Show Less

Impact of Land Reform Strategies on Rural Poverty in the Commonwealth of Independent States

Comparison between Georgia and Moldova

Series:

Kerstin Kötschau

This study aimed at analysing the impact of two different land reform strategies on rural poverty in CIS countries, particularly in Georgia and Moldova. While Georgia distributed agricultural land parcels directly to the population at the beginning of the 1990ies, Moldova transferred land via paper shares for undemarcated land parcels. This study is based on household data, which were collected during household surveys in Georgia and Moldova in 2007 and 2008. The data had been used in order to analyse the impact of land reform on the endowment with land and other capital, the use of capital and the access to markets and credits as well as the importance of agricultural employment for rural households. A logit analysis had been run in order to detect the determinants of poverty.

Prices

Show Summary Details
Restricted access

List of Tables

Extract

Table 1: Different implementation of the land reform in CIS countries ........ 9 Table 2: Restructuring modes for collective and state owned farms ........... 10 Table 3: Gross agricultural output (GAO) in CIS countries (1991=100%) .. 12 Table 4: Poverty rate for CIS countries 1998-2003 (in % of total population) ...................................................................................... 16 Table 5: Georgia and Moldova – selection criteria ....................................... 60 Table 6: Numbers of questionnaires per interviewer .................................... 73 Table 7: Values of the variables included in the cluster analyses for each interviewer .............................................................................. 74 Table 8: Private land tenure in Moldova as of January 1, 2004 ................... 88 Table 9: Characteristics of the Moldavian villages (2008) ......................... 113 Table 10: Use rights to land before 1990 (in ha) .......................................... 120 Table 11: Land transferred during the land reform (in ha) ........................... 121 Table 12: Average land ownership ............................................................... 122 Table 13: Land registration .......................................................................... 124 Table 14: Age of machinery .......................................................................... 125 Table 15: Livestock ownership (in % of households) .................................. 127 Table 16: Land cultivation with animal power (in % of households) .......... 127 Table 17: Household characteristics (in % of all types of households) ........ 129 Table 18: Dependency ratio (classified, in %) .............................................. 130 Table 19: Age of household head in categories (in cumulative %) .............. 131 Table 20: Highest education of household head (in % of households) ........ 131 Table 21: Land sales and land rentals (% of households) ............................. 132 Table 22: Credits (in % of households)......................................................... 134 Table 23: Reasons for not taking out a loan .................................................. 135 Table 24: Collaterals (in % of households) ................................................... 136 Table 25: Amount of fallow land ................................................................. 138...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.

Do you have any questions? Contact us.

Or login to access all content.