IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/compes/v61y2019i4d10.1057_s41294-019-00105-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why Does Sharecropping Survive? Agrarian Institutions and Contract Choice in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan

Author

Listed:
  • Nozilakhon Mukhamedova

    (Justus-Liebig-Universität
    Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO))

  • Richard Pomfret

    (University of Adelaide)

Abstract

A century ago, Alfred Marshall demonstrated the inefficiency associated with farmers receiving only a portion of their marginal product. Farmers will supply less labor than under arrangements in which they receive their marginal product; output will be sub-optimal. Explanations of sharecropping are based on market imperfections, e.g., high transactions costs or inability to insure against risk, suggesting that sharecropping should disappear with economic development. Nevertheless, sharecropping survives. In Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, sharecropping has no legal status but farm surveys provide evidence of its existence. Despite farmers’ awareness of the Marshallian paradox, institutional uncertainty contributes to the persistent attractiveness of sharecropping.

Suggested Citation

  • Nozilakhon Mukhamedova & Richard Pomfret, 2019. "Why Does Sharecropping Survive? Agrarian Institutions and Contract Choice in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 61(4), pages 576-597, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:compes:v:61:y:2019:i:4:d:10.1057_s41294-019-00105-z
    DOI: 10.1057/s41294-019-00105-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41294-019-00105-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41294-019-00105-z?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deininger, Klaus & Goyal, Aparajita, 2012. "Going digital: Credit effects of land registry computerization in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(2), pages 236-243.
    2. Joseph E. Stiglitz, 1974. "Incentives and Risk Sharing in Sharecropping," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 41(2), pages 219-255.
    3. Ghatak, Maitreesh & Pandey, Priyanka, 2000. "Contract choice in agriculture with joint moral hazard in effort and risk," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 303-326, December.
    4. Platteau, Jean-Philippe, 1995. "A framework for the analysis of evolving patron-client ties in agrarian economies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 767-786, May.
    5. Ghatak, Maitreesh & Karaivanov, Alexander, 2014. "Contractual structure in agriculture with endogenous matching," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 239-249.
    6. Shaban, Radwan Ali, 1987. "Testing between Competing Models of Sharecropping," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(5), pages 893-920, October.
    7. Jacoby, Hanan G. & Mansuri, Ghazala, 2006. "Incomplete contracts and investment : a study of land tenancy in Pakistan," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3826, The World Bank.
    8. Eswaran, Mukesh & Kotwal, Ashok, 1985. "A Theory of Contractual Structure in Agriculture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 352-367, June.
    9. LERMAN, Zvi, 2009. "Land reform, farm structure, and agricultural performance in CIS countries," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 316-326, June.
    10. Aldashev, Gani & Guirkinger, Catherine, 2017. "Colonization and changing social structure: Evidence from Kazakhstan," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 413-430.
    11. Alisher Ilkhamov, 1998. "farmers and others: Farm restructuring in Uzbekistan," Central Asian Survey, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 539-560.
    12. Jean-Jacques Laffont & Mohamed Salah Matoussi, 1995. "Moral Hazard, Financial Constraints and Sharecropping in El Oulja," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 62(3), pages 381-399.
    13. Michael E. Bradley, 1971. "Incentives and Labour Supply on Soviet Collective Farms," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 4(3), pages 342-352, August.
    14. Petrick, Martin & Djanibekov, Nodir, 2019. "Farm restructuring in Uzbekistan: What next?," IAMO Policy Briefs 36, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO).
    15. Jacoby, Hanan G. & Mansuri, Ghazala, 2009. "Incentives, supervision, and sharecropper productivity," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 232-241, March.
    16. Klaus Deininger & Songqing Jin & Vandana Yadav, 2013. "Does Sharecropping Affect Long-term Investment? Evidence from West Bengal's Tenancy Reforms," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(3), pages 772-790.
    17. Otsuka, Keijiro, 2007. "Efficiency and Equity Effects of Land Markets," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: Robert Evenson & Prabhu Pingali (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 51, pages 2671-2703, Elsevier.
    18. Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1987. "Aggregation and Linearity in the Provision of Intertemporal Incentives," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(2), pages 303-328, March.
    19. Franklin Allen, 1982. "On Share Contracts and Screening," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 13(2), pages 541-547, Autumn.
    20. D. Gale Johnson, 1950. "Resource Allocation under Share Contracts," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58(2), pages 111-111.
    21. Samuel Garrido, 2017. "Sharecropping was sometimes efficient: sharecropping with compensation for improvements in European viticulture," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 70(3), pages 977-1003, August.
    22. Allen, Douglas & Lueck, Dean, 1992. "Contract Choice in Modern Agriculture: Cash Rent versus Cropshare," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(2), pages 397-426, October.
    23. Galiani,Sebastian & Sened,Itai (ed.), 2014. "Institutions, Property Rights, and Economic Growth," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107041554, October.
    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. Petrick, Martin, 2021. "Post-Soviet agricultural restructuring: A success story after all?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 63(4), pages 623-647.
    2. Akhmadiyeva, Zarema & Herzfeld, Thomas, 2021. "How does practice matches land laws in Central Asia?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).

