IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/afrpps/v70y2010i3p377-398.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evidence of land hoarding behavior in US agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Adesoji O. Adelaja
  • Yohannes G. Hailu
  • Ahadu T. Tekle
  • Saichon Seedang

Abstract

Purpose - 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. Design/methodology/approach - 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. Findings - 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. Practical implications - 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. Originality/value - 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.

Suggested Citation

  • Adesoji O. Adelaja & Yohannes G. Hailu & Ahadu T. Tekle & Saichon Seedang, 2010. "Evidence of land hoarding behavior in US agriculture," Agricultural Finance Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 70(3), pages 377-398, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:afrpps:v:70:y:2010:i:3:p:377-398
    DOI: 10.1108/00021461011088503
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/00021461011088503/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/00021461011088503/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/00021461011088503?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Falk, Barry L. & Lee, Bong-Soo, 1998. "Fads Versus Fundamentals in Farmland Prices," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1306, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Rigoberto A. Lopez & Adesoji O. Adelaja & Margaret S. Andrews, 1988. "The Effects of Suburbanization on Agriculture," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 70(2), pages 346-358.
    3. Govindasamy, Ramu & Hossain, Ferdaus & Adelaja, Adesoji O., 1999. "Income Of Farmers Who Use Direct Marketing," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 28(1), pages 1-8, April.
    4. Blanchet-Scalliet, Christophette & El Karoui, Nicole & Martellini, Lionel, 2005. "Dynamic asset pricing theory with uncertain time-horizon," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 29(10), pages 1737-1764, October.
    5. Plantinga, Andrew J. & Lubowski, Ruben N. & Stavins, Robert N., 2002. "The effects of potential land development on agricultural land prices," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 561-581, November.
    6. Rigoberto A. Lopez & Farhed A. Shah & Marilyn A. Altobello, 1994. "Amenity Benefits and the Optimal Allocation of Land," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(1), pages 53-62.
    7. Govindasamy, Ramu & Italia, John & Adelaja, Adesoji, 2001. "Predicting Willingness-to-Pay a Premium for Integrated Pest Management Produce: A Logistic Approach," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(2), pages 151-159, October.
    8. Titman, Sheridan, 1985. "Urban Land Prices under Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 505-514, June.
    9. Parks, Peter J. & Quimio, Wilma Rose H., 1996. "Preserving Agricultural Land with Farmland Assessment: New Jersey as a Case Study," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(1), pages 22-27, April.
    10. Parks, Peter J. & Quimio, Wilma Rose H., 1996. "Preserving Agricultural Land With Farmland Assessment: New Jersey As A Case Study," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 25(1), pages 1-6, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kai Li & Zhili Ma & Guozhou Zhang, 2019. "Evaluation of the Supply-Side Efficiency of China’s Real Estate Market: A Data Envelopment Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, January.
    2. Choi, Jiseon & Jodlowski, Margaret C., 2023. "Not for sale: the role of farmland as a portfolio investment and its impact on supply in the market," 2023 Annual Meeting, July 23-25, Washington D.C. 335557, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Marlene Kionka & Martin Odening & Jana Plogmann & Matthias Ritter, 2021. "Measuring liquidity in agricultural land markets," Agricultural Finance Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 82(4), pages 690-713, September.
    4. Plogmann, Jana & Mußhoff, Oliver & Odening, Martin & Ritter, Matthias, 2022. "Farmland sales under returns and price uncertainty," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).

    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. Adelaja, Adesoji O. & Miller, Tracy & Taslim, Mohammad, 1998. "Land Values, Market Forces, and Declining Dairy Herd Size: Evidence from an Urban-Influenced Region," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 63-71, April.
    2. Liu, Xiangping & Lynch, Lori, 2006. "Do Agricultural Preservation Programs Affect Farmland Conversion? Evidence from a Propensity Score Matching Estimator," Working Papers 28569, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    3. Lori Lynch & Wesley N. Musser, 2001. "A Relative Efficiency Analysis of Farmland Preservation Programs," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(4), pages 577-594.
    4. Lynch, Lori & Carpenter, Janet, 2002. "Does The Farm Sector Have A Critical Mass?," Working Papers 28552, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    5. Kashian, Russell, 2004. "State Farmland Preferential Assessment: A Comparative Study," Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, Mid-Continent Regional Science Association, vol. 34(1), pages 1-12.
    6. Adelaja, Adesoji O. & Gottlieb, Paul D., 2009. "The Political Economy of Downzoning," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 1-19, October.
    7. Walid Oueslati & Julien Salanié & JunJie Wu, 2014. "Urbanization and Agricultural Structural Adjustments: Some Lessons from European Cities," Working Papers 1442, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    8. Joshua Duke & Lori Lynch, 2007. "Gauging support for innovative farmland preservation techniques," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 40(2), pages 123-155, June.
    9. Coisnon, Thomas & Oueslati, Walid & Salanié, Julien, 2014. "Urban sprawl occurrence under spatially varying agricultural amenities," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 38-49.
    10. Lynch, Lori & Lovell, Sabrina J., 2001. "Factors Influencing Participation In Agricultural Land Preservation Programs," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20714, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Sears, Joshua B., 2019. "A real options model of market entry: Endogenous uncertainty and exogenous uncertainty," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 1-1.
    12. Laure Latruffe & Chantal Le Mouël, 2009. "Capitalization Of Government Support In Agricultural Land Prices: What Do We Know?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(4), pages 659-691, September.
    13. Barton, Nick & Adelaja, Adesoji O. & Seedang, Saichon, 2005. "Testing Speculative Behavior in Farmland Demand," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19308, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    14. Jeffrey A Onsted & Keith C Clarke, 2011. "Forecasting Enrollment in Differential Assessment Programs Using Cellular Automata," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 38(5), pages 829-849, October.
    15. Maksym Polyakov & Daowei Zhang, 2008. "Property Tax Policy and Land-Use Change," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(3), pages 396-408.
    16. Xiangping Liu & Lori Lynch, 2011. "Do Agricultural Land Preservation Programs Reduce Farmland Loss? Evidence from a Propensity Score Matching Estimator," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(2), pages 183-201.
    17. Bills, Nelson L., 2007. "Fifty Years of Farmland Protection Legislation in the Northeast: Persistent Issues and Emergent Research Opportunities," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-9, October.
    18. Joshua M. Duke & Lori Lynch, 2006. "Farmland Retention Techniques: Property Rights Implications and Comparative Evaluation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(2), pages 189-213.
    19. Larson, Janelle M. & Findeis, Jill L. & Smith, Stephen M., 2000. "Locational Effects Of Urbanization On Agriculture In Southeastern Pennsylvania," 2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL 21885, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    20. Kyungwon Kim & Jae Wook Song, 2020. "Detecting Possible Reduction of the Housing Bubble in Korea for Different Residential Types and Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-31, February.

    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:eme:afrpps:v:70:y:2010:i:3:p:377-398. 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.