The Land Crisis in Zimbabwe Viewed from South of the Limpopo

Farm invasions in Zimbabwe have highlighted the pressing need for land reform throughout the southern African region. In South Africa, where the racial disparities in land holding are most severe, the events in Zimbabwe have raised the temperature of the land debate and led to calls for land invasions by some rural groups. The ANC-led government, facing criticism from both right and left for the slow pace of reform, has veered between strident defence of private property rights and threats to expropriate white farms. White farming interests have reacted differentially, with some progressive voices joining the calls for an accelerated reform programme. Current land reform policy in South Africa seems set to advance the interests of emerging black commercial farmers and tribal chiefs at the expense of the rural poor and landless.     

Trump: Reckless Free Trader or Genuine Protectionist?

The question that remains unanswered is whether Trump’s tariff strategy is a tactical one, intended to wring concessions from China, Germany, Mexico and others, or whether it represents a genuine abandonment of the U.S. commitment to free trade that dates back to the mid-1930s. The answer will determine whether the Trump tariffs prove to be a minor skirmish, or trigger a major trade war that will rip apart the fabric of global trading rules.     

Data Aggregation Issues for Crop Yield Risk Analysis

With increased emphasis on risk management in agriculture and a lack of disaggregated or farm‐level yield time series, decision makers are often faced with having to make adjustments to temporal yield risk measures obtained from readily available but aggregated yield data. This paper provides some empirical evidence on what type of aggregation bias to expect when measuring temporal yield risk using yield observations averaged across a region relative to yield risk estimated from quarter‐section yield time series in wheat. This study highlights some of the challenges faced when estimating aggregation distortions in measuring yield risk defined by temporal variance, especially given the nature of the empirical data set used. Cluster analysis, visual examination of relative frequency distributions and mapping of yield risk clusters suggest that using a readily available, aggregate temporal yield risk measure has the tendency to underestimate yield risk observed at the quarter‐section level and that clear, geographic yield risk boundaries do not exist in municipalities or across larger areas in this study. Further research on crops more risky than wheat appears promising. Avec un plus grand intéret sur la gestion du risk dans l'agriculture et un manque de données détaillees ou bien de collections de séries temporelles sur les rendements, les décideurs sont souvent tenus d'apporter des correctifs aux measures du risk obtenues a partir des données de rendements qui sont disponibles. Cet artcle apporte une preuve empirique du type de biais lie a l'agrégation qui peut être présent dans le calcul du risk de rendement temporel obtenu a partir de rendements moyens de blé observés au niveau régional en comparaison du risk de rendement qui est estimé a partir de données basées sur des quart‐de‐sections. Cette étude met en exergue quelques uns des obstacles qui se présentent dans l'estimation de distosions liées a l'aggrégation dans le calcul du risk de rendement défini par la variance temporelle, speciallement étant donne la charactère empirique des données utilisées. L'analyse de groupe, l'examen visual de la distribution des fréquences relatives, et la cartographie de classes de risk de rendement suggèrent que l'utilisation de la measure du risk de rendement basée sur des données disponibles de risk aggrège temporel a tendence a sousestimer le risk de rendement observe au niveau des quart‐de‐sections et qu'il n'y a pas de frontières de risk de rendement certaines, géographiques qui existent entre les municipalités ou bien a travers les zones plus larges examinées dans cette etude.     

THE COST OF MUTUAL FUND DISTRIBUTION FEES

Many individuals purchase shares in mutual funds as investments. With a lack of evidence supporting performance persistence in fund returns, investors should consider expenses as a fund-selection tool since fund expenses have a negative effect on fund returns. One of the largest expenses incurred by fund investors is distribution expenses, which include both load charges and annual fees. Close to two-thirds of all equity funds charge investors for fund distribution. The true cost of these distribution fees to investors is hard to measure because a myriad of distribution arrangements have evolved that vary both the timing and magnitude of distribution charges. We derive a simple methodology that expresses the present value of distribution costs as a percentage of the original investment in fund shares for any expected holding period. This methodology allows direct comparison of the effect on investors of distribution fees for mutual funds with different types of sales arrangements.     

Is off-farm income reforming the farm? Evidence from Mexico

Does access to off-farm income complement or compete with agricultural production? This article explores the effect of off-farm income on agricultural production activities, using data from the 2003 Mexico National Rural Household Survey. We first discuss the theoretical conditions under which access to off-farm income may influence production in an agricultural household model. Instrumental-variable (IV) estimation methods are then used to test whether agricultural production activities, technologies, and input use differ between households with and without access to off-farm income. We find that off-farm income has a negative effect on agricultural output and the use of family labor on the farm, but a positive impact on the demand for purchased inputs. There is also a slight efficiency gain in households with access to off-farm income. Findings offer insights into how household production evolves as rural households increasingly engage in off-farm income activities.     

Blueberry Production in new Brunswick, nova scotia, And Maine: A Reply to wood ET AL.

Wood et al [4] have criticized Kevan's [1] analyses of blueberry production in New Brunswick as related to insecticide applications. Their criticisms have elements of validity, but do not refute in general Kevan's conclusions. That is not to say Kevan's original analyses were not overly simple. However, we present here further arguments which lend strong credence to the essential validity of Kevan's position [1, 2] that blueberry production in New Brunswick has suffered since 1970 because of applications of fenitrothion directed at spruce-budworm infestations in the forest, but which also have adversely affected native pollinating bees of the blueberry lands. The crucial feature of the criticism is Kevan's choice of the co-variate, Nova Scotia, with which to compare New Brunswick. Wood et al object to the choice of Nova Scotia because of the presence of positive trend in blueberry production. In order to clarify this objection it is necessary to point out that Kevan used the time period 1960-75, wheras Wood et al use 1951-77. The trend coefficients and their significance levels for 1960-75 for New Brunswick and Nova Scotia were —0.017 (p = .849) and 0.251 (p= .047), respectively. These estimates support Wood et al . However, Wood et al go on to argue that Kevan should have used Maine as the comparison; their correct logic up to this point is now used in error.