13.11.2014 Views

Institutional Factors Affecting Agricultural Land Markets

Institutional Factors Affecting Agricultural Land Markets

Institutional Factors Affecting Agricultural Land Markets

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

6 | CIAIAN, KANCS, SWINNEN, VAN HERCK & VRANKEN<br />

3. Other policies<br />

In addition to the CAP, other policies – such as rural development programmes and<br />

environmental policies – may affect land markets in the EU. This is illustrated by the<br />

following two examples.<br />

In Finland, the introduction of start-up support grants for new farmers within the rural<br />

development programme has boosted intergenerational transfers, i.e. sales between relatives.<br />

This resulted in a large increase in the number of transactions and the transacted area in<br />

2005 (see Ciaian et al., 2012a).<br />

In Belgium, the ‘manure action plans’, which were developed as instruments to comply with<br />

the European Nitrates Directive (implemented in 1991), strongly affected the Flemish land<br />

market. The manure action policies forced the intensive animal-producing farmers without<br />

(or with insufficient) land to make arrangements with other landowners to internalise the<br />

environmental costs they cause, such that the profits from intensive animal breeding were<br />

captured in the farmland prices in Flanders (Le Goffe and Salanié, 2005). Intensive animal<br />

farms bought agricultural land exclusively for spreading manure in order to avoid the levies<br />

or the processing duties. The impact of increasing land demand is not only limited to the<br />

prices of land in the animal-breeding regions, but it also exerts upward pressure on land<br />

prices in the whole of Flanders. Likewise in the Netherlands, experts point out that the<br />

Nitrates Directive has strongly affected the agricultural land market.<br />

4. <strong>Land</strong> market institutions and regulations<br />

<strong>Land</strong> market institutions and regulations also have an impact on agricultural land markets.<br />

The most obvious regulation affecting the land market concerns that governing land prices<br />

(i.e. prices fixed by the government). This is the case for rental prices in Belgium and France<br />

for example, where there is an upper limit on the regional rental price.<br />

In addition, there is legislation that protects the tenant in Belgium and France, stipulating<br />

long-term contracts (for a minimum of nine years). Furthermore, in these countries the<br />

tenant has a pre-emptive right to buy the tenanted agricultural land if it is for sale. These<br />

regulations have ramifications for the land rental markets; for instance in Belgium, such<br />

regulation has led to the existence of extra, ‘grey’ rental payments, as the legal maximum<br />

price is below the market price for agricultural land.<br />

In the new member states (NMS), land markets have been strongly affected by EU accession.<br />

First, when the NMS acceded to the EU, agricultural subsidies were significantly increased<br />

and were, at least partially, capitalised into land prices. Second, before EU accession, many<br />

NMS feared that when they opened their markets and integrated into the EU single market,<br />

farmers from the old member states (OMS) – who are typically less capital-constrained than<br />

NMS farmers – would benefit from the opportunity to buy cheap agricultural land in the<br />

NMS, crowding out all investment opportunities for local farmers.<br />

Therefore, foreigners have been unable to purchase agricultural land during a transitional<br />

period of seven years after EU accession in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary,<br />

Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and Slovakia, and 12 years for Poland. There are differences<br />

among the countries in the implementation of these restrictions, for example in the way<br />

‘foreigners’ are legally defined and in the conditions they must fulfil to (exceptionally) obtain<br />

agricultural land. These differences usually stem from the fact that the various restrictive<br />

regimes existing before accession were permitted to continue during the transitional period.<br />

In the candidate countries, there are also legal restrictions on foreign ownership of<br />

agricultural land, which are to some extent comparable with the NMS. For example, in the<br />

FYROM, the restrictions are comparable with the NMS but they are much more stringent in<br />

Turkey.<br />

Ciaian et al. (2012b and 2012c) discuss in detail the land market institutions and regulations<br />

in the different member states.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!