Search results

The purpose of this study is to identify and review strategic government policies on agricultural financing in Egypt, Morocco, Nigeria and South Africa. Four factors dictated the choice of these countries. In the first place, the study is set in African emerging markets – and the four countries are the widely acknowledged emerging markets in Africa (Onyiriuba, 2015). Secondly, the spread of the countries, to a large extent, mirrors Africa in general – Egypt and Morocco are in North Africa; Nigeria is a West African country; and, of course, South Africa. Thirdly, other countries in Africa tend to look up to the four countries, apparently as the largest economies in their respective regions. Needless to say, Nigeria alternates with South Africa as the largest economy in Africa. In this capacity, the two countries influence – indeed, mirror – continental Africa's emerging economic progress. Fourthly, lessons from agricultural policy and financing experiences of the four countries will certainly be useful to the other African countries. The specific objective of this paper is to determine how the government seeks to address the financing issues attendant on the risk-laden nature of agriculture through policy interventions. With this end in view, the paper analyses the strategic goals, objectives and beneficiaries of the agriculture financing policies of the government, as well as the constraints on access to finance by the farmers and the policy response.

The study involves a review of empirical literature and government policies on agricultural financing in Egypt, Morocco, Nigeria and South Africa. The high risks in agriculture (Onyiriuba, 2015; Mordi, 1988), risk aversion behaviour of banks towards agricultural financing (Onyiriuba, 2015, 1990), and the reluctance of insurers to take on agricultural risks (World Bank, 2018; Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2016; Onyiriuba, 1990; Mordi, 1988) underpin this methodology. There are two other considerations: the needs to find out how government seeks to address the financing issues in agriculture through policy intervention, and to avoid unwieldy research, one that combines government and institutional policy perspectives on agriculture financing. Thus the study is not approached from the perspective of banks and other lending institutions; neither does it combine government and institutional policy perspectives. It rather focuses on government policy in order to properly situate implications of the findings.

The authorities seek to get rid of bottlenecks, ease participation and redress constraints on access to finance in agriculture through policy interventions as a means of sustainable economic growth. The findings are characteristic of emerging markets, rooted in the transitional challenge of opening economies, economic reforms and the March of progress. However, with agriculture and natural resources – rather than industrialisation – as the main stay of their economies, the African emerging markets face an uphill task in their development efforts. This is evident in the divergent and gloomy pictures in which the literature paints their agricultural economies.

Government should gear financing policies to boost output as a means of ensuring food security. It should address risk aversion tendencies among the lenders and feeble credit guarantee, subsidies and budgetary allocations to agriculture. This will ensure effective commitment of the lenders to agriculture and underpin agricultural insurance. However, it demands strengthening links in the chain of access to, and monitoring of, credit for agricultural production. A realistic policy response should target the rural economy – with youth, women and smallholder farmers as ultimate beneficiaries. These actions should be intensified as measures to boost farming and the rural economy.

Current literature fails to situate the empirical findings in emerging markets context, reflecting economies in transition. Besides, in its current state, the literature does not explicitly clarify that agriculture, like most other sectors in such economies, is bound to experience the observed financing constraints. Neither does it clearly reflect how and why the findings should be seen as fleeting realities of the March of progress in transitional economies. This study will help to fill the gap.

The purpose of this paper is to focus on labor movement in the agricultural sector of Taiwan to clarify the relationship between agricultural policy and the agricultural adjustment problem by estimating the labor movement function.

The relationship between agricultural policy and the adjustment process of agricultural labor in Taiwan was analyzed by modeling labor movement between the agricultural sector and other sectors. Through empirical analysis of labor migration function, it is clear that the following policy factors, affect the incentive for labor migration, and obstruct off‐farm labor migration: the price support policy; the incomplete farmland conversion regulations, which increase farmers' farmland possession motive; and government agricultural expenditure, which includes direct transfers to the agricultural sector.

The study confirms that after the late 1980s the factors that obstruct agricultural adjustment much more than the price support policy are the incomplete farmland conversion regulations and increasing government agricultural payments, from the result of the simulation with the influence of the policy eliminated.

The implication of this paper is that even though Taiwan has been participating in World Trade Organization from 2002 and consented to cut the tariff on agricultural products and reduce agriculture support policies not linked to production, a delay in labor adjustment between the agricultural sector and other sectors may not necessarily be eliminated if there are other policy factors that affect the incentive for off‐farm migration by farmers.

Many studies use the labor migration function for empirical analysis, but most of them estimated the function by a simple single regression which shows that the labor movement from the agricultural sector to the other sectors increases as a result of an expanding wage gap. However, off‐farm labor movement reduces the wage gap between sectors adversely. Therefore, a reverse causal relation exists between labor movement and the wage gap between sectors. The endogeneity problem was considered as analyzing the measurement of the labor migration function.

In recent years, prices for prime farmland have increased substantially, begging the question is the dramatic increase the result of a speculative bubble or consistent with market fundamentals with increases driven by increased global demand, low interest rates, and recent changes to US agricultural and energy policies. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impacts of recent agricultural support policies and ethanol policies on farmland values and rental rates.

Farm-level Agricultural Resource Management Survey data collected by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) between 1998 and 2008 as well as county-level data collected by the USDA, US Census Bureau, and Bureau of Economic Analysis are used to determine the impacts of recent agricultural support policies and ethanol policies on farmland values and rental rates, while controlling for parcel characteristics and urban pressure. Specifically, weighted ordinary least squares and two-stage least squares are used to investigate the impact of various governmental agricultural support policies, corn ethanol facilities location, and local corn ethanol production capacity on farmland values and rental rates.

