IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02573765.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Farmland tenure and transaction costs: Public and collectively owned land vs conventional coordination mechanisms in France
[Régime de tenure foncière et coûts de transaction: terres publiques et collectives vs mécanismes de coordination classiques en France]

Author

Listed:
  • Christine Léger Léger-Bosch

    (Territoires - Territoires - AgroParisTech - VAS - VetAgro Sup - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur et de recherche en alimentation, santé animale, sciences agronomiques et de l'environnement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - UCA - Université Clermont Auvergne)

Abstract

To preserve farmland in industrialized countries, public initiatives or initiatives from nongovernmental organizations increasingly rely on Long‐term and Full Rights Acquisitions of land (LFRAs). The objective of this article is to help assess whether those actions provide profitable access to land use for lessee farms. We compare the economic implications for farms of this mode of access to land use with the two other main modes: conventional lease arrangements and purchasing transactions. The analysis focuses on the transaction costs relative to the cost of exchange, that is, including purchase/rental price, and to the financial benefits of the transaction. We use original data on costs provided by a survey of farmers within a French region. Our results suggest that the ex ante transaction costs incurred by farmers involved in LFRAs, as a percentage of the exchange cost of accessing land use, are lower than those in purchasing transactions and higher than those in conventional lease arrangements. The difference between the two types of lease arrangements is due to negotiation costs, which are doubled in LFRAs. In conclusion, making the involvement of tenant farmers in the construction of LFRAs more effective would allow these initiatives to better achieve their goals.

