Search results

Liquidity is an important aspect of market efficiency. The purpose of this paper is threefold: first, this paper aims to discuss indicators that provide information about liquidity in agricultural land markets. Second, this paper aims to reflect on determinants of market liquidity and analyze the relationship with land prices. Third, this paper aims to conduct an empirical analysis for Germany that illustrates these concepts and allows hypothesis testing.

This study reviews liquidity dimensions and measurement in financial markets and derives indicators applicable to farmland markets. In an empirical analysis, this study exhibits the spatial and temporal variability of land market liquidity in Lower Saxony, a German federal state with the highest agricultural production value. This study uses a rich dataset that includes 72,547 sale transactions of arable land between 1990 and 2018. The research focuses on volume-based (number of transactions, volume and turnover) and time-based (trading frequency and durations) measures. A panel vector autoregression and Granger causality tests are applied to investigate the relation between land turnover and land prices.

The paper confirms the thinness of farmland markets but also reveals regional and temporal heterogeneity of land market liquidity. This study finds that the relation between market liquidity and prices is ambiguous. This study concludes that a high demand from expanding farms absorbs supply shocks regardless of the current price level in agricultural land markets.

Even though the relevance of agricultural land markets’ thinness is widely acknowledged in the literature, this paper is one of the first attempts to measure liquidity in agricultural land markets and to explain its relationship with land prices.

The purpose of the study is to test how land owners respond to the appreciation of land values in the presence of speculation. This paper introduces the concept of “land hoarding,” which is land owners' response to higher land prices by selling more land up to a point beyond which accelerated land price appreciation would lead to land hoarding. Specifically, this paper examines the effect of land value appreciation higher than the opportunity cost of selling the land (measured by treasury‐bill (T‐bill) rate) on land sale and land hoarding.

A theoretical framework is developed to understand the demand for agricultural land retention with and without speculation, the former informing land hoarding behavior. A linear regression model was introduced and estimated using ordinary least square (OLS) method. A panel data model and analysis is also introduced, and following appropriate model selection tests, a fixed effect panel data estimation method is implemented. Data from 48 states, spanning from 1950 to 2004, are utilized.

An inverse relationship is found between the rate of land value appreciation and the demand for land by farmers, suggesting that the standard direct relationship between appreciation and land supplied to development holds. However, the additional finding of an inverse relationship between the rate of land value appreciation in excess of the risk‐free rate of return and agricultural land development confirms the existence of an identifiable speculative demand component that involves land hoarding.

To the extent to which the findings are broadly applicable, one policy implication is that enhanced land retention can be achieved through market mechanisms. For example, the notion that reduced T‐bill rates can actually result in market triggered land preservation is an interesting policy related finding. Equally interesting is the notion that policies that can trigger increases in the rate of appreciation of farmland may also potentially result in the agricultural hoarding of land. Obviously, enhanced profitability in agriculture due to programs targeting viability, commodity price support, reduction of regulation or market expansion programs can potentially affect land retention.

This paper introduces the “land hoarding hypothesis.” High rates of land appreciation can be expected to signal that holding the land may yield better returns than selling it, suggesting that if rates of land appreciation become significantly high enough, farmers may begin to hoard land, not sell it, to maximize long‐term returns. This concept can be valuable to market‐based agricultural land retention programs at the urban fringe. By linking speculative behavior, land demand and existence of a hoarding behavior under some conditions, this paper adds value and originality to the literature.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the current farm economic downturn and credit restructuring by comparing it with the 1920s and 1980s farm crises from both economic and regulatory perspectives.

This paper closely compares critical economic and regulatory aspects of the current farm downturn with two previous farm crises in the 1920s and 1980s, and equally importantly, the golden eras that occurred before them. This study compares key aggregate statistics in land value, agricultural credit, lending regulations, and also evaluates the situations and impacts on individual farmer households by using three representative case studies.

The authors argue that there are at least three economic and regulatory reasons why the current farm downturn is unlikely to slide into a sudden collapse of the agricultural markets: strong, real income; growth in the 2000s, historically low interest rates; and more prudent agricultural lending practices. The current farm downturn is more likely a liquidity and working capital problem, as opposed to a solvency and balance sheet problem for the overall agricultural sector. The authors argue that the trajectory of the current farm downturn will likely be a gradual, drawn-out one like that of the 1920s farm crisis, as opposed to a sudden collapse as in the 1980s farm crisis.

The review provides empirical evidence for cautious optimism of the future trajectory of the current downturn, and argues that the current downturn is much more similar to the 1920s pattern than the 1980s crisis.

The purpose of this paper is to express the development of market price of farmland in the CR and to describe causes and effects of these changes in the price on the ownership of land in the country.

Primarily, description methods (especially for describing the creation of investment farmland funds) and a comparative analysis (in the case of an indicator of the farmland prices in the Czech Republic) were used in this paper.

