Market versus administrative reallocation of agricultural land in a period of rapid industrialization
Under communal farm production, there was little incentive to work hard: the communal system guaranteed a livelihood, and there were few private gains from additional efforts. The reform that introduced the household responsibility system in China in the early 1980s sharpened individual work incentives by assigning specific plots and the rights to residual income to individual households. However, the household responsibility system left unresolved questions about the reallocation of land over time - questions that have become increasingly important (for both efficiency and equity) with the rapid growth of the non-farm economy. The authors use household and village data to show that the initially egalitarian distribution of land is becoming more dispersed over time. In what has become a hybrid property rights system, in some areas local village leaders (the cadre) were empowered to periodically redistribute land between households on the basis of economic and demographic changes among households. In other villages, households were granted much greater immunity against redistribution of any sort. Similarly, villages differed in the degree to which individual households could trade land among themselves. Some villages did not regulate the practice, and other required village approval or prohibited land rental relationships. The authors use simulated maximum likelihood methods to estimate hybrid panel models of the determinants of both market-based and administrative reallocation of land. They also use them to estimate the insecurity-induced investment costs of market-based reallocation of land. They find that administrative reallocation responds to the increasing inequality but non-market reallocations come at a significant cost in forgone investment.
|Date of creation:||31 Oct 1999|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20433|
Phone: (202) 477-1234
Web page: http://www.worldbank.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.:
- Liu, Shouying & Carter, Michael R. & Yao, Yang, 1998.
"Dimensions and diversity of property rights in rural China: Dilemmas on the road to further reform,"
Elsevier, vol. 26(10), pages 1789-1806, October.
- Shouying Liu & MICHAEL R. CARTER & Yang Yao, 1996. "Dimensions and Diversity of Property Rights in Rural China: Delimmas on the Road to Further Reform," Wisconsin-Madison Agricultural and Applied Economics Staff Papers 395, Wisconsin-Madison Agricultural and Applied Economics Department.
- Putterman, Louis, 1992. "Dualism and Reform in China," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(3), pages 467-493, April.
- McMillan, John & Whalley, John & Zhu, Lijing, 1989. "The Impact of China's Economic Reforms on Agricultural Productivity Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(4), pages 781-807, August.
- Gourieroux, Christian & Monfort, Alain, 1993. "Simulation-based inference : A survey with special reference to panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1-2), pages 5-33, September.
- Matthew A. Turner & Loren Brandt & Scott Rozelle, 1999. "Property Rights Formation and the Organization of Exchange and Production in Rural China," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 250, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
- Putterman, Louis, 1991. "Does Poor Supervisability Undermine Teamwork? Evidence from an Unexpected," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(4), pages 996-1001, September.
- Kung, James Kaising, 1994. "Egalitarianism, subsistence provision, and work incentives in China's agricultural collectives," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 175-187, February.
- Gaynor, Martin & Putterman, Louis, 1993. "Productivity consequences of alternative land division methods in China's decollectivization An econometric analysis," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 357-386, December. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:2203. 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: (Roula I. Yazigi)
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.