Search

Knapp über die Hälfte der Fläche Deutschlands wird landwirtschaftlich genutzt. Zunehmende Konkurrenz um die Fläche, die auch durch den zunehmenden Flächenbedarf anderer Sektoren angetrieben wird, spürt man im landwirtschaftlichen Sektor deutlich. Steigende Bodenpreise treiben den landwirtschaftlichen Strukturwandel an. Eine bottom-up Antwort darauf sind gemeinwohlorientierte Organisationen gemeinschaftlicher Governance für landwirtschaftliche Flächen, die dem Markt zunächst Fläche entziehen und diese langfristig zu ertragsangemessenem Marktzins meist ökologisch wirtschaftenden kleineren Betrieben wieder zur Verfügung stellen. Basierend auf einer deutschlandweiten erstmaligen empirischen Untersuchung verzeichnen diese bottom-up Initiativen zwar noch eine geringe absolute Flächenausbreitung, jedoch ein deutliches Wachstum bei der Anzahl ihrer Mitglieder, Kleininvestoren und Spender. Eine breite Ausdifferenzierung an Organisationsformen ist entstanden, diese gelten als Nukleus der sozialen Entwicklung. Betriebsleiter*innen von landwirtschaftlichen Partnerbetrieben solcher gemeinschaftlichen und gemeinwohlorientierten Organisationen, genau wie Beteiligte und Kapitalgeber*innen aus der breiten Gesellschaft, haben eine Nachfrage und einen Bedarf an gemeinsamer Verantwortung und Mitbestimmung über das Management und den Umgang mit landwirtschaftlichen Flächen sowie der Ressource Boden. Die empirische Datenerhebung im Projekt "Neue Organisationsformen des gemeinschaftlichen Landeigentums" (Curtiss et al. 2022) zeigte einige positive ökonomische Vorteile für Partnerbetriebe, ohne im großen Stil den Bodenmarkt zu verzerren, und relativ stabile Rahmenbedingungen, um ökologische Zielsetzungen langfristig abzusichern. Darüber hinaus konnten als gemeinwohlstiftende Auswirkungen soziale Einflüsse auf und für die ländliche Bevölkerung verdeutlicht werden. Die landwirtschaftliche Bodengesetzgebung muss sich auf Länderebene zu diesen Organisationen positionieren. Eine gemeinwohlorientierte Flächenpolitik bezüglich des Eigentumsverkehrs landwirtschaftlicher Flächen wäre ein Novum.

This paper presents a dynamic perspective on the processes of farm restructuring following farm acquisitions by large-scale agroholdings in Ukraine. In particular, the paper employs a large dataset of farm-level data and several quantitative techniques to explore how the acquired farms��� resource bases are integrated after acquisitions and what outcomes an acquisition brings about for farm growth, profitability and productivity. In general, acquisitions positively affect farm growth and productivity while agroholdings use various resource allocation, resource redeployment and investment/divestment instruments for the post-acquisition integration of farms. The variation in achieving profitable post-acquisition growth of farms is contingent upon a number of farm pre-acquisition characteristics, strategic growth orientations and timing of acquisitions.

In recent years, many farms in Germany have been confronted with often serious liquidity prob-lems as a result of income loss due to unfavorable product price developments and weather con-ditions. To improve liquidity, farms sometimes capitalize on hidden reserves by selling agricultural land and leasing it back (Sale and lease back – SLB) on a long-term basis. This study examines whether the conditions of recent years including high investor demand for agricultural land has led to the wider use of SLB in agriculture, and/or whether the instrument has also been used for other strategic purposes in the context of generational change, rising land prices and unequal market power on the land market. Furthermore, the study investigates the microstructure of the SLB mar-ket, i.e. who the land buyers are and how the contractual relationships are designed. Barriers and perspectives of SLB use in agriculture are also examined. Results based on expert interviews suggest that SLB have been used by farms for various purposes, especially in the new Federal States – for example, to avoid financial crisis, but also to finance growth and rationalization investments. In particular, the existence of high hidden reserves in con-nection with a sharp increase in the value of agricultural land can have positive effects on the com-pany's development as a result of SLB. Land buyers are mostly private non-agricultural investors, dominated (in terms of area) by private individuals with high financial assets. Such buyers aim at investment security by avoiding production risks, securing stable values and generating moderate returns (approximately 1.5 to 2.0 %). However, the activity of this group is estimated by experts to be slightly declining. In addition to private investors, the various Land Settlement Companies (LSLG) also act as SLB agents with the aim of fulfilling their agricultural-structural mandate from the fed-eral states. Unlike other investors, LSLGs provide a conditioned buyback option for the seller. How-ever, due to the relatively short period within which this option can be used, LSLG's overall SLB market share is small. The Land Transaction Act, which gives pre-emption rights to active farmers over non-farmers in farmland sales, together with the high affinity of farmers towards their own land, are considered to be essential barriers to more SLB. Expert opinions on the future development of SLB are ambiguous. Model calculations show that bank loans are in most cases preferable to SLB given the current favorable interest rates, although multiple aspects have to be taken into account. Mainly the medium- to long-term business strategy and future land prices can have decisive influence on the comparative advantage of each alternative. Experts see SLB as having no significant effects on agricultural structural developments in Germany., DOI:10.3220/WP1600341246000

