Modelling the exiting of South African producers from commercial agricultural production – an agent-based model

References

• Castro-Fontoura, G. 2016. Productivity and agri-tech in Uruguay. Montevideo: Uruguayan National Agricultural Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Chavas, J. 1994. Production and investment decisions under sunk cost and temporal uncertainty. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 76, no. 1: 114–127.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, H., A. Weersink, M. Beaulieu, Y.N. Lee, and K. Nagelschmitz. 2019. A historical review of changes in farm size in Canada. Working Paper Series WP 19-03, Institute for the Advanced Study of Food and Agricultural Policy, Department of Food, Agriculture, and Resource Economics. University of Guelph.
   Google Scholar
• Cloete, J.C. 2022. Investigating farm-level exit decisions and exit rates in commercial agriculture in South Africa, an agent-based approach. Doctoral diss., Department of Agricultural Economics, Stellenbosch University.
   Google Scholar
• Cloete, K., S. Mann, and M. Delport. 2022. Confident or captured? Commercial producers in South Africa. International Journal of Social Economics 49, no. 7: 976–992.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coase, R.H. 2013. The problem of social cost. The Journal of Law and Economics 56, no. 4: 837–877. doi:10.1086/674872.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries [DAFF]. 2019. Abstract of agricultural statistics 2019. Pretoria: Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2017. Young farmers in the EU – structural and economic characteristics. EU Agricultural and Farm Economics Briefs 15, no. Oct: 1–17.
   Google Scholar
• Fernando, A., and A. Ruggieri. 2015. Financial constraints and productivity: Evidence from euro area companies. Working Paper Series No. 1823, European Central Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Gale, H.F. 2003. Age-specific patterns of exit and entry in U.S. farming, 1978–1997. Review of Agricultural Economics 25, no. 1: 168–186.
   Google Scholar
• Geyer, H. 2016. Poverty traps in South African agriculture. Agrekon 55, no. 4: 356–376. doi:10.1080/03031853.2016.1243753.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gras, C. 2009. Changing patterns in family farming: The case of the Pampa region, Argentina. Journal of Agrarian Change 9, no. 3: 345–364. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0366.2009.00215.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greyling, J.C. 2019. Policy, production, and productivity: Spatial dynamics in the South African maize industry during the 20th century. Doctoral diss., Department of Agricultural Economics, Stellenbosch University.
   Google Scholar
• Greyling, J.C., N. Vink, and E. Mabaya. 2015. South Africa’s agricultural sector twenty years after democracy (1994 to 2013). Professional Agricultural Workers Journal 3, no. 1: 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Grubbstrom, A., and C. Erikssen. 2018. Retired farmers and new land users: How relations to land and people influence farmers’ land transfer decisions. Sociologia Ruralis 58, no. 4: 707–725.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guerini, A., and A. Moneta. 2017. A method for agent-based models validation. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 82: 125–141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gutter, M., and T. Saleem. 2005. Financial vulnerability of small business owners. Financial Services Review 14, no. 2: 133–147.
   Google Scholar
• Headey, D.D. 2016. The evolution of global farming land: facts and interpretations. Agricultural Economics 47, no. supplement: 185–196.
   Google Scholar
• Heckelei, T., W. Britz, and Y. Zhang. 2012. Positive mathematical programming approaches – recent developments in literature and applied modelling. Bio-based and Applied Economics 1, no. 1: 109–124. doi:10.13128/BAE-10567.
   Google Scholar
• Katchova, A.L., and M. Ahearn. 2014. Farmland ownership and leasing: Implications for young and beginning farmers. Agricultural Economics Staff Paper No. 486. Lexington: College of Agriculture, Food and Environment, University of Kentucky.
   Google Scholar
• Liebenberg, F. 2012. South African agricultural production, productivity and research performance in the 20th century. PhD thesis, University of Pretoria.
