Why sharecropping? : explaining its presence and absence in Europe's vineyards, 1750-1950

The traditional view that sharecropping was a cause of low productivity in European agriculture prior to the Second World War has been challenged by economic historians, and today the contact is often considered as efficient at reducing the monitoring costs associated with labour and allocation of risk between landowners and farmers, especially when capital markets were weak for working capital. Yet if sharecropping was a relatively efficient contract, why was it not found more often? This paper looks at the vine, a crop that was widespread in Europe and that has been central to the current debates. It argues that while the literature has been right to emphasise the importance of the high monitoring costs, it has ignored the equally important costs associated with dividing the harvest. These were sufficiently large to make the contract unattractive, except in the few cases where the landowner was prepared to be actively involved in wine making and its sale, such as was found in Beaujolais or Tuscany

Economies of scale and obstacles to land reform, Andalusia 1931-36

Proceedings of the Sixth European Social Science History Conference, Amsterdam, 22-25 March 2006.Publicad

The "Rabassa Morta" in Catalan viticulture : the rise and decline of a long-term sharecropping contract, 1670s-1920s

For long periods, and in line with recent theoretical literature, the rabassa morta sharecropping contract successfully reduced problems of moral hazard and opportunistic behavior, and provided incentives for sharecroppers to respond to market opportunities. However, from the late nineteenth century, technical change, rising wages, and weak wine prices all increased the incentives for postcontractual opportunistic behavior on the part of the sharecropper, leading to conflicts and loss of trust between the principal and agent. Under these conditions, contemporaries often considered the contract synonymous with "exploitation" and "impoverishment," terms frequently found in the more traditional literature on sharecropping.Publicad

Land markets and agrarian backwardness (Spain, 1900-1936)

To what extent were land markets the cause of Spanish agrarian backwardness? This paper uses new provincial data on average real land prices, together with provincial level variation in land productivity, to analyse land markets efficiency. To address this unresolved issue, we test whether land markets were spatially integrated and whether their prices can be explained with the present value model. Our results suggest that land prices converged across provinces and that variations were driven by fundamentals. In consequence, we conclude that institutional failure in land markets was not the cause of the relatively poor productivity performance of Spanish agricultur

Why sharecropping? : explaining its presence and absence in Europe's vineyards, 1750-1950

The traditional view that sharecropping was a cause of low productivity in European agriculture prior to the Second World War has been challenged by economic historians, and today the contact is often considered as efficient at reducing the monitoring costs associated with labour and allocation of risk between landowners and farmers, especially when capital markets were weak for working capital. Yet if sharecropping was a relatively efficient contract, why was it not found more often? This paper looks at the vine, a crop that was widespread in Europe and that has been central to the current debates. It argues that while the literature has been right to emphasise the importance of the high monitoring costs, it has ignored the equally important costs associated with dividing the harvest. These were sufficiently large to make the contract unattractive, except in the few cases where the landowner was prepared to be actively involved in wine making and its sale, such as was found in Beaujolais or Tuscany.

Explaining contract choice : vertical co-ordination, sharecropping, and wine, France 1850-1950.

Recent literature on sharecropping has emphasized its importance in reducing problems associated with moral hazard in cultivation (Tuscany), or in providing an important ‘rung’ on the farm ladder (US South). Yet despite these and other important features, sharecropping is surprisingly absent in many, if not most other settings. Using case studies associated with French wine production, this paper argues that a number of factors have often been overlooked in the literature: 1) the need for landowners to be able to offer farms that were both sufficiently large to employ full time the sharecropper’s family, and allowed them to produce a variety of products to minimize risk; 2) measurement problems associated with the division of the harvest, especially when quality was an important factor in determining farm price; 3) and the nature of vertical co-operation and integration associated with the production and marketing arrangements of individual crops explains that landowners were not indifferent to receiving payment in cash or kind, and this affected contract choice. This paper incorporates these ideas to explain not just the presence and absence of sharecropping in different geographical localities, but also the wide variety of different forms of the contract that existed in Europe.Sharecropping; French agriculture; Wine history;