This paper responds to the ongoing debate on the improvement of the investment support in the CAP after 2020. First, the analysis of the sector performance of the past investment supports is presented, followed by the farm level dynamic counterfactual analysis of policy results. Baseline and three alternative scenarios of distributions between income and investment support are presented as they were agreed and assessed by experts and stakeholders in two focus groups. Apart from the significant effect on the expansion of livestock production, the impacts of the modernization support (M121) on farm performance are ambiguous. Participants of the focus groups will prefer maintaining the income support at the current level while reducing the intervention stimulating farms investment activity arguing by easier adjustment of activities to the actual needs of the business.

The paper investigates the effect of two types of public support measures, production-related subsidies and value added tax (VAT) reimbursements, on productivity of crop production in Ukraine. The analysis is carried out by means of production function difference-in-differences (fixed effects regression) approach using data provided by the State Statistic Service of Ukraine (SSSU) for the time period of 2008-2013. The public support effect is analyzed from different perspectives considering (i) potential differences related to two farm structural characteristics - holding membership and size, and (ii) time-variability. The results indicate that the relationships between both subsidies and VAT reimbursements and farm productivity statistically significantly vary across time periods and farm types. For nonholding farms in general, an increase in the volume of subsidies is found to statistically significantly increase farm productivity. However, entering subsidization is found to have a negative relation to farm productivity. The latter result may imply uncontrolled-for policy selection of farms in greater need for public support. The level of VATreimbursements is also found to be statistically significantly and positively related to farm productivity; this result is driven by VAT-reimbursements’ productivity impact mainly in the earlier years of the analyzed period. For holding companies, public support effects on farm productivity are found not statistically significant in models on pooled data (over time or only inconsistently statistically significant in some years.

This paper analyses how different types of buyers affect the farmland price. We specify a flexible hedonic land pricing model that allows for non-uniform valuation of land characteristics among buyers. Data on 579 land sale contracts from five districts of the Czech Republic from 2008-2010 are utilised in the study. The results provide strong evidence of buyerspecific valuation of land’s productive and site characteristics as well as systemic differences in land market conditions among groups of buyers, both of which affect the land price. Non-agricultural buyers are observed to significantly overbid agricultural buyers on land location and site characteristics rather than productive qualities. Among agricultural buyers, joint stock companies and cooperatives enjoy major land price discounts, while individual private farms and limited liability companies face land market access constraints that are surmountable only through paying high price premiums. These observations have important implications for future land ownership structure and land use efficiency. Der Aufsatz analysiert, wie unterschiedliche Typen von Käufern den Bodenpreis beeinflussen. Wir spezifizieren ein flexibles hedonisches Bodenpreis-Modell, das Unterschiede in der Bewertung von Bodeneigenschaften durch verschiedene Käufer erfasst. Daten aus 579 Verträgen zu Bodenkäufern aus fünf tschechischen Landkreisen der Jahre 2008 bis 2011 liegen der Analyse zugrunde. Die Ergebnisse liefern eindeutige Belege, dass sowohl käuferspezifische Bewertungen der Bodenproduktivität und Standorteigenschaften als auch systematische Unterschiede in den Marktbedingungen zwischen den Gruppen von Käufern den Preis beeinflussen. Nichtlandwirtschaftliche Käufer bieten signifikant höhere Preise als Käufer mit einem landwirtschaftlichen Hintergrund, dabei achten sie weniger auf die Bodenqualität, sondern schätzen mehr die Lage und andere Standortcharakteristika. Bei den landwirtschaftlichen Käufern werden Aktiengesellschaften und Genossenschaften oft große Preisnachlässe gewährt. Privatlandwirte und GmbHs sehen sich dagegen Beschränkungen im Zugang zum Bodenmarkt ausgesetzt, die nur durch Zahlung von signifikanten Preisprämien überwindbar sind. Diese Ergebnisse haben wichtige Implikationen für die zukünftige Bodeneigentumsstruktur und Effizienz der Bodennutzung.

