IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/areint/308592.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Інвестиції Та Земельна Реформа В Сільському Господарстві В Україні

Author

Listed:
  • Onegina, Viktoriya
  • Vitkovskyi, Yurii

Abstract

Purpose. The purpose of the paper is to identify trends and factors of investment in agriculture in Ukraine in the period 2014–2019 and the impact of land reform, expected liberalization of the trade of agricultural land on the of investment in agriculture. Methodology / approach. We used for the research such methods as logical operations (analysis, synthesis, generalization, induction, deduction) – to determine the trends of investment, to make conclusions about the impact of land reform on investment; indices – to identify quantitative changes in nominal and real investments, factors impact; trend analysis – to identify the main tendencies of changes, build the functions of the investment trend in different periods, factors and correlation analysis –- to identify the main factors and the density of relationships, the dependence of investment on the factors (profit, prices, interest rates); graphic – for visual presentation of investment dynamics. The research was performed on the basis of statistical data of the State Statistics Service of Ukraine, the National Bank of Ukraine, statistical and financial reports of agricultural enterprises of Kharkiv region and data of own observations for 2014–2019 (for the calculation of indices of some indicators and correlation coefficients data of 2009–2019 was used). Results. The function of the trend, which reveals the general direction of change in annual volumes of investment in agriculture in 2014–2019 in Ukraine, was defined. The main factors influencing the investment process were revealed: rising prices for agricultural products, low level of disparity in prices for agricultural products and material and technical resources, export orientation of production and favorable for exporters dynamics of the national currency, agro-innovation, profitability of agricultural production. However, the effect of revealed factors does not explain the decrease of investment in 2019. The study showed that expectations of changes in the legislation on agricultural land sales had a negative impact on the dynamics of investment in agriculture in Ukraine. To maintain the trend of increasing investment in agricultural production, its technical and technological renewal, it is important to implement a set of legal, economic, technical and organizational measures that will ensure quality of reform of land relations. Originality / scientific novelty. Revealing the dynamics of investmentі in agriculture in Ukraine and identification of the most significant factors influencing them in 2014–2019 were further developed. Changes of the annual volume of investment under the influence of expectations of the introduction of the land market in Ukraine are estimated. It is proved that while the ownership rights on the agricultural land remain unclear and uncompleted, it is impossible to assert about the grounds for improving the efficiency of land use, increasing investment in agriculture due to the abolition of the moratorium on land sales. The duration of the lag of the impact of land reform on increasing investment in agriculture will depend on the quality of institutions of land use and land market. Practical value / implications. The results of the study can be used in management at both micro and macro levels to forecast the volume of investment in agriculture, develop measures to stimulate investment and deepening land reform.

