scholarly journals Reassignment-proof rules for land rental problems

2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 173-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfredo Valencia-Toledo ◽  
Juan Vidal-Puga
Keyword(s):  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tongwei Qiu ◽  
Qinying He ◽  
Shangpu Li ◽  
Biliang Luo
Keyword(s):  

Land ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 466
Author(s):  
Xi Yu ◽  
Xiyang Yin ◽  
Yuying Liu ◽  
Dongmei Li

Agricultural machinery services play an increasingly important role in the land transfer market, especially in developing countries. Prior studies have explored the impact factors of machinery use on agricultural production and land transfer, respectively. However, little research has focused on the relationship between the adoption of agricultural machinery services and the land transfer of rice farmers. To bridge this gap, this study investigated the correlation between machinery services and land transfer, using unique survey data of 810 rice farmers collected from Sichuan province in China. Additionally, this study further explored the impact mechanism on land transfer of rural households with IV-Probit and IV-Tobit models. The empirical results show the following: (i) Agricultural machinery services have a significantly positive and robust effect on both the incidence and area of rice farmers’ land transfer-in, while the impact degree is different. Specifically, with other conditions remaining unchanged, and with a 1% increase in the proportion of machinery services, the average probability of land transfer-in of rice farmers increased by 2.4%, and the area of land transfer-in increased by 13.4 mu, on average. (ii) For control variables, head education, agricultural certificates and whether the majority of land, are in a flat area have positive impacts on land transfer-in behavior. Yet, age and off-farm labor have a negative impact on land transfer-in area. Moreover, our findings highlight the importance of agricultural machinery services in stimulating the development of rural land rental markets.


Author(s):  
Klaus Salhofer ◽  
Paul Feichtinger

Abstract Nearly 80 per cent of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) expenditures are spent on three different measures: first pillar payments (FPPs), agri-environmental payments (AEPs) and less favoured area payments (LFAPs). Based on a dynamic panel model and farm accounting data for Bavaria, we find that, on average, 30 per cent of FPPs, 40–50 per cent of LFAPs, but no relevant share of AEPs are capitalised into land rental prices. The capitalisation ratio varies considerably across regions. Above average capitalisation ratios for FPPs are observed in more favourable areas with high yields, a low grassland share and large farms. The same is true for LFAPs for areas with high yields, large farms and a greater share of part-time farmers.


2012 ◽  
Vol 47 (6) ◽  
pp. 405-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergey Grebenshchikov ◽  
Nuno P. Lopes ◽  
Corneliu Popeea ◽  
Andrey Rybalchenko
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kwabena Krah ◽  
Annemie Maertens ◽  
Wezi Mhango ◽  
H.C. Michelson ◽  
Vesall Nourani

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document