The findings show that the situation in the Czech agricultural sector has improved particularly due to increasing subsidies; non-agricultural subjects are showing increased interest and banks are changing their approach to granting loans for the purchase of farmland. The market price of farmland in the Czech Republic has been rising; in 2015, it exceeded CZK162,500 per hectare on average. However, it is still low compared to the old EU member states.

Practical implication of the paper consists in comparing market prices of farmland with prices at which state sold farmland through PRGLF. Plot owners are often approached about the sale or lease of farmland. However, there are many speculators among those interested in buying, who often focus on those owners who have no idea regarding the value of their plots.

In the paper, the model of farmland prices was newly used and applied to real data in the Czech Republic from 2004 to 2015. Moreover, current data on investments to farmland were acquired, and an analysis which could be useful for foreign investors was elaborated.

Although South African landowners have been subject to various forms of land tax in the past, the ownership (or occupation) of agricultural land is not taxed at present. Despite the fact that white agricultural landowners are strongly opposed to the possible introduction of a rural land tax, political and fiscal pressures in present‐day South Africa seem to suggest that the imposition of such a tax is inevitable. It is suggested that it could be equitable, and would be administratively feasible, to levy, assess and collect a rural land tax at local government level within the commercial farming sub‐sector, but that levying such a tax on subsistence farmers occupying communal land poses serious problems.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of institutional factors in agricultural structural change in the European Union (EU) using the case study of land mobility in Ireland. A range of agricultural land use options are compared in order to examine the effect of domestic and EU policy instruments on land mobility.

Using socio-economic data from the Teagasc National Farm Survey, three hypothetical farms are created using a microsimulation approach to compare incomes across farm systems and land use options. Tax and subsidy policies are applied to derive returns for the hypothetical farms under a variety of land use scenarios.

The analysis finds that in comparing four hypothetical scenarios, leasing out agricultural land on a long-term basis can prove more profitable for cattle and tillage farmers than farming the land. Only dairy farmers derive consistently higher disposable incomes from farming their land as opposed to leasing it out. Changes in CAP rules can also negatively affect farmers taking advantage of Ireland’s tax-based leasing incentives.

A gap in the literature exists in terms of how institutional factors may act to prevent either land supply or demand channels from functioning properly. This paper addresses that gap, using Ireland as a case study.

With the decline of US net farm income from $123.8 billion in 2013 to $71.5 billion forecasted for 2016, concern has developed regarding the future path of agricultural land values. The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between net farm income, cash rents and land values in the state of Kansas and provides insight regarding future land values.

This study estimates partial adjustment models for cash rent and land values and uses those results to infer long-run capitalization rates and earnings multipliers. These models are used to forecast Kansas land values through 2018 and also the long-run price of farmland given 2016 expectations.

Land adjusts to changes in Kansas net farm income slowly with a one-year elasticity of 6.7 percent. The long-run elasticity is 96.9 percent which is very close to the 100 percent suggested by the theoretical income capitalization model. The long-run multiplier for income in Kansas is 21.71 which implies a capitalization rate of 4.61 percent. The estimated results suggest that Kansas land values would peak in 2016 and begin to slowly decline. If market conditions were to remain the same, land values would ultimately decrease to $1,171 per acre, a 28 percent decline from current levels.

Declines of the magnitude in estimated land values could negatively affect the financial condition of the sector. Factors such as a change in the long-run capitalization rate or unexpected supply or demand shocks for agricultural commodities globally could certainly alter the long-term prospects. However, current expectations as of March 2016 suggest that farmers will face difficult conditions over the next few years.

This study analyses agricultural land price dynamics in order to better understand price development and to improve forecast accuracy. Understanding the evolution of agricultural land prices is important when considering sound investment decisions.

This study applies threshold autoregression to model agricultural land prices. The data includes quarterly observations on Finnish agricultural land prices.

The study shows that Finnish agricultural land prices exhibit regime-switching behaviour when using past changes in prices as a threshold variable. The threshold autoregressive model not only fits the data better but also improves the accuracy of price forecasts compared to the linear autoregressive model.

The results show that a sharp fall in agricultural land prices temporarily changes the regular development of prices. This information significantly improves the accuracy of price predictions.

The purpose of this paper is to examine differences in property institutions in the USA and India and their effects on agricultural productivity.

This paper undertakes a case study of industrial organization of agriculture, comparing agricultural development in the USA and India, with a focus on changes in farm size over time.

In the USA, unlimited individual land ownership has enabled the gradual, long-term development of scale economies in agriculture through the application of capital and technology. In contrast, land reforms in India, especially land ceilings that limit farm size, have stunted productivity growth in agriculture by limiting achievement of scale economies and capital formation.

The finding that India’s consistently meager agricultural productivity stems largely from legal limitations on land ownership indicates that reforms that create a US-style open-ended land ownership structure would greatly increase farm productivity and total crop output in India.

This paper presents a side-by-side analysis of the USA and India and their radically different paths of agricultural development over time, and connects these divergent outcomes directly to the underlying institutional framework of property rights. Moreover, the paper analyzes the prospects for pro-market reform in light of public choice political economy, specifically applying Tullock’s insights regarding the “transitional gains trap.”