Human Capital and Gender Effects on Agro-Industrial Investment in the Turkestan region

2026

Full text Open access: Hybrid Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.47703/ejgs.v3i2.128
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Agricultural investment is an important driver of regional development, particularly in predominantly rural regions where employment, labour productivity and entrepreneurial activity determine the sustainability of the local economy. This article examines the relationship between human capital, gender characteristics and agricultural investment in the Turkestan region. The empirical analysis covers the period from 2015 to 2024 and combines descriptive statistics, correlation analysis and an exploratory ordinary least squares regression model. Investment in agricultural fixed assets is used as the dependent variable. At the same time, labour productivity, the share of women managers in peasant and farm households, average monthly wages and agricultural employment are included as explanatory variables. The results indicate that agricultural investment in the Turkestan region increased from KZT 8.5 billion in 2015 to KZT 142.8 billion in 2024. Over the same period, labour productivity and average wages increased, agricultural employment declined, and the share of women managers rose from 22.6% to 29.9%. The regression model identifies a statistically significant negative association between the share of women managers and agricultural investment. However, this result should be interpreted with caution because the analysis is based on only ten annual observations, and the explanatory variables are strongly correlated. The estimated relationship may reflect differences in farm size, access to productive assets, financing conditions or other unobserved structural characteristics rather than a direct effect of women’s participation in agricultural management. The findings demonstrate the need to improve the availability of gender-disaggregated data on agricultural loans, subsidies and investment support.