IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/122250.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Revisiting the Eswaran-Kotwal model of tenancy

Author

Listed:
  • Ghatak, Maitreesh
  • Mookherjee, Dilip

Abstract

Persistence of sharecropping tenancy, and increases in farm productivity resulting from regulations protecting tenant rights have been observed in many developing countries. This paper examines if these can be explained by alternative models of sharecropping with two sided efforts/investments, namely, complete contract models, either without wealth constraints (Eswaran-Kotwal, 1985) or with a wealth constrained tenant (Mookherjee, 1997; Banerjee-Gertler-Ghatak, 2002), and incomplete contract holdup models without wealth constraints (Grossman Hart, 1986). In the absence of wealth constraints, the complete contract model always results in (incentive constrained) surplus-maximizing productivity; thus, there can be no scope for tenancy regulations to raise productivity. In the incomplete contract model, tenancy regulations would raise productivity only if the tenant’s investments are more important than the landlord’s investment. But in that case, sharecropping tenancy would not persist in the absence of wealth constraints, as the tenant would have purchased the land right ex ante from the landlord. The model with wealth constraints helps explain both the persistence of tenancy and the productivity/surplus enhancing effects of tenancy regulations.

Suggested Citation

  • Ghatak, Maitreesh & Mookherjee, Dilip, 2024. "Revisiting the Eswaran-Kotwal model of tenancy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 122250, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:122250
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/122250/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dilip Mookherjee, 1997. "Informational Rents and Property Rights in Land," International Economic Association Series, in: John E. Roemer (ed.), Property Relations, Incentives and Welfare, chapter 1, pages 3-42, Palgrave Macmillan.
    2. Abhijit V. Banerjee & Paul J. Gertler & Maitreesh Ghatak, 2002. "Empowerment and Efficiency: Tenancy Reform in West Bengal," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(2), pages 239-280, April.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Pranab Bardhan & Dilip Mookherjee, 2011. "Subsidized Farm Input Programs and Agricultural Performance: A Farm-Level Analysis of West Bengal's Green Revolution, 1982-1995," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(4), pages 186-214, October.
    6. Sugato Bhattacharyya & Francine Lafontaine, 1995. "Double-Sided Moral Hazard and the Nature of Share Contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 26(4), pages 761-781, Winter.
    7. Hart, Oliver, 1995. "Firms, Contracts, and Financial Structure," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198288817.
    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. Ghatak, Maitreesh & Karaivanov, Alexander, 2014. "Contractual structure in agriculture with endogenous matching," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 239-249.
    2. Ghatak, Maitreesh & Mookherjee, Dilip, 2014. "Land acquisition for industrialization and compensation of displaced farmers," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 303-312.
    3. Jacoby, Hanan G. & Mansuri, Ghazala, 2009. "Incentives, supervision, and sharecropper productivity," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 232-241, March.
    4. Roussey, Ludivine & Soubeyran, Raphael, 2018. "Overburdened judges," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 21-32.
    5. Du, Xiaoxue & Lu, Liang & Zilberman, David, 2013. "Vertical Integration or Contract Farming on Biofuel Feedstock Production: A Technology Innovation Perspective," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150629, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. 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.
    7. Francine Lafontaine & Emmanuel Raynaud, 2002. "The Role of Residual Claims and Self-Enforcement in Franchise Contracting," NBER Working Papers 8868, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Ananish Chaudhuri, 1997. "A Dynamic Model of Contractual Choice in Tenancy," Departmental Working Papers 199711, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
    9. Besley, Timothy & Ghatak, Maitreesh, 2010. "Property Rights and Economic Development," Handbook of Development Economics, in: Dani Rodrik & Mark Rosenzweig (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 4525-4595, Elsevier.
    10. Burlando, Alfredo & Motta, Alberto, 2016. "Legalize, tax, and deter: Optimal enforcement policies for corruptible officials," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 207-215.
    11. Pietrobon, Davide, 2024. "The dual role of insurance in input use: Mitigating risk versus curtailing incentives," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    12. Steiner, Bodo E., 2009. "The Extent and Nature of Contracting in the Wine Supply-Chain When Moral Hazard is Present," Staff Paper Series 154127, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    13. Pedro Mendi, 2005. "The Structure of Payments in Technology Transfer Contracts: Evidence from Spain," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(2), pages 403-429, June.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Kim, Son Ku & Wang, Susheng, 1998. "Linear Contracts and the Double Moral-Hazard," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 342-378, October.
    17. 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.
    18. Hongyun Han & Hanning Li, 2018. "The Distribution of Residual Controls and Risk Sharing: A Case Study of Farmland Transfer in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, June.
    19. Hensher, David A. & Ho, Chinh & Knowles, Louise, 2016. "Efficient contracting and incentive agreements between regulators and bus operators: The influence of risk preferences of contracting agents on contract choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 22-40.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D02 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact
    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development

    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:ehl:lserod:122250. 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: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.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.