IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpdc/0105001.html

Agro-Ecological Zones and their Impact on Farm Production and Farm Organization after Privatization in Azerbaijan

Author

Listed:
  • Nemet Alibejov

    (Institute of Agricultural Economics, Baku)

  • Stephan Krische

    (ICON-INSTITUT GmbH)

  • Justus Wesseler

    (Wageningen University)

Abstract

The privatization of agriculture in Azerbaijan started in the mid 1990s, while the pace of privatization in the country differs. Some Rayons have privatized almost all of the former state-owned agricultural land while others hold a wait and see strategy. The agricultural administration observes the recent agricultural development with suspicion. Specifically, there are concerns about the decrease in wheat production in the area and about a possible collapse of agriculture production in general. In addition to the perceived changes in agriculture production there are obvious problems on the management of natural resources, which may have an impact on farm production. In this paper we present the results of a combined natural resources and farm household survey conducted during the first six month of the year 2000 in Sagatalla Rayon. The results show the Rayon can be divided into five agro-ecological zones. Agriculture is concentrated in two zones. Average farm income was higher among the households farming in the less favorable agricultural zone, while on a hectare basis the average gross margin for major crops was higher in the more favorable agro-ecological zone. Households without off-farm income opportunities were the losers of privatization. The results further show that wheat production cannot compete with other annual crops like tobacco, maize and vegetables. Further results on net- benefits of improved natural resource management and implications for regional agriculture policies will be discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Nemet Alibejov & Stephan Krische & Justus Wesseler, 2001. "Agro-Ecological Zones and their Impact on Farm Production and Farm Organization after Privatization in Azerbaijan," Development and Comp Systems 0105001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpdc:0105001
    Note: Type of Document - pdf-document; pages: 8; figures: no figures
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/dev/papers/0105/0105001.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barbier, Edward B., 2000. "Links between economic liberalization and rural resource degradation in the developing regions," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 299-310, September.
    2. Fan, Shenngen & Hazell, Peter & Haque, T., 2000. "Targeting public investments by agro-ecological zone to achieve growth and poverty alleviation goals in rural India," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 411-428, August.
    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. World Bank, 2006. "Poverty, Growth, and Environment in Brazil : Spatial Insights for Policymaking," World Bank Publications - Reports 12852, The World Bank Group.
    2. Datta, Nirupam, 2015. "Evaluating Impacts of Watershed Development Program on Agricultural Productivity, Income, and Livelihood in Bhalki Watershed of Bardhaman District, West Bengal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 443-456.
    3. Hazell, Peter B.R. & Haddad, Lawrence James, 2001. "Agricultural Research And Poverty Reduction," 2020 Briefs 16331, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Palmer-Jones, Richard, 2003. "Agricultural growth, poverty reduction and agro-ecological zones in India: an ecological fallacy?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(5-6), pages 423-431.
    5. Demeke, Bayou, 2004. "Is Globalization Bad For The Environment? International Trade And Land Degradation In Developing Countries:The Case Of Small Open Economy," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20376, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. Yanhui Wang & Shoujie Jia & Wenping Qi & Chong Huang, 2022. "Examining Poverty Reduction of Poverty-Stricken Farmer Households under Different Development Goals: A Multiobjective Spatio-Temporal Evolution Analysis Method," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-21, October.
    7. Pender, John L., 2007. "Agricultural Technology Choices for Poor Farmers in Less-Favored Areas of South and East Asia," IFPRI Discussion Papers 42404, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. Winslow D. Hanse & Helen T. Naughton, 2013. "Social and Ecological Determinants of Land Clearing in the Brazilian Amazon: A Spatial Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(4), pages 699-721.
    9. Alder Keleman, 2010. "Institutional support and in situ conservation in Mexico: biases against small-scale maize farmers in post-NAFTA agricultural policy," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 27(1), pages 13-28, March.
    10. Alexandre Carvalho & Daniel da Mata & Kenneth M. Chomitz & João Carlos Magalhães, 2005. "Spatial Dynamics of Labor Markets in Brazil," Discussion Papers 1110, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA.
    11. Watmough, Gary R. & Atkinson, Peter M. & Saikia, Arupjyoti & Hutton, Craig W., 2016. "Understanding the Evidence Base for Poverty–Environment Relationships using Remotely Sensed Satellite Data: An Example from Assam, India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 188-203.
    12. Sen, S K & Guha, S & Chakraborty, N, 2011. "A Study on Regional Disparity of Devolution of Rural Infrastructure Development Fund - Evidence for India," MPRA Paper 39117, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Li Xiaoliang & Li Guangqin, 2025. "How Agricultural Product Trade Affects Agricultural Carbon Emissions: Empirical Evidence Based on China Provincial Panel Data," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 19(1), pages 1-15.
    14. Fan, Shenggen & Rao, Neetha, 2003. "Public Spending In Developing Coutries: Trends, Determination, And Impact," EPTD Discussion Papers 16080, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    15. Escobal, Javier, 2005. "The Role of Public Infraestructure in Market Development in Rural Peru," MPRA Paper 727, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Julien, Jacques C. & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E. & Rada, Nicholas E., 2019. "Assessing farm performance by size in Malawi, Tanzania, and Uganda," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 153-164.
    17. Yoshito Takasaki & Oliver T. Coomes & Christian Abizaid & Stéphanie Brisson, 2014. "An Efficient Nonmarket Institution under Imperfect Markets: Labor Sharing for Tropical Forest Clearing," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 96(3), pages 711-732.
    18. Haque, T., 2006. "Resource Use Efficiency in Indian Agriculture," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 61(01), pages 1-12.
    19. Kuldeep Singh & Madhvendra Misra, 2021. "Developing an agricultural entrepreneur inclination model for sustainable agriculture by integrating expert mining and ISM–MICMAC," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 5122-5150, April.
    20. Unai Pascual & Edward B. Barbier, 2007. "On Price Liberalization, Poverty, and Shifting Cultivation: An Example from Mexico," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(2), pages 192-216.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth
    • P - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems
    • Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics

    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:wpa:wuwpdc:0105001. 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: EconWPA The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask EconWPA to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.