This paper examines allocative and cost efficiency implications of adopting variable-rate fertiliser application using survey data from Czech wheat farms. Data Envelopment Analysis delivered higher efficiency scores for precision farming (PF) adopters. Correcting for selection bias using a one-step endogenous switching regression reveals that farms displaying a lower cost efficiency score are less likely to adopt PF technology. Nonadopters switching to PF technology would likely be affected by a significant decrease in cost efficiency given their production conditions and/or managerial and technical skills. In line with this, results indicate that human capital and farm size increase the likelihood of PF adoption. Cost (allocative efficiency) implications of PF-related changes in input structure only, on the other hand, are not found to have an impact on the choice of technology. A positive allocative efficiency effect of PF technology is brought about mainly by a farm's ability to better extrapolate the soil's productive potential, which is insufficiently reflected in the land rental prices. The allocative as well as cost efficiency implications of PF technology are further related to technology-specific responses to various farm characteristics and technological practices. PF technology makes farms' efficiency more responsive to production conditions, farm specialisation, legal form and other technological practices. The overall efficiency effect the PF practices is, therefore, conditioned on farm characteristics.

This paper presents a review of financial economics literature and offers a comprehensive discussion and systematisation of determinants of financial capital use. In congruence with modern financial literature, it is acknowledged here that real and financial capital decisions are interdependent. While the fundamental role of the (unconstrained) demand for real capital in the demand for finance is acknowledged, the deliverable focuses on three complementary categories of the determinants of financial capital use: i) capital market imperfections; ii) factors mitigating these imperfections or their impacts; and iii) firm- and sector-related factors, which alter the severity of financial constraints and their effects. To address the question of the optimal choice of financial instruments, theories of firm capital structure are reviewed. The deliverable concludes with theory-derived implications for agricultural and non-agricultural rural business’ finance.

This paper aims to identify drivers of physical capital adjustments in agriculture. It begins with a review of some of the most important theories and modelling approaches regarding firms’ adjustments of physical capital, ranging from output-based models to more recent approaches that consider irreversibility and uncertainty. Thereafter, it is suggested that determinants of physical capital adjustments in agriculture can be divided into three main groups, namely drivers related to: i)expected (risk-adjusted) profit, ii) expected societal benefits and costs and iii) expected private nonpecuniary benefits and costs. The discussion that follows focuses on the determinants belonging to the first group and covers aspects related to product market conditions, technological conditions, financial conditions and the role of firm structure and organization. Furthermore, the role of subjective beliefs is emphasized. The main part of this paper is concerned with the demand side of the physical capital market and one section also briefly discusses some aspects related to supply of farm assets.

Cooperative and corporate farms have retained an important role for agricultural production in many transition countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Despite this importance, these farms' ownership structure, and particularly the ownership's effect on their investment activity, which is vital for efficient restructuring and the sector's future development, are still not well understood. This paper explores the ownership-investment relationship using data on Czech farms from 1997 to 2008. We allow for ownership-specific variability in farm investment behaviour analyzed by utilizing an errorcorrection accelerator model. Empirical results suggest significant differences in the level of investment activity, responsiveness to market signals, investment lumpiness, as well as investment sensitivity to financial variables among farms with different ownership characteristics. These differences imply that the internal structure of the Czech cooperative and corporate farms will be developing in the direction of a decreasing number of owners and an increasing ownership concentration.

Cooperative and corporate farms have retained an important role for agricultural production in many transition countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Despite this importance, their ownership structure and particularly the ownership's effect on their investment activity vital for efficient restructuring and the sector's future development are still not well understood. This paper aims to analyze the ownership-investment relationship using data on Czech farms from 1997 to 2008. We allow for ownership-specific variability in farm investment behavior analyzed by means of error-correction accelerator model. Empirical results suggest significant differences in the level of investment activity, responsiveness to market signals, investment lumpiness of investment as well as sensitivity to financial variables among farms with different ownership characteristics. Resulting increase in farm performance differences among farms can be expected to lead to farm restructuring in direction of lowering number of owners and increasing ownership concentration.

