11. Farm transfer, marriage, household and parental power in rural Switzerland, 1860-1960

Author(s):  
Anne-Lise Head-König
Keyword(s):  
2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia C.D. Valliant ◽  
Stephanie Dickinson ◽  
Yijia Zhang ◽  
Lilian Golzarri-Arroyo ◽  
James R. Farmer

PurposeBeginning farmers and ranchers (BFRs) are more likely to access land through an unrelated landowner than through family. Thus, farm and ranch owners who might transfer their land or businesses out of family are potential sources of land access for BFRs and are the most frequent participants in incentive programs to facilitate land transfer to BFRs. To assist in identifying landowners who might transfer out of family, the paper aims to explore similarities and differences between landowners according to their expectations for intra-familial versus extra-familial farm transfer.Design/methodology/approachPairwise and regression analysis of USA Midwestern and Plains landowners' responses to an online survey (n = 322).FindingsLandowners who might transfer out of family were likely to need the proceeds from a land sale to finance their retirement. Landowners' financial needs interacted with their widespread interest in transferring to a BFR such that 97% of owners who expected extra-familial transfer wanted to transfer to a BFR. There were also statistical patterns around the size of owners' landholdings in relation to their transfer plans.Research limitations/implicationsThis exploratory inquiry suggests patterns for future research to examine, especially around landowners' juxtaposition of their retirement income and their interest in transferring to a BFR and how to align these priorities and values.Originality/valueBy exploring the characteristics of landowners who are the most likely to provide land access to BFRs, the authors begin to examine how to target these owners in program outreach. Patterns for further exploration point to landowners' financial needs in relation to their interest in helping a BFR to get started in agriculture.


2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 429-434
Author(s):  
Iuliia Tetteh ◽  
Michael Boehlje

This case illustrates a challenging management decision faced by the family farm: when should they bring the younger generation to the farm full-time? Under consideration is a critical trade-off between the firm’s growth and transfer tax implications that drives the farm transfer decision. Industry practitioners and students are asked to use the results of the intergenerational farm transfer simulation model to evaluate this trade-off and provide an effective recommendation. The case can be used as part of succession/estate planning workshops attended by agricultural producers, farm managers, agricultural lenders, as well as in Master’s level courses in agricultural finance and farm management.


2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 270
Author(s):  
R. Tawaf ◽  
M. Paturochman ◽  
L. Herlina ◽  
M. Sulistyati ◽  
A. Fitriani

This research aimed to analyze the revenue optimization of farmer family with ratio of the most ideal farm scale in the integration of Pasundan cattle and paddy farm, and to analyze the most leveraging production factor towards the family revenue. The respondents were 94 farmers who had integrated farming between cattle and paddy. This research used survey method in four regions purposively based on Pasundan cattle centre. Data were analyzed with linear programming and production function of Cobb Douglass. The results were: (1) max Z = -(4,584,841x1+1574260 (x2+x3)) + (6,000,000jx1+4000000 (j x2 +j x3 )); this function consist of constraints: labour, transfer products between cattle and paddy farm, transfer fertilizer, capital of paddy farming in planting season-I and season-II. (2) Yintegration = 15,721,319.75 – 72.541 land – 1.317 fertilizer + 4.667 seeds + 487765.94 farminglabour + 6339170.199 cattlevalue – 935.559 feed + 162618.999 cattlelabour. There were some conclusions: First, the integration of Pasundan cattle and paddy farming produced the optimum family revenue/year, with ratio of 6.02 animal unit and 0.5 ha of paddy farming; Second, the production factor of agricultural land, labour, seeds, feed and capital (cattle) were explained (R2=87.66%) toward the integration revenue; Third, the variable which has the contribution to leverage the revenue was the capital of cattle (81.52%).


EuroChoices ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 18-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karei Bommei ◽  
Hennie Veen ◽  
Gabe Venema

2017 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 60-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shane Francis Conway ◽  
John McDonagh ◽  
Maura Farrell ◽  
Anne Kinsella

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document