IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/agreko/246024.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Best Institutional Arrangements For Farm-Worker Equity-Share Schemes In South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Knight, S
  • Lyne, M
  • Roth, M

Abstract

Farmworker equity-share schemes were initiated in the Western Cape region of South Africa in the early 1990’s as a method of redistributing farm assets to land reform beneficiaries while maintaining the viability of commercial farming operations. This study set out to identify the institutional characteristics of successful farmworker equity-share schemes in South Africa and to discern a set of best institutional practices that will likely promote the success of future equity-share schemes. A detailed study of nine land reform projects intended to empower previously disadvantaged farmworkers was undertaken in the Western Cape during November 2001 to explore relationships between their institutional arrangements, worker empowerment, management quality and performance. Cluster analysis of variables measuring these four constructs revealed positive relationships between sound institutional arrangements, competent management, effective worker empowerment and good performance. Best institutional practices identified by the analysis suggest that farmworker equity-share schemes should be operated as (or like) a company with voting and benefit rights proportional to individual shareholdings, but with restrictions on certain share transactions to prevent free-riding by non-workers and the loss of creditworthiness through sudden outflows of equity and managerial expertise. However, this positive relationship between best institutional practices and enterprise performance is dependent on effective worker empowerment (e.g. skills transfer and gender representation), good governance (e.g. external auditing) and competent management (e.g. schemes to reward worker performance and to resolve disputes).

Suggested Citation

  • Knight, S & Lyne, M & Roth, M, 2003. "Best Institutional Arrangements For Farm-Worker Equity-Share Schemes In South Africa," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 42(3).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:agreko:246024
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.246024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/246024/files/42_3_4.%20Knight%20Paper%202.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.246024?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. Brian Everitt, 1980. "Cluster analysis," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 75-100, January.
    2. Michael L. Cook & Constantine Iliopoulos, 2000. "Ill-defined property rights in collective action: the case of US agricultural cooperatives," Chapters, in: Claude Ménard (ed.), Institutions, Contracts and Organizations, chapter 22, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Nieuwoudt, W. L., 1990. "Efficiency Of Land Use," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 29(4), December.
    4. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    5. Porter, Philip K & Scully, Gerald W, 1987. "Economic Efficiency in Cooperatives," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 30(2), pages 489-512, October.
    6. M.C. Lyne & W.L. Nieuwoudt, 1990. "The Real Tragedy of the Commons: Livestock Production in Kwazulu," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 58(1), pages 51-56, March.
    7. Kirsten, J. F. & van Rooyen, J. & Ngqangweni, S., 1996. "Progress With Different Land Reform Options In South Africa," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 35(4), December.
    8. Hendrikse, George W. J. & Veerman, Cees P., 2001. "Marketing cooperatives and financial structure: a transaction costs economics analysis," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 205-216, December.
    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. Poulton, Colin & Dorward, Andrew & Kydd, Jonathan, 2010. "The Future of Small Farms: New Directions for Services, Institutions, and Intermediation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 1413-1428, October.
    2. Gray, B.C. & Lyne, Michael C. & Ferrer, Stuart R.D., 2004. "Measuring the performance of equity-share schemes in South African agriculture: A focus on financial criteria," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 43(4), pages 1-19, December.
    3. Sartorius, Kurt & Kirsten, Johann, 2007. "A framework to facilitate institutional arrangements for smallholder supply in developing countries: An agribusiness perspective," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5-6), pages 640-655.
    4. Gray, B.C. & Lyne, Michael C. & Ferrer, Stuart R.D., 2005. "Criteria to monitor the poverty alleviation, empowerment and institutional performance of equity-share schemes in South African agriculture," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 44(4), pages 1-31, December.
    5. Ortmann, Gerald F., 2005. "Promoting the competitiveness of South African agriculture in a dynamic economic and political environment," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 44(3), pages 1-35, September.

    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. Evans, Lewis & Meade, Richard, 2005. "The Role and Significance of Cooperatives in New Zealand Agriculture, A Comparative Institutional Analysis," Working Paper Series 3847, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    2. Lyne, Michael C. & Collins, Ray, 2008. "South Africa’s new Cooperatives Act: A missed opportunity for small farmers and land reform beneficiaries," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 47(2), pages 1-18, June.
    3. repec:vuw:vuwscr:18942 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Evans, Lewis & Meade, Richard, 2005. "The Role and Significance of Cooperatives in New Zealand Agriculture, A Comparative Institutional Analysis," Working Paper Series 18942, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    5. Grashuis, Jasper & Cook, Michael, 2016. "Capital, Ownership, and Governance: Analyzing the Structure of U.S. Farmer Cooperatives," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235677, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Cheng, Yuxi & Katchova, Ani, 2018. "Cooperatives capital structure adjustment during the agricultural downturn," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 273788, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Knight, SL & Lyne, MC, 2002. "Perceptions Of Farm Worker Equity-Share Schemes In South Africa," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 41(4).
    8. Vontalge, Alan L., 1991. "A feasibility study of swine producer management cooperatives," ISU General Staff Papers 1991010108000018168, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    9. Ortmann, Gerald F., 2000. "Promoting competitiveness in South African agriculture and agribusiness: The role of institutions," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 39(4), pages 1-33, March.
    10. Cadot, Julien & Féral, Arnaud, 2022. "Good Co-ops, Bad Co-ops : Financing Cooperatives in Asymmetric Information," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322550, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Cadot, Julien & Féral, Arnaud, 2023. "Cooperative Finance: Signaling Risk with Investment and Retained Earnings," 2023 Annual Meeting, July 23-25, Washington D.C. 335976, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Sexton, Richard J. & Iskow, Julie, 1993. "What Do We Know About the Economic Efficiency of Cooperatives: An Evaluative Survey," Journal of Agricultural Cooperation, National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, vol. 8, pages 1-13.
    13. Kuhle Prudence Mnisi & Abdul Latif Alhassan, 2021. "Financial structure and cooperative efficiency: A pecking‐order evidence from sugarcane farmers in Eswatini," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 92(2), pages 261-281, June.
    14. Gorton, Gary & Schmid, Frank, 1999. "Corporate governance, ownership dispersion and efficiency: Empirical evidence from Austrian cooperative banking," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 119-140, June.
    15. Jieming Zhu & Chen Chen & Lie You, 2022. "Engaging Smallholders in Flower Agribusiness for Inclusive Rural Development: The Case of Yunnan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-15, February.
    16. Franken, Jason R.V. & Cook, Michael L., 2015. "Investment Constraints in Agricultural Cooperatives," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205427, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. Oosthuizen, L.K., 1998. "Agriculture As A Driving Force Of Economic Development: Suggestions For Agricultural Development Policy In Southern Africa," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 37(4), pages 1-21, December.
    18. Jieming Zhu & Yan Guo, 2015. "Rural development led by autonomous village land cooperatives: Its impact on sustainable China’s urbanisation in high-density regions," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 52(8), pages 1395-1413, June.
    19. Shen, Mingrui & Shen, Jianfa, 2018. "Evaluating the cooperative and family farm programs in China: A rural governance perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 240-250.
    20. Mahabile, M. & Lyne, Michael C. & Panin, A., 2005. "An empirical analysis of factors affecting the productivity of livestock in southern Botswana," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 44(1), pages 1-19, March.
    21. Borgen, Svein Ole, 2004. "Rethinking incentive problems in cooperative organizations," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 383-393, September.

    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:agreko:246024. 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: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeasaea.html .

    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.