Increasing worldwide energy demand and diminishing supplies of fossil fuels have necessitated the development and increasing use of new sustainable energy sources, as well as more parsimonious energy use. In the context of agriculture, research has focused predominantly on the production of bio-energy, while only a limited number of studies have investigated the energy use and possible energy saving in conventional agricultural production. In response to this lack in empirical research this study aims (i) to measure the farm-level energy and cost efficiency of conventional agricultural (wheat) production, (ii) to identify the potential for energy saving in conventional agriculture and quantify its shadow cost, (iii) to identify production technologies and managerial practices that reduce total energy use. We adjusted the method by Coelli, Lauwers, Van Huylenbroeck (2007) introducing analogy between cost and nutrient minimization to measure energy use reduction potential and its costs. The analysis was carried out on survey data for 95 farms for production year 2007/08. Energy coefficients for individual non-renewable inputs were derived from the PLANETE methodology (Méthode Pour L'Analyse EnergéTique de l'Exploitation) developed by SOLAGRO. We applied data envelopment analysis to estimate energy and cost optima and efficiencies, and truncated regression to identify statistically significant determinants of energy efficiency. We found significant differences in energy consumption per unit of wheat production among Czech farms - best producers consume 46% less energy per unit of production than average producers, however, from that ca. 30% is due to variation in production conditions. Marked share of energy inefficiency (over 50% of potential energy savings) originates in technical efficiency, which offers simultaneous cost savings. Producing wheat in energy optimum would increase costs by 9% when compared to cost optimum. The largest potential of energy savings was found in fuel, and fertilizers and other chemicals. Regression analysis implies that use of more fuel-efficient machinery or machinery with other energy-saving technical parameters (e.g., higher utility weight) and optimizing material transport could increase energy efficiency, while some commonly applied technological practices (such as conventional soil preparation) have a negative energy efficiency effects.

The objectives of this study are (i) to analyse the current state of socio-economic sustainability of SFHs and identify the main types of SFH, and (II) to assess the impact of the 2005 EC Rural Development Measures on SFHs' socio-economic sustainability., JRC.DDG.J.5-Agriculture and Life Sciences in the Economy

In the enlargement process of the European Union (EU), micro farm households so called semi-subsistence farm households (SFHs) came into the focus of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The political question was and still is, how these households could be stimulated to become market oriented private farms or to exit the agricultural sector? This would induce positive structural change. It is difficult to answer this question. Reliable statistical information on SFHs is scarce. Moreover, SFHs may follow diverse objectives in a simultaneous manner to sustain their livelihoods. The portfolio of objectives largely depends on their specific characteristics. Having said this, it is clear that it is difficult to address the households with the right policy measures to promote structural change and maintain sustainable rural livelihoods. Therefore, two research questions were addressed: (i) What characterises SFHs in Central and South-eastern Europe? and (ii) which development strategies could benefit them most?, JRC.DDG.J.5-Agriculture and Life Sciences in the Economy

Semi-subsistence farm households (SFHs) have persevered in Central and Southeastern Europe. An outlook on future perspectives of SFHs asks for reliable information on the phenomenon of SFHs and the impact of policy measures on their development options: (1) intensifying farming, (2) diversifying income creating activities, or (3) exiting farming for waged employment. This article focuses on SFHs and rural non-farm employment (RNFE). On the basis of a comparative 2007-survey of 489 SFHs in Bulgaria, Poland and Romania, three countries with particularly many SFHs, four major types of SFHs (rural pensioners, farmers, rural diversifiers, rural newcomers) were identified. For policy analysis, a multiobjective linear programming household model was developed. In the model, labour can be devoted to (1) farming, (2) self-employment and (3) waged employment. The policy scenarios reflect different development options for SFHs: (1) farm development, (2) start selfemployment, (3) farm development and start self-employment, and (4) stop agriculture. Policy can foster the structural change but the modeling results show that fine targeting to the various types of semi-subsistence farms and country specificities is a strong precondition for success.

The European Union (EU) introduced a special transitional semi-subsistence measure to promote the smallest agricultural producers, so-called semi-subsistence farm households (SFHs) in the enlargement process. An outlook on the future of SFHs requires comprehensive and reliable information on the phenomenon and the impact of policy measures on their development. Therefore, a survey using a standardised questionnaire was conducted in Poland (175 households), Romania (185 households), and Bulgaria (184 households) from July to September 2007. In a first step, four major types of SFHs could be identified by means of cluster analysis: (i) rural diversifiers, (ii) rural pensioners, (iii) farmers, and (iv) rural newcomers. In a second step, a multiobjective linear programming household model was designed to simulate the impact of policy measures and various household strategies on the future viability of the SFHs. Results show that the most preferable combination of strategies for rural diversifiers and rural newcomers is starting a non-farm self-employed activity and developing their farms. Farmers will advance best when they focus on developing their farms only, whereas rural pensioners will mainly remain or become unviable.

