Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T17:49:13.505Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Landlord Satisfaction with Arkansas Agricultural Land Agreements

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Ronald L. Rainey ,
Bruce L. Dixon ,
Lucas D. Parschy ,
Bruce L. Ahrendsen  and
Ralph W. Bierlen
Ronald L. Rainey
Affiliation:
Cooperative Extension Service, University of Arkansas, Little Rock, AR
Bruce L. Dixon
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR
Lucas D. Parschy
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR
Bruce L. Ahrendsen
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR
Ralph W. Bierlen
Affiliation:
Packers and Stockyards Administration, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Des Moines, IA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Landlord satisfaction levels with agricultural land-leasing agreements are examined with a 1998 sample of Arkansas landowners. Ordered probit models are estimated identifying which factors significantly affect satisfaction levels. Results indicate that the type of lease is not a significant determinant of landlord satisfaction levels. Proportion of landlord's income from leasing, tenant educational background, social capital variables, presence of irrigation equipment, and perceptions about the FAIR Act were found to significantly affect lease satisfaction in at least one of the three satisfaction models estimated. A comparison with an earlier study of Arkansas tenants indicates landlords have generally higher satisfaction levels.

Keywords

cropland contractslandlord satisfactionleasingprobit modelsL14Q12Q24
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , December 2003 , pp. 543 - 553
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, D.W., and Lueck, D.. “Contract Choice in Modern Agriculture: Cash Rent Versus Cropshare.” Journal of Law and Economics 35(1992):397–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, D.W., and Lueck, D.. “Transaction Costs and the Design of Cropshare Contracts.” Rand Journal of Economics 24(1993):78–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, D.W., and Lueck, D.. “Risk Preferences and the Economics of Contracts.” American Economic Review 85(May 1995):447–451.Google Scholar
Barry, P.J., Moss, L.M., Sotomayor, N.L., and Escalante, C.L.. “Lease Pricing for Farm Real Estate.” Review of Agricultural Economics 22(2000):2–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bierlen, R., and Parsch, L.D.. “Tenant Satisfaction with Land Leases.” Review of Agricultural Economics 18(1996):505–513.Google Scholar
Bierlen, R., Parsch, L.D., and Dixon, B.L.. “How Cropland Contract Type and Term Decisions are Made: Evidence from an Arkansas Tenant Survey.” International Food and Agribusiness Management Review 2(1999):103–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bierlen, R., Parsch, L.D., Dixon, B.L., and Ahrendsen, B.L.. “The 1996 FAIR Act: Measuring the Impacts on Land Leasing.” Review of Agricultural Economics 22(Fall/Winter 2000):336–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, D.J., and Atkinson, J.H.. “Cash and Share Renting: An Empirical Test of the Link Between Entrepreneurial Ability and Contracting Choice.” Bell Journal of Economics 12(1981):296–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dasgupta, S., Knight, T.O., and Love, H.A.. “Evolution of Agricultural Land Leasing Models: A Survey of the Literature.” Review of Agricultural Economics (Spring/Summer 1999):148–176.Google Scholar
Greene, W.H.Econometric Analysis, 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2000.Google Scholar
Gwilliam, K. “Farmland Leasing and Contract Choice in Michigan: The Influence of Social Distance.” Ph.D. dissertation. Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1993.Google Scholar
Kennedy, P.A Guide to Econometrics, 3rd ed. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1996.Google Scholar
Lin, J.Y. “Endowments, Technology and Factor Markets: A Natural Experiment of Induced Institutional Innovations from China's Rural Reform.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 77(May 1995):231–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddala, G.S.Introduction to Econometrics, 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan, 1992.Google Scholar
Nelson, F.D. “On a Computer Algorithm for the Analysis of Models with Limited Dependent Variables.” Annals of Economic and Social Measurement 5(1976):493–509.Google Scholar
Oliver, R.L. “A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions.” Journal of Marketing Research 17(November 1980):460–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, R.L.. “Measurement and Evaluation of Satisfaction Processes in Retail Settings.” Journal of Retailing 57(Fall 1981):25–48.Google Scholar
Rainey, R.L., Dixon, B.L., Ahrendsen, B.L., Parsch, L.D., and Bierlen, R.. “Contract Choice Selection with Land-Leasing Agreements.” Ag Econ Search, Research in Agricultural and Applied Economics @ www.agecon.lib.umn.edu (2001):26. Selected paper, American Agricultural Economics Association annual meetings, Chicago, IL, August 2001.Google Scholar
Schertz, L.P., and Johnston, W.E.. “Managing Farm Resources in the Era of the 1996 Farm Act.” Economic Research Service Staff Report Number 9711, December 1997. U.S. Department of Agriculture–National Agricultural Statistics Service. Agricultural Economics and Land Ownership Survey. Internet site: http://www.nass.usda.gov/census/census97/aelos/aelos.htm (Accessed November 2002).Google Scholar