REALIZING EFFICIENT USE AND CONSERVATION OF LAND UNDER PRIVATE OWNERSHIP: A REBUTMENT TO NOBEL ECONOMICS LAUREATE THEODORE W. SCHULTZ

Rebutting Theodore W. Schultz's assertions that small farmers are rational, low income countries saddled with traditional agriculture have not the problem of many farmers leaving agriculture for nonfarm jobs, part-time farming is efficient, and economies of scale have no logical basis and not stood the test of time, this paper presents that in (1) the low income countries still saddled with traditional agriculture, (2) the low income countries developing towards the high income economy, and (3) the high income countries, numerous able-bodied part-time and absent farmers earning higher off-farm income tend to under-utilize or idle small (and often fragmented) farms without selling or leasing them to full-time farmers to achieve economies of scale which do have logical basis and stood the test of empirical findings; and indicates that this is a global problem unresolved under private land ownership in both developing and developed countries. Thus small farmers in so doing are not so rational to the societal and their own fundamental interests. The paper also shows that in Central-Eastern Europe and Central Asia under private land ownership or possession many farmers voluntarily remain in collective land operation which perpetuates the low individual incentives. The paper further analyses the dilemmas the EU has been facing in resolving food overproduction, reducing trade-distorting agricultural subsidies and tariffs, keeping self-sufficiency, retaining small farmers in agriculture while strengthening large farmers, and efficient land use; and the crucial imperfections in the EU enlargement process. The paper thus proposes possible solutions on how to protect private land ownership, while transferring under-utilized land to full-time farmers; prevent the high costs of the traditional land consolidation, but still reaching its aims; keep part-time small farmers in agriculture, meanwhile bolstering full-time large farmers; avoid collective land operation, in the meantime benefiting from collective services; boosting EU enlargement but not adding burdens on the EU; retain non-cereal agriculture on ecologically sensitive land, at the same time improving the environment and precluding food overproduction; reduce trade-distorting agricultural subsidies and high tariffs, whereas making full-time farmers viable and competitive; and promote off-farm activities, for the meantime reinforcing agriculture.Land Economics/Use,

Overcoming Inefficient Land-Holding of Part-Time and Absent Small Farmers - A Challenge to Nobel Economics Laureate Theodore W. Schultz

Paper presented at the International Symposium Sustaining Food Security and Managing Natural Resources in Southeast Asia - Challenges for the 21st Century Organized by University of Hohenheim, Germany Chiang Mai University and Kasetsart University, Thailand International Center for Research in Agroforestry, and International Board for Soil Research and Management 8-11 January 2002 at Chiang Mai University, Thailandpart-time and absent small farmers, inefficient land-holding, low and high income economy, economies of scale, obliged lease of unused land to full-time farmers., Agricultural and Food Policy, Community/Rural/Urban Development, Farm Management, Food Security and Poverty, Institutional and Behavioral Economics, International Development, Labor and Human Capital, Land Economics/Use, Political Economy, Production Economics, Productivity Analysis, B, O, Q, R,

PRESERVING SMALL WHILE STRENGTHENING LARGE FARMERS IN THE USA AND OECD

Facing the general trend towards larger but fewer farms since 1935, the US government implemented a protective safety net for small farmers during 1933-96 which did not halt it but incurred market distortions and other drawbacks. It then switched to market oriented measures in 1996 which have made small farmers more exposed to market risks. A suitable solution to both preserving small and strengthening large farms has not been found. This paper provides a proposal not included in the 145 recommendations in the report `A Time to Act' by the National Commission on Small Farms of the USDA in January 1998: to promote part ownership of land by encouraging small farmers to develop off-farm activities and lease the land beyond self-need to part owners (including competent small farmers) to boost large farmers. In this way, while part owners could achieve economies of scale, small farmers would be boss of self-used land and landlord of rented-out land, integrated with large farmers, gain more income from rent, increase time for and earnings from off-farm activities, so that small farmers, rural communities, democracy roots and landscape could be conserved. It shows an example of how some black farmers who were small in terms of owned land but became large after renting in land achieved success in farming. Although part ownership has been increasing, it has never been promoted as a policy direction and even be neglected. This proposal may be relevant to other OECD countries with a large versus small bimodal farm structure.land tenure, full owner, tenant, part owner, large farmers, small farmers, off farm activities, inefficient land-holding, Dual Land System, Single Land System, Industrial Organization,

PROPOSALS FOR THE EU ON THE 'MID-TERM REVIEW OF CAP OF AGENDA 2000' WITH EMPHASIS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

How agricultural policies affect the environment is within ecological economics. The EU Commission `Mid-Term Review of CAP of Agenda 2000' of July 2002 proposed to separate production from direct payments, so that farmers would fully compete in the market, without gearing production to the trade-distorting subsidies. The decoupled direct payment to each farm will be conditional upon cross-compliance with the environmental, food safety, animal health and welfare, and occupational safety standards. MTR maintains extra set-aside payment for normal land to avoid overproduction, but no longer for marginal land. This paper suggests not to set aside normal land, because overproduction would be prevented by decoupling; normal land is less environmentally sensitive, and the direct payment would be enough for farmers to keep it in a good agricultural condition; setting-aside normal land would cost money, and make it unavailable for full-time farmers to achieve economies of scale. It recommends to set aside marginal land which is more environmentally sensitive, and the direct payment may not be enough for farmers to keep it in a good agricultural condition. It advises to gradually convert marginal land back to the nature forever, give a conversion payment to its owners to keep it in a good environmental condition, and pursue non-cereal agriculture and off-farm activities. It advocates a tax on those farmers who refuse to keep a good agricultural or environmental condition on the set aside or converted marginal land for maximally two years, and forced land sale afterwards, which would be less harsh than expropriation.Agricultural and Food Policy, Environmental Economics and Policy,

Promoting Agricultural Entrepreneurs against Food Shortage, Overproduction and Protectionism in Northern Africa and Other Regions of the World - A Critique to Nobel Laureate Schultz and Nominee Hirschman

Paper presented at the International Conference of 'Entrepreneurship and Land and Rural Development' Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences, University of AbouBekr BELKAID TLEMCEN Tlemcen, Algeria, 3-4 December 2008Agribusiness, International Relations/Trade,