Contrary to what was expected at the beginning of the transformation, semisubsistence farm households (SFHs) have persevered. There is an ongoing debate about what could prompt SFHs to become more profitable or to exit farming. A number of policy measures within the Common Agricultural Policy address this issue. This contribution assesses the impact of selected EU rural development measures on SFHs in Poland. Under the heading of multiple criteria decision-making, different approaches have been discussed in the literature. In this contribution, a multiobjective linear programming household model using compromise programming is applied. Four household objectives are optimised simultaneously: net agricultural production, net non-farm income, and household cash balance are maximised, while agricultural labour input is minimised. All together, four representative SFH types were simulated. Simulation results show that fine-targeting of policy measures to specific household situations is a strong precondition for successful development. The differing results between the multiobjective approach as compared to programming with one objective are also discussed. Keywords: Semi-subsistence agriculture, policy analysis, transition countries, multiobjective modelling, JRC.J.5-Agriculture and Life Sciences in the Economy

The contributions in this edited volume constitute the mini-symposium on "Structural change in Europe’s rural regions – Farm livelihoods between subsistence orientation, modernization and non-farm diversification" at the international conference of the International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE) on "The New Landscape of Global Agriculture" in Beijing, China, August 16-22, 2009. The majority of the contributions emerge from two structured research frameworks. The first is the scientific network and research of an ongoing (2007-2009) EU-financed FP6 project on "Structural Change in Agriculture and Rural Livelihoods" (SCARLED). SCARLED addresses past and future key social and agricultural restructuring processes for a living countryside in the NMS of the EU. Methodologically, the topic is approached by comparative, structured multi-country farm surveys (in Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovenia) as well as case studies on rural development in selected regions of five established Member States (from Austria, Ireland, the new German Bundesländer, Spain, and Sweden). The other is the Graduate School "Prospects for small-scale farm structures in the New Member States of the European Union", which was installed at the Leibniz Institute for Agricultural Development in Central and Eastern Europe (IAMO) in 2007. It looks at the lessons to be learned from a selection of countries that spans from the EU-15 member states, Austria and Germany across the NMS Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland and Romania to the non-member region Kosovo. One contribution is an outcome of the EU tender project "Sustainability of Semi-Subsistence Farming Systems in New Member States and Acceding Countries (S-FARM)" funded and coordinated by the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS) in Seville, Spain. Since 2004, the European Union (EU) has undergone an unprecedented enlargement, reuniting the Western and Eastern parts of the continent. Subsequently, the share of rural areas and of those employed in agriculture grew notably in the EU-27. Europe's rural areas represent 93% of the territory in EU-27 and about 58% of the population live in predominantly and significantly rural areas. Rural areas generate 45% of gross value added in EU-27 and 53% of the employment, but tend to lag behind urban areas for a number of important socio-economic indicators such as income, activity rates and access to services (EC, 2008). The new Member States (NMS) in Central and Eastern Europe have already undergone substantial sector restructuring and socio-economic transformation (Rozelle and Swinnen, 2004). Nevertheless, as regards the agricultural sector and rural livelihoods, a great number of them still display a tremendous disparity as compared to the EU15-average. For instance, the share of those employed in agriculture ranges from 4.8% in the Czech Republic to 42.7% in Romania. The EU15 employs, on average, about 4% of the workforce in the agricultural sector (Copus et al., 2006). In addition, the average farm size in the NMS10 (pre-2007) is approximately five hectares, and 27% of the land is cultivated by farms smaller than five hectares (Davidova, 2005). Often, the rural economy can not sufficiently support rural livelihoods. Especially, those living from (semi-) subsistence farming are prone to low productivity, low incomes and vulnerable livelihoods. Therefore, it is important that the ground is prepared for significant structural changes in the labour force, farming structures, and the wider rural economy. If structural change does not take place, rural areas in the NMS will continue to lose attractiveness and competitiveness. Particularly in Eastern Europe we find the phenomenon of a re-orientation towards farming and the existence and persistence of a large number of tiny (semi-) subsistence farms. Effective rural policies have to consider that these farms do not necessarily react to the same policy signals as larger scaled (commercial) farms. When farming incomes are small, the functioning and continuous development of rural labour markets is important. Non-farm activities could play a decisive role for rural development by allowing families to overcome poverty and, in the medium term, possibly exit the farming sector and thus allowing more competitive farms to grow. Some of the developments that we observe and expect to happen in the NMS are comparable to earlier experiences in the EU-15. These experiences could give hints how successful change can be effectively implemented. Structural change in agriculture , let alone in rural economies, is a complex phenomenon. Structural change affects rural livelihoods through changes in agricultural productivity and profitability, and in wider rural labour markets. There is little consensus on how to judge structural change. For instance, efficiency-increasing structural change, in terms of a better allocation of resources, might be desirable from a pure economic point of view. Yet, the decreased labour demand may make smaller-scale, part-time farm households to losers, especially if the wider rural labour market is weak. Furthermore, some argue, it is the smaller-scale subsistence and (semi-) subsistence farming households that contribute most to a living countryside. Whatever the effects of structural change in agriculture and rural livelihoods are and how they might be judged, understanding the driving factors, obstacles and pathways and their interactions is crucial. Therefore this mini-symposium aims at stimulating a discussion on possible developments and success factors of rural development in an enlarged Europe. References Copus, A., Hall, C., Barnes, A., Dalton, G., Cook, P., Weingarten, P., Baum, S., Stange, H., Lindner, C., Hill, A., Eiden, G., McQuaid, R., Grieg, M., Johansson, M. (2005): Study on employment in rural areas. Draft Final Deliverable prepared for the European Commission, DG Agri. Davidova, S. (2005): Memorandum submitted by Dr Sophia Davidova, Imperial College, London April 2005. In The future financing of the Common Agricultural Policy, House of Lords, European Union Committee (ed.): 154-162, 2nd Report of Session 2005-06. London, UK: http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ ldeucom/007/5030902.htm (accessed March 2006)., Edited volume of the contributions to the mini-symposium of the same title at the IAAE conference 2009.

