Skip to main content

Table 7 Secondary activity of those engaged in farming/livestock production

From: Considering the benefits of hosting refugees: evidence of refugee camps influencing local labour market activity and economic welfare in Rwanda

  Wage employment Self-employment
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
Camp proximity (< 10km) 0.01 − 0.01   0.05** 0.07***  
(0.06) (0.06)   (0.02) (0.02)
 x Female    − 0.03    0.09***
(0.07) (0.03)
 x Male 0.03 0.03
(0.07) (0.04)
Controls No Yes Yes No Yes Yes
R 2 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.02 0.02
Observations 1205 1205 1205 1205 1205 1205
  1. Note: ***p < 0.01, **p < .05, *p < 0.10. Estimates are based on a linear probability model, but robust to maximum likelihood estimation. Standard errors in parentheses are robust and clustered at the community level (46). The omission of the main effect ‘Camp proximity (< 10 km)’ in models (3) and (6) represent a reparameterization of a full model, in order to provide the estimates for the comparisons of interest (e.g. females < 10 km vs. females > 20 km). See Fig. 2 in the Appendix for full heterogeneous effects across gender. Other covariates controlled for include female, age, married, household head, education at lower secondary level, size of household, share of children (per adult), market distance, city distance, community population and nearest refugee camp