Suggested Citation

  • Christine Léger Léger-Bosch, 2019. "Farmland tenure and transaction costs: Public and collectively owned land vs conventional coordination mechanisms in France [Régime de tenure foncière et coûts de transaction: terres publiques et c," Post-Print hal-02573765, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02573765
    DOI: 10.1111/cjag.12206
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-02573765
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-02573765/document
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/cjag.12206?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. Keita Fukunaga & Wallace E. Huffman, 2009. "The Role of Risk and Transaction Costs in Contract Design: Evidence from Farmland Lease Contracts in U.S. Agriculture," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(1), pages 237-249.
    2. Eggertsson, Thrainn, 1990. "The role of transaction costs and property rights in economic analysis," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(2-3), pages 450-457, May.
    3. McCann, Laura & Colby, Bonnie & Easter, K. William & Kasterine, Alexander & Kuperan, K.V., 2005. "Transaction cost measurement for evaluating environmental policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 527-542, March.
    4. Richard Gray, 1994. "Transactions Costs and New Institutions: Will CBLTs Have a Role in the Saskatchewan Land Market?," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 42(4), pages 501-509, December.
    5. Evy Mettepenningen & Ann Verspecht & Guido Van Huylenbroeck, 2009. "Measuring private transaction costs of European agri-environmental schemes," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(5), pages 649-667.
    6. Annie Royer, 2011. "Transaction costs in milk marketing: a comparison between Canada and Great Britain," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 42(2), pages 171-182, March.
    7. Peter Murrell, 1983. "The Economics of Sharing: A Transactions Costs Analysis of Contractual Choice in Farming," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 14(1), pages 283-293, Spring.
    8. Sami Myyrä & Elise Ketoja & Markku Yli-Halla & Kyöisti Pietola, 2005. "Land Improvements under Land Tenure Insecurity: The Case of pH and Phosphate in Finland," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(4).
    9. Laura McCann & Roger Claassen, 2016. "Farmer Transaction Costs of Participating in Federal Conservation Programs: Magnitudes and Determinants," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 92(2), pages 256-272.
    10. Laura McCann & K. William Easter, 1999. "Transaction Costs of Policies to Reduce Agricultural Phosphorous Pollution in the Minnesota River," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(3), pages 402-414.
    11. Schilling, Brian J. & Attavanich, Witsanu & Sullivan, Kevin P. & Marxen, Lucas J., 2014. "Measuring the effect of farmland preservation on farm profitability," MPRA Paper 100122, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Jun 2014.
    12. Masten, Scott E & Meehan, James W, Jr & Snyder, Edward A, 1991. "The Costs of Organization," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 1-25, Spring.
    13. Myyra, Sami & Pietola, Kyosti, 2005. "Land Improvements Under Land Tenure Insecurity: The Case of Liming in Finland," 94th Seminar, April 9-10, 2005, Ashford, UK 24418, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Allen, Douglas & Lueck, Dean, 1992. "Contract Choice in Modern Agriculture: Cash Rent versus Cropshare," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(2), pages 397-426, October.
    15. Katherine Falconer & Pierre Dupraz & Martin Whitby, 2001. "An Investigation of Policy Administrative Costs Using Panel Data for the English Environmentally Sensitive Areas," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 83-103, January.
    16. Pierre Dupraz & Maria Espinosa Goded & Jesus Barreiro-Hurle, 2013. "Identifying additional barriers in the adoption of agri-environmental schemes: the role of fixed costs," Post-Print hal-01208850, HAL.
    17. Per Kristian Rørstad & Arild Vatn & Valborg Kvakkestad, 2007. "Why do transaction costs of agricultural policies vary?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 36(1), pages 1-11, January.
    18. Lindon J. Robison & Robert J. Myers & Marcelo E. Siles, 2002. "Social Capital and the Terms of Trade for Farmland," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 24(1), pages 44-58.
    19. Douglas W. Allen & Dean Lueck, 2000. "A Transaction Cost Primer on Farm Organization," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 48(4), pages 643-652, December.
    20. Nancy Bockstael, 2008. "An Empirical Examination of the Timing of Land Conversions in the Presence of Farmland Preservation Programs," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(3), pages 613-626.
    21. 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.
    22. Frédéric Courleux, 2011. "Augmentation de la part des terres agricoles en location : échec ou réussite de la politique foncière ?," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 444(1), pages 39-53.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Christine Léger Léger-Bosch, 2018. "Farmland Tenure and Transaction Costs," Working Papers hal-01775201, HAL.
    2. Coggan, Anthea & Buitelaar, Edwin & Whitten, Stuart & Bennett, Jeff, 2013. "Factors that influence transaction costs in development offsets: Who bears what and why?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 222-231.
    3. Coggan, Anthea & Whitten, Stuart M. & Bennett, Jeff, 2010. "Influences of transaction costs in environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1777-1784, July.
    4. Shahab, Sina & Clinch, J. Peter & O’Neill, Eoin, 2018. "Accounting for transaction costs in planning policy evaluation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 263-272.
    5. Mettepenningen, E. & Beckmann, V. & Eggers, J., 2011. "Public transaction costs of agri-environmental schemes and their determinants--Analysing stakeholders' involvement and perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 641-650, February.
    6. Lundmark, Robert, 2022. "Time-adjusted transaction costs for energy renovations for single-family house-owners," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    7. Weber, Anja Michaela, 2011. "Why do Farmers Spend Different Amounts of Transaction Costs in Agri-Environmental Schemes?," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 115738, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Huong, Tran Thi Thu & Zeller, Manfred & Hoanh, Chu Thai, 2014. "The ‘Five Million Hectare Reforestation Program’ in Vietnam: An Analysis of its Implementation and Transaction Costs - A Case Study in Hoa Binh Province," Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture, Humboldt-Universitaat zu Berlin, vol. 53(4), pages 1-35, November.
    9. Salomon Espinosa Diaz & Francesco Riccioli & Francesco Di Iacovo & Roberta Moruzzo, 2023. "Transaction Costs in Agri-Environment-Climate Measures: A Review of the Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-18, May.
    10. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A Global Survey and Review of the Determinants of Transaction Costs of Forestry Carbon Projects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 1-10.
    11. Valentová, Michaela & Horák, Martin & Dvořáček, Lukáš, 2020. "Why transaction costs do not decrease over time? A case study of energy efficiency programmes in Czechia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    12. Sauer, Johannes & Walsh, John, 2011. "ESS versus NVZ – The Cost-Effectiveness of Command-and-Control versus Agreement Based Policy Instruments," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108963, Agricultural Economics Society.
    13. Nantongo, Mary & Vatn, Arild, 2019. "Estimating Transaction Costs of REDD+," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 1-11.
    14. Pannell, David J. & Roberts, Anna M. & Park, Geoff & Alexander, Jennifer, 2013. "Improving environmental decisions: A transaction-costs story," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 244-252.
    15. DeBoe, Gwendolen & Stephenson, Kurt, 2016. "Transactions costs of expanding nutrient trading to agricultural working lands: A Virginia case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 176-185.
    16. Mettepenningen, Evy & Beckmann, Volker & Eggers, Jorg, 2008. "Public transaction cost of agri-environmental schemes and its determinants - Analysing stakeholders’ involvement and perceptions," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44321, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Sina Shahab & Leonhard K. Lades, 2020. "Sludge and Transaction Costs," Working Papers 202007, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    18. Nijiraini, Georgina & Thiam, Djiby, 2015. "Estimating transaction costs associated with water policy implementation in South Africa," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212585, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Liu, Xing & Lehtonen, Heikki & Purola, Tuomo & Pavlova, Yulia & Rötter, Reimund & Palosuo, Taru, 2016. "Dynamic economic modelling of crop rotations with farm management practices under future pest pressure," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 65-76.
    20. Anne GASSIAT & Sylvain ROUSSET & Frèdèric ZAHM, 2011. "Improving water quality with a territorial agro-environmental policy? Insights from the new generation AES in South-West France," ERSA conference papers ersa10p1569, European Regional Science Association.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hal:journl:hal-02573765. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.