This paper aims at assessing the relationship between ownership structure, performance and investment activity. In particular it studies how behavioural differences between farms related to ownership structure influence farms' investment activity and thus their further development potential resulting in farm structural changes. The paper analyses a sample of corporate farms over 7 years, 1997-2003, using structural model of three equations including investment accelerator model. This model considers the effect of ownership on (a) technical efficiency as proxy for the quality of operational management, (b) returns on capital as proxy for quality of financial management, (c) investment activity, and (d) investment sensitivity to internal funds as proxy for owners/managers opposition to credit financing. The empirical results provide evidence of a theoretically justifiable positive effect of ownership concentration on investment activity and farms’ economic performance, and a theoretically consistent effect of external/employee ownership on technical performance. However, the authors are not able to confirm empirically the theoretically based effect of external/employee ownership on farm investment activity.

The paper provides an empirical study of the dynamics of ownership changes in Czech agricultural companies, which are assigned by unique heterogeneity in ownership forms. Since employee ownership has retained a relatively important place in these structures, neoclassical, as well as institutional theories of labour managed firms are considered. Building upon efficiency arguments, both approaches suggest the dissolution of labour managed firms. The empirical analysis utilized detailed survey data from 2004 and accountancy data from 1997 to 2003. We used cluster analysis to classify companies into homogeneous groups with respect to their ownership structure and stage of restructuring, and analysed these characteristics in relation to performance indicators. The companies were found to be in various transition stages. The results reveal that the most progressed and the most profitable are companies with a significantly higher capital concentration, low number of owners and a low share of employee and external ownership. The least restructured companies with higher employee and external ownership show markedly worse performance figures. The restructuring process is complex and farms have adopted different strategies; restructuring only firm's liabilities by capitalising transformation debts appeared insufficient for improving performance.

Since the late 1980s, agriculture in Central and Eastern European Countries (CEECs) has been under considerable adjustment pressure due to changing political, economic and institutional environments. These changes have been linked to the transition process, as well as the ongoing integration into the European Union and the world market. Reduced subsidies, increased environmental and food quality demands, as well as structural changes in the supply, processing and food retailing sector call for major structural adjustments and the improvement of farmers’ managerial abilities. Though such changes always carry significant threats to farms, they also offer new opportunities for the farms' entrepreneurial engagement. Upcoming changes in the agricultural environment and their possible consequences for farm structures across Europe are thus still timely subjects. The objective of the IAMO Forum 2006 is to contribute to the success of agriculture in the CEECs, as well as their neighboring countries, in today’s increasingly competitive environment. Concrete questions the conference focuses on are: What are the most suitable farm organizations, cooperative arrangements and contractual forms? How to improve efficiency and productivity? Where do market niches lie and what are the new product demands? This book contains 33 invited and selected contributions. These papers will be presented at the IAMO Forum 2006 in order to offer a platform for scientists, practitioners and policy-makers to discuss challenges and potential strategies at the farm, value chain, rural society and policy levels in order to cope with the upcoming challenges. IAMO Forum 2006, as well as this book, would not have been possible without the engagement of many people and institutions. We thank the authors of the submitted abstracts and papers, as well as the referees, for their evaluation of the abstracts from which the papers were selected. In particular, we would like to express our thanks to OLIVER JUNGKLAUS, GABRIELE MEWES, KLAUS REINSBERG and ANGELA SCHOLZ, who significantly contributed to the organization of the Forum. Furthermore, our thanks goes to SILKE SCHARF for her work on the layout and editing support of this book, and to JIM CURTISS, JAMIE BULLOCH, and DÓNALL Ó MEARÁIN for their English proof-reading. As experience from previous years documents, the course of the IAMO Forum continues to profit from the support and engagement of the IAMO administration, which we gratefully acknowledge. Last but not least, we are very grateful to the Robert Bosch Foundation, the Federal Ministry of Nutrition, Agriculture and Consumer Protection (BMELV), the German Research Foundation (DFG), the Haniel Foundation and the Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Central and Eastern Europe (IAMO) for their respective financial support.

