Endogenizing the Planning Horizon in Urban fringe agriculture

To evaluate the nature of farm operation longevity in urban fringe agriculture, this paper develops a model that endogenizes planning horizon and estimates an empirical model whereby anticipated longevity in farming is regressed against farm, farmer, regulatory and land market related variables. The results suggest that the length of the planning horizon is directly related to farm profitability and confirm the impermanence syndrome hypothesis that land values are inversely related to the planning horizon. Contrary to farmers’ claims that periodic land disposal provides an internal source of credit to support long-term viability, the disposition of portions of the farmland is found to shorten the planning horizon. Innovative farmers are found to have longer planning horizons while experiences with Right-to-Farm conflicts are found to result in decreased planning horizon. Given the expected continual increase in land values and the growing physical closeness of farmers to their non-farm neighbors, significant concerns remain about the long-term survivability of urban fringe farmers. This study suggests the importance of considering farmers’ planning horizon as a key component in farmland retention programs.     

Market Power,Industrial Organization and Tradeable Quotas

Individual Transferable Quotas (ITQs) wereintroduced into the Mid-Atlantic Surf Clam and OceanQuahog fishery to reduce over-capitalization whileconserving clam populations. Because the number ofoperators in the fishery declined drastically sincethe introduction of this policy, there is concernabout its effect on competitiveness. This paperutilizes Bertrand Pricing Models to show thatmonopoly power is absent from the surf clam andocean quahog markets. Concentration ratios, Lorenzcurves and Gini Coefficients estimated for thefishery for periods before and after ITQintroduction support the results of the Bertrand model.     

Product attributes,consumer benefits and public approval of genetically modified foods

The use of biotechnology in food production has generated considerable debate involving the benefits and risks associated with its use. Consumer acceptance of genetically modified foods is a critical factor that will affect the future of this technology. Using data from a national survey, this study examines how public acceptance of food biotechnology is related to consumers’ socioeconomic and value attributes as well as the benefits associated with the use of this technology. Empirical results suggest that consumer acceptance of food biotechnology increases considerably when the use of this technology brings tangible benefits for the public. Consumers with different socioeconomic and demographic attributes have diverging views of food biotechnology only when its use brings specific benefits to them. When the use of genetic technology confers no additional benefit, public attitudes towards genetically modified foods are driven primarily by their scientific knowledge, views of scientists and corporations associated with biotechnology as well as public trust and confidence in government.     

Can medium-scale farms support smallholder commercialisation and improve welfare? Evidence from Nigeria

In spite of mounting evidence about the growth of medium-scale farms (MSFs) across Africa, there is limited empirical evidence on their impact on neighbouring small-scale farms (SSFs). We examine the relationships between MSFs and SSFs, with particular focus on the specific mechanisms driving potential spillover effects. First, we develop a theoretical model explaining two propagating mechanisms: learning effects (training) and cost effects (reduced transactions cost). An empirical application to data from Nigeria shows that SSFs with training from MSFs tend to use higher levels of modern inputs (have higher productivity), and receive higher prices and income. The results also show that purchasing inputs from MSFs reduces the costs of accessing modern inputs and is associated with higher inorganic fertiliser use by SSFs. Our results suggest that the benefits of receiving training and purchasing inputs from MSFs are particularly important for very small-scale producers, operating less than 1 hectare of land. This implies that policies which promote the efficient operation of MSFs and encourage their interaction with SSFs can be an effective mechanism for improving the productivity and welfare of smallholder farms, hence reducing their vulnerability to extreme poverty.