An analysis of factors contributing to the use of an income equalisation deposit scheme by commercial farmers in South Africa
Recent research suggests that an Income Equalisation Deposit (IED) scheme could be a feasible new risk management tool for commercial farmers in South Africa. This prompted a study of practicing consultantsÂ’ (tax experts) views on determining what types of farmers would be likely to use the scheme. During 2000, a postal survey of 24 consultants was conducted mainly in KwaZulu-Natal, and in the Maize Triangle and surrounding areas. Each consultant was to review nine scenarios (eight plus a control, giving 192 observations) and decide whether they would recommend an IED scheme for each scenario. A statistical experimental design was used to structure the scenarios, allowing for main and interaction effects between variables that could influence the potential use of an IED scheme. Discriminant analysis revealed that, ceteris paribus, farmers with higher annual net farm incomes (>R300,000), lower debt/asset ratios (<15%), more variable net farm incomes, and less off-farm income would most likely use an IED scheme. In terms of ranking, ceteris paribus, high risk maize farmers, intermediate risk maize farmers and high risk livestock farmers are more likely to use an IED scheme than are low risk maize farmers, low and intermediate risk livestock farmers and diversified farmers. These results support the use of an IED scheme as a risk management tool as higher risk farmers are more likely to make use of the scheme.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Stephen C. Gabriel & C. B. Baker, 1980. "Concepts of Business and Financial Risk," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 62(3), pages 560-564.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:agreko:9501. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.