The study investigates determinants of affiliation with the two strongest associations in Czech agriculture. These represent Agricultural Association grouping large-scale enterprises and Association of Private Farmers, respectively. Our objective is to analyze whether associations with different types of members (large-scale enterprises vs. private farmers) experience different motives for joining or lapsing. Moreover, we investigate if there are characteristics of the associations' members which positively correlate to membership. The results imply that political lobbying is the main entry incentive for both large-scale enterprises and individual farmers. Informal information exchange is a more significant motivation for private farmers than for agricultural enterprises. To the question of who affiliates, we found that the probability of association membership of individual private farms significantly increases with employment of external workers and their commercial orientation, and the probability of association membership of large-scale agricultural enterprises significantly increases with the increasing share of livestock production on the total agricultural revenues and the increasing share of employee ownership.

Replaced with revised version of paper 03/01/06.

Market liberalization in Central and Eastern Europe was targeted at establishing incentives that would improve economic performance. While substantial reorganization of enterprises is observed, firms can also be observed which devote resources towards establishing organizational legitimacy. Motivations for such behavior are considered and empirical evidence of its relationship with technical efficiency using a distance function approach is analyzed for the case of Czech agriculture. Contrary to the expectation that such behavior would be inefficient, we find that firms reap private economic gains from legitimacy efforts through improved access to agricultural land, investment subsidies and firm internal social capital. However, its effect on technical efficiency depends on whether such legitimacy efforts are valued by stakeholders or understood as a norm. Evidence of the trade-off between gains or sustainability from legitimacy and reorganization thus brings a new perspective to the understanding of structural changes in transition.

Dieses Discussion Paper enthält die Kurzfassungen der Beiträge, die im Rahmen des Workshops zur Agrarentwicklung in Mittel- und Osteuropa für Doktoranden und Post-Doc's vorgestellt und diskutiert werden sollen. Dieser Workshop findet zum dritten Mal, vom 11. bis 13. Juli 2005, am IAMO statt, wobei die Anzahl der eingereichten Beiträge ein stabiles Interesse der Teilnehmer signalisiert. Ziel der Veranstaltung ist es, Nachwuchswissenschaftlern die Möglichkeit zu geben, Ihre Forschungsvorhaben zu präsentieren und zu diskutieren. Die folgenden Kurzfassungen sollen allerdings nicht nur als Diskussionsgrundlage für den Workshop dienen, sondern auch einen Querschnittsüberblick über die gegenwärtige Nachwuchsforschung im Agrarbereich zu Mittel- und Osteuropa vermitteln. Obwohl auch in diesem Jahr ein breites Spektrum von relevanten Themen bearbeitet wird, ergaben sich als zwei Schwerpunktthemen ländliche Entwicklung und Agrarhandel mit Mittel- und Osteuropa. Hervorzuheben ist wie in den Vorjahren der hohe Anteil von Wissenschaftlern aus dem europäischen Ausland, die am Workshop teilnehmen. Dieser Umstand dokumentiert die europäische Dimension der Institutstätigkeit und unterstreicht die Rolle des IAMOs als Forum des wissenschaftlichen Austausches. Wir wünschen uns, dass der Workshop zur Agrarentwicklung in Mittel- und Osteuropa für Doktoranden und Post-Doc's zu fruchtbaren Diskussionen anregt und hoffen, dass die vorliegende Zusammenstellung dazu beiträgt, den Erfahrungsaustausch auch über den engeren Kreis der unmittelbar Beteiligten hinaus zu fördern. This Discussion Paper contains the contributions to be presented at the "Workshop zur Agrarentwicklung in Mittel- und Osteuropa für Doktoranden und Post-Docs" to take place at IAMO from 11 to 13 July, 2005. After last year's positive reception, the workshop will be held for the third time, and again enjoys a respectable number of contributions. The aim of the event is to provide young scientists with the opportunity to present and discuss their research. The following short versions of the contributions shall not only serve as a basis for discussion during the workshop, but also offer a cross-sectional overview of current research on agriculture in Central and Eastern Europe being done by young scientists. Although a broad spectrum of issues is covered, two major topics are rural development and agricultural trade with Central and Eastern Europe. We also want to stress the significant contribution of scientists originating from European countries other than Germany, which underscores IAMO's role as a forum of scientific exchange. It is our hope that the "Workshop zur Agrarentwicklung in Mittel- und Osteuropa für Doktoranden und Post-Docs" stimulates fruitful discussions and that the current compilation fosters exchange beyond those immediately involved in the workshop.