The results indicate that government payments, urban pressure, and the proximity of the parcel to an ethanol facility have a positive impact on both farmland values and rental rates. More specifically, parcels located in the same county as at least one corn ethanol facility are more valuable and command higher rental rates. In addition, county-level ethanol production capacity is positively associated with farmland values and rental rates. An inverse relationship between distance of the parcels from an ethanol facility and farmland values is also found; a similar result is found for rental rates.

The findings suggest that agricultural support payments and ethanol policies are capitalized into farmland values. These findings have important implications for the formulation of future farm policy. A limitation of the analyses is that farmland values are estimated by landowners; future research could utilize farmland transaction data to overcome potential biases generated by using landowner estimates. In addition, while our study period covers 11 years, future research could expand the time period further to analyze the effect of more recent agricultural and ethanol policies.

This paper extends prior research pertaining to factors influencing farmland values and rental rates by also examining the proximity of the parcel to an operating ethanol facility using a unique data set.

The purpose of this paper is to quantify the implications of China's recently adopted agricultural policies on domestic and international commodity markets.

A systematic, quantitative analysis is applied to address whether China's recent trade and production policies distort China's domestic and international commodity markets. The paper provides a clear picture of how trade‐restricting policies affect markets using a 42‐country partial equilibrium global dynamic agricultural simulation model.

The paper shows that recent agricultural policy reforms increase China's production slightly, causing imports to decrease while exports decline because of input subsidies, export taxes and the reduction of export value added tax rebates. Domestic prices to consumers decrease in real terms. The effects on world markets are small as the set of policies adopted partially offset each other in the international arena.

The paper indicates that the adoption of the policy reforms lower price levels domestically and benefit lower income urban and rural households, whose diets are largely based on rice and wheat as staple foods. Future model enhancements should include measures of producer and consumer welfare in order to capture the total impacts of policies and policy changes in China.

The paper quantifies the potential implications of the recent agricultural policy reforms in China. This contributes to the investigation of the effects of these policies implemented by the Chinese Government to achieve the country's policy objectives. Owing to the dynamics of China's policy implementation an in‐depth analysis sheds light and contributes to capturing the impacts of policy reforms on the domestic and international markets.

At the outset of this book, we argued that it was important that we study agricultural “policy regimes” rather than agricultural policy itself. Our reasoning was that our interest lies in the actual outcomes in terms of farming practice, industry arrangements, global trade linkages, technology assemblages, and agroecological relationships in particular countries and regions. It is a convenient fiction that these practices and arrangements are the direct result of the formal agricultural policy arrangements in each specific country. In reality, the formal policy process in each country (including not only agriculture, but also, in some cases, rural, environmental, trade, and social development policy) can be argued to be in constant interaction with wider global politics, geographically specific environmental and cultural dynamics, prevailing farm practices, and new technologies. To recognize this full assembly of dynamics that coordinate to determine actual farm practice, we use the term “policy regimes.” In neoliberalized economies such as New Zealand, there is even a strong sense in which devolved governance at the industry and sector level now operates within these regimes in the same way that formal agricultural policy does in European countries.

China's Government in 2015 announced its goal of stabilizing the use of fertilizers and pesticide by the year 2020. However, implementation of effective policies is not straightforward, while one may even argue that the policy goal is by far not ambitious enough. Hence, it is useful to look at experiences of other countries that have gone through a similar process. In this paper, the authors explicitly consider the case of European Union's (EU’s) policies aimed at greening agriculture. The choice for the EU is motivated by the fact that the EU is about 35 years ahead of China in implementing a policy agenda to counter the problems China is facing now.

In this paper, the authors focus on agricultural inputs, in particular fertilizer and pesticides, as well as land use and their impact on food safety, air and water quality, soil degradation, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and biodiversity. Policies related to those issues are discussed for both, China and the EU. Given that implementation and monitoring are critical for the success of policies, the authors also discuss how policies are implemented and monitored under different governance and institutional conditions.

From the EU experiences, positive and negative, three central lessons are drawn: (1) China should strive for cross compliance but in two steps. In the first step, arrangements for on-farm monitoring must be made, coupled with a pilot program of cross-compliance conditions for large farms in selected counties; in the second step, cross-compliance requirements must be introduced for all farmers, with additional funds for rural development in vulnerable areas. (2) Strong stakeholder commitment should be sought in the formulation as well as implementation of greening policies. (3) Monitoring of greening results should be harmonized and standardized across the country, with a limited number of indicators.

This paper contributes to the policy discussion by comparing the agricultural greening measures in the EU (which was some 35 years ago in the same situation as China now) with the measures taken in China so far.

Purpose – This chapter compares bioenergy policy developments in Germany and Denmark to better understand the responses of EU country policy regimes to global shocks; to examine potentially emerging new trends of productivist policy models; and to explore potential land use conflicts in the context of a multifunctional EU agricultural policy.

Design/methodology/approach – The chapter reviews the bioenergy policy development pathways taken by Germany and Denmark, highlighting key consequences for agricultural land use and rural development. Findings from both case studies are then compared in summary tables, followed by a discussion of the possible emergence of productivist policy approaches in the bioenergy sector in these countries.

Findings – The bioenergy policies pursued by both countries differ in key respects and yet have had the same result-an increase in the productivist orientation of agriculture, legitimised by the environmental concerns of bioenergy policy. The Danish and German case studies also demonstrate that the particular pathways taken to establish bioenergy policies in each country have been strongly influenced by local political, farming and technological dynamics.

Originality/value – This chapter presents a telling case of what Burton and Wilson (this volume) call “repositioned productivism”, where productivist approaches benefit from environmental or multifunctional policy rationale to continue at the farm level.