我该留下还是该走?塔吉克斯坦农业组织选择的行为研究

IF 1.2 4区 经济学 Q3 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics Pub Date : 2018-09-01 DOI:10.22004/AG.ECON.276506
Malte Müller, Jens Rommel
{"title":"我该留下还是该走?塔吉克斯坦农业组织选择的行为研究","authors":"Malte Müller, Jens Rommel","doi":"10.22004/AG.ECON.276506","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Most communist economies were dominated by large collective farms. Today, smaller family farms often coexist with larger corporate and collective farms in these countries. The roles of other-regarding preferences and social norms have been largely neglected in the debate on farmers’ organizational choices. We conducted lab-in-the-field ultimatum game experiments with 397 cotton farmers from collective and family farms. Large and statistically significant differences existed in the rejection behavior among the two farm types. Punishment of unfair behavior explained organizational choice, both with and without controlling for other factors. We conclude that the continuation of dual farm structures requires tailored policy support.","PeriodicalId":54890,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Should I Stay or Should I Go? A Behavioral Approach to Organizational Choice in Tajikistan’s Agriculture\",\"authors\":\"Malte Müller, Jens Rommel\",\"doi\":\"10.22004/AG.ECON.276506\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Most communist economies were dominated by large collective farms. Today, smaller family farms often coexist with larger corporate and collective farms in these countries. The roles of other-regarding preferences and social norms have been largely neglected in the debate on farmers’ organizational choices. We conducted lab-in-the-field ultimatum game experiments with 397 cotton farmers from collective and family farms. Large and statistically significant differences existed in the rejection behavior among the two farm types. Punishment of unfair behavior explained organizational choice, both with and without controlling for other factors. We conclude that the continuation of dual farm structures requires tailored policy support.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54890,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22004/AG.ECON.276506\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22004/AG.ECON.276506","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

大多数共产主义经济体由大型集体农场主导。如今,在这些国家,较小的家庭农场往往与较大的企业和集体农场共存。在关于农民组织选择的辩论中,其他人在偏好和社会规范方面的作用在很大程度上被忽视了。我们对来自集体和家庭农场的397名棉农进行了最后通牒博弈实验。两种农场类型之间的排斥行为存在巨大且具有统计学意义的差异。对不公平行为的惩罚解释了组织选择,包括是否控制其他因素。我们的结论是,继续实行双重农业结构需要有针对性的政策支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Should I Stay or Should I Go? A Behavioral Approach to Organizational Choice in Tajikistan’s Agriculture
Most communist economies were dominated by large collective farms. Today, smaller family farms often coexist with larger corporate and collective farms in these countries. The roles of other-regarding preferences and social norms have been largely neglected in the debate on farmers’ organizational choices. We conducted lab-in-the-field ultimatum game experiments with 397 cotton farmers from collective and family farms. Large and statistically significant differences existed in the rejection behavior among the two farm types. Punishment of unfair behavior explained organizational choice, both with and without controlling for other factors. We conclude that the continuation of dual farm structures requires tailored policy support.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics
Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 社会科学-农业经济与政策
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: The mission of the Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics is to publish creative and scholarly economic studies in agriculture, natural resources, and related areas. Manuscripts dealing with the economics of food and agriculture, natural resources and the environment, human resources, and rural development issues are especially encouraged. The Journal provides a forum for topics of interest to those performing economic research as well as to those involved with economic policy and education. Submission of comments on articles previously published in the Journal is welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Learning about Our Vices from Devices: A Model of Individual Learning with an Application to Consumer Food Waste. Replacing Late Calving Beef Cows to Shorten Calving Season On Policy Interventions and Vertical Price Transmission: the Italian Milk Supply Chain Case Origin and Export Basis Interdependencies in Soybeans: A Panel Data Analysis Provision Point Reverse Auction: A New Auction Mechanism with Applications for Conservation Contracts
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1