IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnlage/v55y2009i12id115-2009-agricecon.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Historical, environmental and socio-economic driving forces on land ownership fragmentation, the land consolidation effect and project costs

Author

Listed:
  • P. Sklenicka

    (Department of Land Use and Improvement, Faculty of Environment Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • J. Hladík

    (Research Institute for Soil and Water Conservation, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • F. Střeleček

    (Department of Accounting and Finances, Faculty of Economics, University of South Bohemia, České Budějovice, Czech Republic)

  • B. Kottová

    (Department of Land Use and Improvement, Faculty of Environment Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • J. Lososová

    (Department of Accounting and Finances, Faculty of Economics, University of South Bohemia, České Budějovice, Czech Republic)

  • L. Číhal

    (Central Land Office, Ministry of Agriculture, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • M. Šálek

    (Department of Ecology and Environment, Faculty of Environment Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Land consolidation (LC) is an effective program for land ownership defragmentation. The main objectives of this study are: (i) to analyse the characteristics of 487 study areas before and after implementation of the LC; (ii) to evaluate these study areas according to the influence of historical, environmental and socio-economic driving forces on the pre-LC ownership pattern, on the consolidation effect and on the financial costs of the LC projects. In average, the plot size has been increased twofold and the plot shape has also achieved an evidently positive change, but the average owner still has a holding of 2.72 ha divided into more than three plots after the LC. Historical factors were found to be the key driving forces for the pre-LC fragmentation, while socio-economic drivers play the major role for the LC effect and in the formation of the LC project costs. In contrast, the effect of natural factors is considered to be the least significant of all.

