IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaaeo2/197142.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

New Apprroaches to the Theory of Rental Contracts in Agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Bell, Clive
  • Zusman, Pinhas

Abstract

This paper addresses two issues: the relationship between the choice of rental contract in agriculture and the set of conditions or environment under which such contracts are arrived at, and the implications of this relationship for efficiency, equity, and development policy. Both issues have been the subject of much discussion in the theoretical literature of late. In particular, close attention has been paid to the role of imperfections in, or outright failure of, one or more markets. This has led, in turn, to the notion of "market interconnectedness" in the narrow sense that the same two agents will deal with one another in several markets simultaneously, an obvious example being the landlord who also provides credit to tenants. Two main analytical approaches are discernible. The first posits free entry for an indefinitely large set of agents who have access to parametrically given alternative utility levels elsewhere in the economy. The resulting equilibria are normally characterized by utility equivalent contracts, which are the outcome of a Nash noncooperative game. The second assumes barriers to entry in the face of market failure so that, in equilibrium, the set of contracts is the outcome of a system of Nash cooperative games. Taken together they yield a rich taxonomy and a number of interesting results.

Suggested Citation

  • Bell, Clive & Zusman, Pinhas, 1981. "New Apprroaches to the Theory of Rental Contracts in Agriculture," 1981 Occasional Paper Series No. 2 197142, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaaeo2:197142
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.197142
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/197142/files/agecon-occpapers-1981-077_1_.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.197142?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. Joseph E. Stiglitz, 1974. "Incentives and Risk Sharing in Sharecropping," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 41(2), pages 219-255.
    2. Bell, Clive & Zusman, Pinhas, 1976. "A Bargaining Theoretic Approach to Cropsharing Contracts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(4), pages 578-588, September.
    3. William Hallagan, 1978. "Self-Selection by Contractual Choice and the Theory of Sharecropping," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(2), pages 344-354, Autumn.
    4. David M. G. Newbery, 1977. "Risk Sharing, Sharecropping and Uncertain Labour Markets," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 44(3), pages 585-594.
    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. Poray, A., 1983. "The Land Resource: A Look At Recent Agricultural Rents In South Africa," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 22(2), October.
    2. Tyagi, Ashish & Himanshu, Himanshu, 2011. "Tenancy in Palanpur," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 38374, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Netanyahu, Sinaia & Mitra, Siddhartha & Just, Richard E., 1995. "Behavioral Risk: An Explanation of Contracts in the Broiler Industry," Working Papers 197832, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    4. Laha, A. & Kuri, P.K, 2008. "Productivity Differences under Alternative Tenurial Contracts in Agriculture and Access to Credit: Evidence from Rural West Bengal, India," Sri Lankan Journal of Agricultural Economics, Sri Lanka Agricultural Economics Association (SAEA), vol. 10, pages 1-18.
    5. Bharadwaj K., 1989. "Formation of rural labour markets: an analysis with special reference to Asia," ILO Working Papers 992679613402676, International Labour Organization.

    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. Kaushik Basu, 1989. "Limited Liability and the Existence of Share Tenancy," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-1989-061, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    2. Ananish Chaudhuri & Pushkar Maitra, 1997. "Determinants of Land Tenure Contracts; Theory and Evidence from Rural India," Departmental Working Papers 199710, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
    3. M. A. Taslim, 1992. "A Survey of Theories of Cropshare Tenancy," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 68(3), pages 254-275, September.
    4. Lanjouw, Jean Olson, 1999. "Information and the operation of markets: tests based on a general equilibrium model of land leasing in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 497-527, December.
    5. Sen, Debapriya, 2011. "A theory of sharecropping: The role of price behavior and imperfect competition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 181-199.
    6. Ananish Chaudhuri, 1997. "A Dynamic Model of Contractual Choice in Tenancy," Departmental Working Papers 199711, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
    7. Debapriya Sen, 2005. "Sharecropping, interlinkage, and price variation," Department of Economics Working Papers 05-10, Stony Brook University, Department of Economics.
    8. Ray, Tridip, 1999. "Share tenancy as strategic delegation," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 45-60, February.
    9. Bernat, G. Andrew, Jr., 1987. "Share Leasing And Production Efficiency," Staff Reports 278000, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    10. Head, Thomas, 1981. "Modeling Institutional Change in Rural Egypt," Working Papers 232846, University of California, Davis, Agricultural Development Systems: Egypt Project.
    11. repec:ags:ucdegw:232846 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. He, Yiming & Collins, Alan R., 2021. "The effect of information structure on farmland contractual choice: toward a revised theory of share tenancy with new evidence from Guangdong, China," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    13. Juliano Junqueira Assunção, 2005. "Non-agricultural land use and land reform: theory and evidence from Brazil," Textos para discussão 496, Department of Economics PUC-Rio (Brazil).
    14. Bellemare, Marc F. & Barrett, Christopher B., 2003. "An Asset Risk Theory of Share Tenancy," Working Papers 127203, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    15. Pierre Dubois & Bruno Jullien & Thierry Magnac, 2008. "Formal and Informal Risk Sharing in LDCs: Theory and Empirical Evidence," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(4), pages 679-725, July.
    16. Francine Lafontaine & Kathryn L. Shaw, 1999. "The Dynamics of Franchise Contracting: Evidence from Panel Data," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(5), pages 1041-1080, October.
    17. Rambonilaza, Mbolatiana, 2004. "Normes sociales et productivité dans le processus d’appariement des contrats agricoles," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 80(4), pages 571-592, Décembre.
    18. Olmos, Marta Fernandez & Rosell-Martinez, Jorge & Espitia-Escuer, Manuel Antonio, 2008. "The yield/quality trade-off and contractual choice," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6065, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. Vassalos, Michael & Li, Yingbo, 2016. "Assessing the Impact of Fresh Vegetable Growers’ Risk Aversion Levels and Risk Preferences on the Probability of Adopting Marketing Contracts: A Bayesian Approach," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 19(1), pages 1-18, February.
    20. McConnell, Kenneth E. & Price, Michael, 2006. "The lay system in commercial fisheries: Origin and implications," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 295-307, May.
    21. Ho, Peter, 2018. "Institutional function versus form: The evolutionary credibility of land, housing and natural resources," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 642-650.

    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:iaaeo2:197142. 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/iaaeeea.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.