Optimal Farm Size under an Uncertain Land Market: the Case of Kyrgyz Republic
The paper illustrates a theoretical model of real option value applied to the problem of land development. Making use of the 1998-2001 Kyrgyz Household Budget Survey, we show that when the hypothesis of decreasing return to scale holds, the relation between the threshold value of revenue per hectare and the amount of land cultivated is positive. In addition to that, the relation between the threshold and the amount of land owned is positive in the case of continuous supply of land and negative when there is discontinuous supply of land. The direct consequence is that, in the first case, smaller farms will be more willing to rent land and exercise the option where, in the second case, larger farms will exercise first. The results corroborate the findings of the theoretical model and suggest three main conclusions: (i) the combination of uncertainty and irreversibility is a significant factor in the land development decisions, (ii) farmers’ behaviour is consistent with the continuous profit maximization model, (iii) farming unit revenue tends to be positively related to farm size, once uncertainty is properly accounted for.
|Date of creation:||20 Aug 2009|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.eaae.org|
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Binswanger, Hans P. & Elgin, Miranda, 1988. "What are the Prospects for Land Reform?," 1988 Conference, August 24-31, 1988, Buenos Aires, Argentina 183168, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
- Verma, B N & Bromley, Daniel W, 1987. "The Political Economy of Farm Size in India: The Elusive Quest," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(4), pages 791-808, July.
- Louis Putterman & Xiao-Yuan Dong, 1997. "Pre-Reform Industry and The State Monopsony in China," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 94, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
- Deininger, Klaus & Feder, Gershon, 2001.
"Land institutions and land markets,"
Handbook of Agricultural Economics,in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 6, pages 288-331
- Deininger, Klaus & Feder, Gershon, 1998. "Land institutions and land markets," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2014, The World Bank.
- Vranken, Liesbet & Swinnen, Johan, 2006. "Land rental markets in transition: Theory and evidence from Hungary," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 481-500, March.
- Binswanger, Hans P. & Deininger, Klaus & Feder, Gershon, 1995. "Power, distortions, revolt and reform in agricultural land relations," Handbook of Development Economics,in: Hollis Chenery & T.N. Srinivasan (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 42, pages 2659-2772 Elsevier.
- Binswanger, Hans P. & Deininger, Klaus & Feder, Gershon, 1993. "Power, distortions, revolt, and reform in agricultural land relations," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1164, The World Bank.
- Titman, Sheridan, 1985. "Urban Land Prices under Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 505-514, June.
- Feder, Gershon, et al, 1992. "The Determinants of Farm Investment and Residential Construction in Post-Reform China," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(1), pages 1-26, October.
- Feder, Gershon & Lau, Lawrence J. & Lin, Justin & Luo Xiaopeng, 1990. "The determinants of farm investment and residential construction in post-reform China," Policy Research Working Paper Series 471, The World Bank.
- Edward B. Barbier & Joanne C. Burgess, 1997. "The Economics of Tropical Forest Land Use Options," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 73(2), pages 174-195.
- Carter, Michael R, 1984. "Identification of the Inverse Relationship between Farm Size and Productivity: An Empirical Analysis of Peasant Agricultural Production," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(1), pages 131-145, March.
- Newell, Andrew & Pandya, Kiran & Symons, James, 1997. "Farm Size and the Intensity of Land Use in Gujarat," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(2), pages 307-315, April.
- Williams, Joseph T, 1991. "Real Estate Development as an Option," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 191-208, June.
- Guang Wan & Enjiang Cheng, 2001. "Effects of land fragmentation and returns to scale in the Chinese farming sector," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(2), pages 183-194.
- Dong, Xiao-Yuan & Putterman, Louis, 2000. "Prereform Industry and State Monopsony in China," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 32-60, March.
- Benjamin, Dwayne, 1995. "Can unobserved land quality explain the inverse productivity relationship?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 51-84, February.
- Feder, Gershon, 1985. "The relation between farm size and farm productivity : The role of family labor, supervision and credit constraints," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2-3), pages 297-313, August.
- Cornia, Giovanni Andrea, 1985. "Farm size, land yields and the agricultural production function: An analysis for fifteen developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 513-534, April. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)