Suggested Citation

  • P. Sklenicka & J. Hladík & F. Střeleček & B. Kottová & J. Lososová & L. Číhal & M. Šálek, 2009. "Historical, environmental and socio-economic driving forces on land ownership fragmentation, the land consolidation effect and project costs," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 55(12), pages 571-582.
    • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnlage:v:55:y:2009:i:12:id:115-2009-agricecon
    DOI: 10.17221/115/2009-AGRICECON
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://agricecon.agriculturejournals.cz/artkey/age-200912-0003_historical-environmental-and-socio-economic-driving-forces-on-land-ownership-fragmentation-the-land-consolida.php
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://agricecon.agriculturejournals.cz/pdfs/age/2009/12/03.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/115/2009-AGRICECON?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Castro Coelho, J. & Aguiar Pinto, P. & Mira da Silva, L., 2001. "A systems approach for the estimation of the effects of land consolidation projects (LCPs): a model and its application," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 179-195, June.
    2. Jean CavailhËs & Pierre Wavresky, 2003. "Urban influences on periurban farmland prices," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 30(3), pages 333-357, September.
    3. Reenberg, Anette & Paarup-Laursen, Bjarke, 1997. "Determinants for land use strategies in a Sahelian agro-ecosystem--Anthropological and ecological geographical aspects of natural resource management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 53(2-3), pages 209-229.
    4. Paul Dragos Aligica & Adina Dabu, 2003. "Land Reform and Agricultural Reform Policies in Romania's Transition to the Market Economy," Eastern European Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(5), pages 49-69, January.
    5. Jean Cavailhès & Pierre Wavresky, 2003. "Urban influences on periurban farmland prices [[L'influence urbaine sur le prix des terres périurbaines]]," Post-Print hal-02670737, HAL.
    6. Adina Dabu & Paul Dragos Aligica, 2003. "Land Reform and Agricultural Reform Policies in Romania's Transition to the Market Economy: Overview and Assessment," Post-Print hal-00480390, HAL.
    7. Lerman, Zvi, 2001. "Agriculture in transition economies: from common heritage to divergence," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 95-114, November.
    8. Casimir Dadak, 2004. "The Case for Foreign Ownership of Farmland in Poland," Cato Journal, Cato Journal, Cato Institute, vol. 24(3), pages 277-294, Fall.
    9. Gonzalez, X. P. & Alvarez, C. J. & Crecente, R., 2004. "Evaluation of land distributions with joint regard to plot size and shape," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 31-43, October.
    10. Csaki, Csaba & Lerman, Zvi, 1997. "Land Reform and Farm Restructuring in East Central Europe and CIS in the 1990s: Expectations and Achievements after the First Five Years," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 24(3-4), pages 428-452.
    11. Sengupta, Nirmal, 2006. "Fragmented landholding, productivity, and resilience management," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(4), pages 507-532, August.
    12. Johan F. M. Swinnen, 1999. "The political economy of land reform choices in Central and Eastern Europe," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 7(3), pages 637-664, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pavel SEKÁČ & Miroslav ŠÁLEK & Alena WRANOVÁ & Peter KUMBLE & Petr SKLENIČKA, 2017. "Effect of water features proximity on farmland prices in a landlocked country: the consequences for planning," Soil and Water Research, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 12(1), pages 18-28.
    2. Jänicke, Clemens & Wesemeyer, Maximilian & Chiarella, Cristina & Lakes, Tobia & Levers, Christian & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Müller, Daniel & Pratzer, Marie & Rufin, Philippe, 2024. "Can we estimate farm size from field size? An empirical investigation of the field size to farm size relationship," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    3. Tudorel ANDREI & Bogdan OANCEA & Marius PROFIROIU, 2011. "An analysis of the Romanian agriculture using quantitative methods," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 57(2), pages 85-92.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chakir, Raja & Lungarska, Anna, 2015. "Agricultural land rents in land use models: a spatial econometric analysis," 150th Seminar, October 22-23, 2015, Edinburgh, Scotland 212641, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Walid Oueslati & Julien Salanié & JunJie Wu, 2014. "Urbanization and Agricultural Structural Adjustments: Some Lessons from European Cities," Working Papers 1442, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    3. Paul Feichtinger & Klaus Salhofer, 2016. "The Fischler Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy and Agricultural Land Prices," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 92(3), pages 411-432.
    4. Wujing Wang & Xingqing Ye, 2020. "The Potential Supply and Demand of Farmers’ Land Contract Rights-Based on 697 Households in Four Provinces of China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-21, March.
    5. Jean Cavailhès & Mohamed Hilal & Pierre Wavresky, 2011. "Urban influence of farmland prices and its impact on agriculture [L'influence urbaine sur le prix des terres agricoles et ses conséquences pour l'agriculture]," Post-Print hal-02645617, HAL.
    6. Kathleen P. Bell & Timothy J. Dalton, 2007. "Spatial Economic Analysis in Data‐Rich Environments," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 487-501, September.
    7. Petrick, Martin, 2000. "Land reform in Moldova: how viable are emerging peasant farms? An assessment referring to a recent World Bank study," IAMO Discussion Papers 28, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO).
    8. Duvivier, Romain & Gaspart, Frederic & Frahan, Bruno Henry de, 2005. "A Panel Data Analysis of the Determinants of Farmland Price: An Application to the Effects of the 1992 Cap Reform in Belgium," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24577, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Mathijs, Erik & Noev, Nivelin, 2002. "Commercialization and Subsistence in Transaction Agriculture: Empirical Evidence from Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania," 2002 International Congress, August 28-31, 2002, Zaragoza, Spain 24786, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Maria Magdalena TUREK RAHOVEANU & Luxita RISNOVEANU, 2017. "Sustainable Rural Development through Promoting Non-Agricultural Activities," Risk in Contemporary Economy, "Dunarea de Jos" University of Galati, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, pages 423-433.
    11. Richard J. Vyn & Max Zongyuan Shang, 2021. "Prices paid for farmland in Ontario: Does buyer type matter?," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 69(1), pages 59-72, March.
    12. Swinnen, Johan F. M., 2002. "Land reform in Russia: constraints and policy implications," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 159-162, June.
    13. B. James Deaton & Chad Lawley, 2022. "A survey of literature examining farmland prices: A Canadian focus," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 70(2), pages 95-121, June.
    14. Veron, Emilien, 2022. "Comparative analysis of revenue and land prices between organic and conventional farming," 96th Annual Conference, April 4-6, 2022, K U Leuven, Belgium 320734, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    15. Constantin Postoiu & Ionuț Bușega, 2015. "Romania's Agriculture and its Role in the Convergence Process," Global Economic Observer, "Nicolae Titulescu" University of Bucharest, Faculty of Economic Sciences;Institute for World Economy of the Romanian Academy, vol. 3(1), pages 33-43, May.
    16. Thomas Coisnon & Walid Oueslati & Julien Salanié, 2013. "Spatial targeting of agri-environmental policy and urban development," Post-Print halshs-00949730, HAL.
    17. Dachary-Bernard, Jeanne & Rambonilaza, Tina & Lemarié-Boutry, Marie, 2014. "The response of land markets to flood protection and flood experience: a hedonic price modeling on the Gironde estuary (France)," 88th Annual Conference, April 9-11, 2014, AgroParisTech, Paris, France 169761, Agricultural Economics Society.
    18. Wendong Zhang & Cynthia J. Nickerson, 2015. "Housing Market Bust and Farmland Values: Identifying the Changing Influence of Proximity to Urban Centers," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 91(4), pages 605-626.
    19. Sergiu Țâra, 2020. "Romanian agrarian structure after thirty years," Journal of Community Positive Practices, Catalactica NGO, issue 4, pages 3-24.
    20. Vasco Capela Tavares & Fernando Tavares & Eulália Santos, 2022. "The Value of Farmland and Its Determinants—The Current State of the Art," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-14, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:caa:jnlage:v:55:y:2009:i:12:id:115-2009-agricecon. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.