    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. Sen, Debapriya, 2011. "A theory of sharecropping: The role of price behavior and imperfect competition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 181-199.
    2. Raul V. Fabella, 2016. "Why Fixed Rent Contracts are Less Prevalent: Weak Third Party Enforcement and Endogenous Principal Type," UP School of Economics Discussion Papers 201606, University of the Philippines School of Economics.
    3. Ananish Chaudhuri & Pushkar Maitra, 1997. "Determinants of Land Tenure Contracts; Theory and Evidence from Rural India," Departmental Working Papers 199710, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
    4. Konrad B Burchardi & Selim Gulesci & Benedetta Lerva & Munshi Sulaiman, 2019. "Moral Hazard: Experimental Evidence from Tenancy Contracts," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(1), pages 281-347.
    5. Dubois, Pierre, 2002. "Moral hazard, land fertility and sharecropping in a rural area of the Philippines," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 35-64, June.
    6. Luis H.B. Braido, 2005. "Risk and Insurance in Sharecropping," Risk and Insurance 0508002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Luis H. B. Braido, 2008. "Evidence on the Incentive Properties of Share Contracts," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 51(2), pages 327-349, May.
    8. Ananish Chaudhuri, 1997. "A Dynamic Model of Contractual Choice in Tenancy," Departmental Working Papers 199711, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
    9. Debapriya Sen, 2005. "Sharecropping, interlinkage, and price variation," Department of Economics Working Papers 05-10, Stony Brook University, Department of Economics.
    10. Ackerberg, Daniel A. & Botticini, Maristella, 2000. "The Choice of Agrarian Contracts in Early Renaissance Tuscany: Risk Sharing, Moral Hazard, or Capital Market Imperfections?," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 241-257, July.
    11. Juliano Junqueira Assunção, 2005. "Non-agricultural land use and land reform: theory and evidence from Brazil," Textos para discussão 496, Department of Economics PUC-Rio (Brazil).
    12. Bidisha, Sayema Haque & Hossain, Md. Amzad & Alam, Rubaiyat & Hasan, Md. Mehedi, 2018. "Credit, tenancy choice and agricultural efficiency: Evidence from the northern region of Bangladesh," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 22-32.
    13. Oriana Bandiera, 1999. "On the Structure of Tenancy contracts: Theory and Evidence fron 19th Century Rural Sicily," STICERD - Development Economics Papers - From 2008 this series has been superseded by Economic Organisation and Public Policy Discussion Papers 19, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    14. Huffman, Wallace E & Just, Richard E, 2004. "Implications of Agency Theory for Optimal Land Tenure Contracts," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(3), pages 617-642, April.
    15. Jacoby, Hanan G. & Mansuri, Ghazala, 2009. "Incentives, supervision, and sharecropper productivity," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 232-241, March.
    16. Juliano Assunção, 2006. "Land Reform and Landholdings in Brazil," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2006-137, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    17. Oriana Bandiera, 2002. "Land Distribution, Incentives and the Choice of Production Techniques in Nicaragua," STICERD - Development Economics Papers - From 2008 this series has been superseded by Economic Organisation and Public Policy Discussion Papers 34, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    18. Priyanka Pandey, 2004. "Effects of Technology on Incentive Design of Share Contracts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 1152-1168, September.
    19. Benin, Samuel & Place, Frank & Nkonya, Ephraim M. & Pender, John L., 2006. "Land Markets and Agricultural Land Use Efficiency and Sustainability: Evidence from East Africa," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25645, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Ananish Chaudhuri & Pushkar Maitra, 2001. "Tenant characteristics and the choice of tenurial contracts in rural India," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(2), pages 169-181.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Sharecropping; Central Asia; Agriculture;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness
    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
    • J43 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets - - - Agricultural Labor Markets
    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pal:compes:v:61:y:2019:i:4:d:10.1057_s41294-019-00105-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/ .

    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.