The study investigates the efficiency effect of affiliation with the two strongest associations in Czech agriculture. These represent large-scale enterprises and individual farmers, respectively. The efficiency analysis is supplemented by analyses of incentives for associations' membership and farm characteristics decisive for membership choice. The results imply that political lobbying is the main entry incentive. Commercially-oriented individual farms which employ external workers are more likely to choose association membership, as are agricultural enterprises that specialize in livestock production or preserve a high share of employee ownership. We find that association membership has a significant positive impact on farms' performance, especially among individual farms. Non-members represent a more heterogeneous group. Nevertheless, the best non-members are able to achieve the production potential of association members.

An important approach to reducing persistent technical inefficiency is through technical change. This paper considers the case of genetically modified crop production. A stochastic frontier approach is used to examine how a drastic change from non-GM to GM technology effects the position of the production frontier as well as the extent and nature of technical inefficiency. A one-step method is applied to consider firm-level effects on technical inefficiency. Using soybean production from the U.S. we find that GM technology improves productivity and reduces technical inefficiency though these effects vary across farm characteristics.

This Discussion Paper contains the contributions to be presented at the "Workshop zur Agrarentwicklung in Mittel- und Osteuropa für Doktoranden und Post-Docs" to take place at IAMO from 11 to 13 July, 2005. After last year'’s positive reception, the workshop will be held for the third time, and again enjoys a respectable number of contributions. The aim of the event is to provide young scientists with the opportunity to present and discuss their research. The following short versions of the contributions shall not only serve as a basis for discussion during the workshop, but also offer a cross-sectional overview of current research on agriculture in Central and Eastern Europe being done by young scientists. Although a broad spectrum of issues is covered, two major topics are rural development and agricultural trade with Central and Eastern Europe. We also want to stress the significant contribution of scientists originating from European countries other than Germany, which underscores IAMO’'s role as a forum of scientific exchange. It is our hope that the "Workshop zur Agrarentwicklung in Mittel- und Osteuropa für Doktoranden und Post-Docs" stimulates fruitful discussions and that the current compilation fosters exchange beyond those immediately involved in the workshop. VORWORT DER HERAUSGEBER Jarmila Curtiss, Martin Petrick, Alfons Balmann Dieses Discussion Paper enthält die Kurzfassungen der Beiträge, die im Rahmen des Workshops zur Agrarentwicklung in Mittel- und Osteuropa für Doktoranden und Post-Doc'’s vorgestellt und diskutiert werden sollen. Dieser Workshop findet zum dritten Mal, vom 11. bis 13. Juli 2005, am IAMO statt, wobei die Anzahl der eingereichten Beiträge ein stabiles Interesse der Teilnehmer signalisiert. Ziel der Veranstaltung ist es, Nachwuchswissenschaftlern die Möglichkeit zu geben, Ihre Forschungsvorhaben zu präsentieren und zu diskutieren. Die folgenden Kurzfassungen sollen allerdings nicht nur als Diskussionsgrundlage für den Workshop dienen, sondern auch einen Querschnittsüberblick über die gegenwärtige Nachwuchsforschung im Agrarbereich zu Mittel- und Osteuropa vermitteln. Obwohl auch in diesem Jahr ein breites Spektrum von relevanten Themen bearbeitet wird, ergaben sich als zwei Schwerpunktthemen ländliche Entwicklung und Agrarhandel mit Mittel- und Osteuropa. Hervorzuheben ist wie in den Vorjahren der hohe Anteil von Wissenschaftlern aus dem europäischen Ausland, die am Workshop teilnehmen. Dieser Umstand dokumentiert die europäische Dimension der Institutstätigkeit und unterstreicht die Rolle des IAMOs als Forum des wissenschaftlichen Austausches. Wir wünschen uns, dass der Workshop zur Agrarentwicklung in Mittel- und Osteuropa für Doktoranden und Post-Doc’'s zu fruchtbaren Diskussionen anregt und hoffen, dass die vorliegende Zusammenstellung dazu beiträgt, den Erfahrungsaustausch auch über den engeren Kreis der unmittelbar Beteiligten hinaus zu fördern.