Suggested Citation

  • Onegina, Viktoriya & Vitkovskyi, Yurii, 2020. "Інвестиції Та Земельна Реформа В Сільському Господарстві В Україні," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 6(4), December.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:areint:308592
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.308592
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/308592/files/10_Onegina_article.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.308592?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jean-Paul Chavas, 1994. "Production and Investment Decisions Under Sunk Cost and Temporal Uncertainty," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(1), pages 114-127.
    2. Syster C. Maart-Noelck & Oliver Musshoff, 2013. "Investing Today or Tomorrow? An Experimental Approach to Farmers’ Decision Behaviour," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(2), pages 295-318, June.
    3. Theodoros Skevas & Feng Wu & Zhengfei Guan, 2018. "Farm Capital Investment and Deviations from the Optimal Path," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(2), pages 561-577, June.
    4. Johan F.M. Swinnen, 2009. "Reforms, globalization, and endogenous agricultural structures," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(s1), pages 719-732, November.
    5. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    6. Marten Graubner & Igor Ostapchuk & Taras Gagalyuk, 0. "Agroholdings and land rental markets: a spatial competition perspective," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 48(1), pages 158-206.
    7. Charles B. Moss & Dong Hee Suh, 2020. "Effect of Compliance Cost on the Supply of Bank Credit to Agriculture: A Differential Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(2), pages 713-726, March.
    8. Z. Lerman, 2001. "Ten Years of Land Reforms: What Lessons Can Russia Draw from the World Experience," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, vol. 8.
    9. Timothy G. Baker & Michael D. Boehlje & Michael R. Langemeier, 2014. "Farmland: Is It Currently Priced as an Attractive Investment?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1321-1333.
    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. Cord-Friedrich von Hobe & Marius Michels & Oliver Musshoff, 2021. "German Farmers’ Perspectives on Price Drivers in Agricultural Land Rental Markets—A Combination of a Systematic Literature Review and Survey Results," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-22, February.
    2. Ihli, Hanna Julia & Gassner, Anja & Musshoff, Oliver, 2018. "Experimental insights on the investment behavior of small-scale coffee farmers in central Uganda under risk and uncertainty," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 31-44.
    3. Ihli, Hanna Julia & Musshoff, Oliver, 2013. "Investment Behavior of Ugandan Smallholder Farmers: An Experimental Analysis," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 154775, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    4. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 2002. "Political economics and public finance," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 24, pages 1549-1659, Elsevier.
    5. Qiuyue Xia & Lu Li & Jie Dong & Bin Zhang, 2021. "Reduction Effect and Mechanism Analysis of Carbon Trading Policy on Carbon Emissions from Land Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-22, August.
    6. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    7. Usher, Dan, 2001. "Personal goods, efficiency and the law," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 673-703, November.
    8. George Tridimas & Stanley L. Winer, 2018. "On the Definition and Nature of Fiscal Coercion," Carleton Economic Papers 18-09, Carleton University, Department of Economics.
    9. Mario Jametti & Thomas von Ungern-Sternberg, 2005. "Assessing the Efficiency of an Insurance Provider—A Measurement Error Approach," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 30(1), pages 15-34, June.
    10. Stephanie Rosenkranz & Patrick W. Schmitz, 2007. "Can Coasean Bargaining Justify Pigouvian Taxation?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 74(296), pages 573-585, November.
    11. Stefan Ambec & Yann Kervinio, 2016. "Cooperative decision-making for the provision of a locally undesirable facility," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(1), pages 119-155, January.
    12. Liu, Duan & Yu, Nizhou & Wan, Hong, 2022. "Does water rights trading affect corporate investment? The role of resource allocation and risk mitigation channels," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    13. Valcu-Lisman, Adriana & Weninger, Quinn, 2012. "Markov-Perfect rent dissipation in rights-based fisheries," ISU General Staff Papers 201209260700001037, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    14. Hausknost, Daniel & Grima, Nelson & Singh, Simron Jit, 2017. "The political dimensions of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES): Cascade or stairway?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 109-118.
    15. Kurtis Swope & Ryan Wielgus & Pamela Schmitt & John Cadigan, 2011. "Contracts, Behavior, and the Land-assembly Problem: An Experimental Study," Research in Experimental Economics, in: Experiments on Energy, the Environment, and Sustainability, pages 151-180, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    16. Ralph E. Townsend, 2010. "Transactions costs as an obstacle to fisheries self-governance in New Zealand," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 54(3), pages 301-320, July.
    17. Simon Levin & Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2021. "On the Coevolution of Economic and Ecological Systems," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 13(1), pages 355-377, October.
    18. Whitten, Stuart M. & Salzman, James & Shelton, Dave & Procter, Wendy, 2003. "Markets for ecosystem services: Applying the concepts," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 58269, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    19. Rambaud, Alexandre & Richard, Jacques, 2015. "The “Triple Depreciation Line” instead of the “Triple Bottom Line”: Towards a genuine integrated reporting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 92-116.
    20. Karsten Neuhoff, 2002. "Optimal congestion treatment for bilateral electricity trading," Working Papers EP05, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness; Land Economics/Use;

    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:ags:areint:308592. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://are-journal.com/are .

    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.