IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae94/24437.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Agricultural Agent Land-Use and Land Ownership Behavioural Analysis: A Casa Study From a Southern Italian Region

Author

Listed:
  • Pascucci, Stefano

Abstract

The recent CAP reform introduced new income support instruments much more related on agricultural agents land-use and land-ownership conditions than before. In this perspective the behavioural analysis of land-use and land-ownership decision process seems to be a basic condition to evaluate the efficiency, effectiveness and equity of those instruments, and to understand and to forecast the agents response to these stimuli. The land-use and land-ownership behaviour differs according to various land managers, not only on the base of "economic-productive" conditions, but also on the base of exogenous and endogenous "institutional" conditions, such as the presence of formal or informal contracts, cultural values, intergenerational linkages, family-farm organisation and land-market imperfections and regulations. In this study an analytic methodology is presented together with an explanatory model which both try to show the role and the relationships between the various land-use and landownership driving factors at an agricultural agent level. It is also showed the different behavioural response to the exogenous stimuli coming from the "economic-institutional" environment, in which the agents operate. The model was tested in a Southern Italian region case study. In the first part of the analysis the various "economic-institutional" environment typologies, in which the region is articulated, were detected, on the base of official census data at the communal administrative units level. The Factorial Analysis through the Principal Components Analysis and Groups Analysis, is the analytic methodology used for this aim. In the second part of the analysis two specific "environments" were chosen in which the empirical survey was led at the agricultural agent level. The data coming from the survey were used to test the behavioural explanatory model. The results showed not only some specific "behavioural" paths which may be detected in the two different environments, but also deep differences among the various typologies of agricultural agents inside the same environments, depending on the "economic-productive" size, the presence of strong familiar roles, informal contracts for hiring work and renting land, the specific history of the agricultural agent, the perception of land as a productive factor, an investment good or a "social status symbol". The results are presented in the last part of the article.

Suggested Citation

  • Pascucci, Stefano, 2005. "Agricultural Agent Land-Use and Land Ownership Behavioural Analysis: A Casa Study From a Southern Italian Region," 94th Seminar, April 9-10, 2005, Ashford, UK 24437, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae94:24437
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.24437
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/24437/files/sp05pa01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.24437?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deininger, Klaus & Feder, Gershon, 2001. "Land institutions and land markets," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 6, pages 288-331, Elsevier.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Rabah Arezki & Klaus Deininger & Harris Selod, 2015. "What Drives the Global "Land Rush"?," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 29(2), pages 207-233.
    2. 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).
    3. Jan Fałkowski & Maciej Jakubowski & Paweł Strawiński, 2014. "Returns from income strategies in rural Poland," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 22(1), pages 139-178, January.
    4. Klaus Deininger & Denys Nizalov & Sudhir K Singh, 2013. "Are mega-farms the future of global agriculture? Exploring the farm size-productivity relationship for large commercial farms in Ukraine," Discussion Papers 49, Kyiv School of Economics.
    5. Kubitza, Christoph & Krishna, Vijesh V. & Urban, Kira & Alamsyah, Zulkifli & Qaim, Matin, 2018. "Land Property Rights, Agricultural Intensification, and Deforestation in Indonesia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 312-321.
    6. Deininger, Klaus & Nizalov, Denys & Singh, Sudhir K, 2013. "Are mega-farms the future of global agriculture ? exploring the farm size-productivity relationship," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6544, The World Bank.
    7. Ogada, Maurice Juma, 2012. "Forest Management Decentralization in Kenya: Effects on Household Farm Forestry Decisions in Kakamega," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126319, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Daymard, Arnaud, 2022. "Land rental market reforms: Can they increase outmigration from agriculture? Evidence from a quantitative model," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    9. Chaoran Chen & Diego Restuccia & Raul Santaeulalia-Llopis, 2022. "The Effects of Land Markets on Resource Allocation and Agricultural Productivity," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 45, pages 41-54, July.
    10. Gersbach, Hans & Siemers, Lars-H. R., 2010. "Land Reforms And Economic Development," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(4), pages 527-547, September.
    11. Jia, Lili, 2012. "Land fragmentation and off-farm labor supply in China," Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Transition Economies, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), volume 66, number 66, September.
    12. Gharad Bryan & Jonathan de Quidt & Tom Wilkening & Nitin Yadav, 2017. "Land Trade and Development: A Market Design Approach," CESifo Working Paper Series 6557, CESifo.
    13. Kvartiuk, Vasyl & Herzfeld, Thomas, 2019. "Welfare effects of land market liberalization scenarios in Ukraine: Evidence-based economic perspective," IAMO Discussion Papers 186, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO).
    14. Che, Yi, 2009. "Mismatch: land reallocations, recovery land rental and land rental market development in rural China," MPRA Paper 39794, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Gwendoline Promsopha, 2016. "Temporary transfers of land and risk-coping mechanisms in Thailand," Working Papers hal-01409110, HAL.
    16. Jiang Du & Miao Zeng & Zhengjuan Xie & Shikun Wang, 2019. "Power of Agricultural Credit in Farmland Abandonment: Evidence from Rural China," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-14, December.
    17. Briones, Roehlano M., 2016. "Growing Inclusive Businesses in the Philippines: The Role of Government Policies and Programs," Discussion Papers DP 2016-06, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    18. Macours, Karen, 2002. "Insecurity Of Property Rights And Matching In The Tenancy Market," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19603, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. Marijn A. Bolhuis & Swapnika R. Rachapalli & Diego Restuccia, 2021. "Misallocation in Indian Agriculture," NBER Working Papers 29363, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Juliano Assunção, 2006. "Land Reform and Landholdings in Brazil," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2006-137, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Land Economics/Use;

    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:ags:eaae94:24437. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    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.