   Google Scholar
• Ligmann-Zielinska, A., P. Siebers, N. Maglioccia, D. Parker, V. Grimms, E. Jing Du, M. Cenek, et al. 2020. ‘One size does not fit all’: A roadmap of purpose-driven mixed-method pathways for sensitivity analysis of agent-based models. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 23, no. 1: 6. doi:10.18564/jasss.4201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacLeod, C.J., and H. Moller. 2006. Intensification and diversification of New Zealand agriculture since 1960: An evaluation of current indicators of land use change. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 115, no. 1–4: 201–218. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2006.01.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mbongwa, M., J. Kirsten, and J. Van Zyl. 2001. The agrarian structure and empowerment: The legacy. In South African agriculture at the crossroads: An empirical analysis of efficiency, technology and productivity, eds. C. Thirtle, J. van Zyl, and N. Vink, 6–44. London: Macmillan Press.
   Google Scholar
• McCarl, B.A. 1984. Model validation: An overview with some emphasis on risk models. Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics 52, no. 3: 153–173.
   Google Scholar
• McCarl, B.A., and A.G. Nelson. 1983. Model validation: An overview with some emphasis on risk models. Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics 52, no. 3: 153–173.
   Google Scholar
• Middelberg, S.L. 2014. Agricultural land valuation methods used by financiers: The case of South Africa. Agrekon 53, no. 3: 101–115. doi:10.1080/03031853.2014.922033.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Möhring, A., G. Mack, A. Zimmermann, A. Ferjani, A. Schmidt, and S. Mann. 2016. Agent-based modeling on a national scale – Experiences from SWISSland. Agroscope Science No. 30, Ettenhausen.
   Google Scholar
• National Planning Commission [NPC]. 2012. The National Development Plan 2030: Our future – make it work. Pretoria: Government Printer.
   Google Scholar
• Pedersen, H.B., and S. Møllenberg. 2017. Agriculture and Danish farm returns through 100 years 1916–2015. Statistics Denmark. https://www.dst.dk/en/Statistik/Publikationer/VisPub?cid=28642.
   Google Scholar
• Productivity Commission. 2005. Trends in Australian agriculture. Canberra: Productivity Commission Research Paper.
   Google Scholar
• Qiu, T., S.T. Boris Choy, Y. Li, L. Luo, and J. Li. 2021. Farmers’ exit from land operation in rural China: Does the price of agricultural mechanization services matter? China & World Economy 29, no. 2: 99–122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rigg, J., M. Phongsiri, B. Promphakping, A. Salamanca, and M. Sripun. 2020. Who will tend the farm? Interrogating the ageing Asian farmer. The Journal of Peasant Studies 47, no. 2: 306–325.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Satola, L., T. Wojewodzic, and W. Sroka. 2018. Barriers to exit encountered by small farms in light of the theory of new institutional economics. Agricultural Economics (Zemědělská Ekonomika) 64, no. 6: 277–290. https://doi.org/10.17221/233/2016-AGRICECON.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shimizu, T. 2017. Present state of Japanese agriculture and future prospect for agricultural structure: Detailed picture seen in 2015 Agricultural Census. The Japan Agri News, July 31.
   Google Scholar
• Statistics South Africa (StatsSA). 2020. Census of commercial agriculture 2017. Pretoria: StatsSA.
   Google Scholar
• The Advisory Panel on Land Reform and Agriculture [APLRA]. 2019. Final report of the presidential advisory panel on land reform and agriculture. For his excellency, the president of South Africa. Pretoria: APLRA.
   Google Scholar
• Van Dijk, T. 2007. Complications for traditional land consolidation in Central Europe. Geoforum; Journal of Physical, Human, and Regional Geosciences 38, no. 3: 505–511.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vink, N. 1993. Entrepreneurs and the political economy of reform in South African agriculture. Agrekon 32, no. 4: 153–166. doi:10.1080/03031853.1993.9524737.
   Google Scholar
• Vink, N., and J. Kirsten. 2019. Principles and practice for successful farmland redistribution in South Africa. Working Paper 57, Programme for Land and Agrarian Studies. University of the Western Cape.
   Google Scholar
• Waldman, K.B., S.A. Giroux, J.A. Farmer, B.M. Heaberlin, J.B. Blekking, and P.T. Todd. 2021. Socioeconomic threats are more salient to farmers than environmental threats. Journal of Rural Studies 86: 508–517.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williamson, O.E. 2010. Transaction cost economics: The natural progression. American Economic Review 100, no. 3: 673–690. doi:10.1257/aer.100.3.673.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xia, X., X. Xin, and L. Ma. 2017. What are the determinants of large-scale farming in China? China & World Economy 25, no. 4: 93–108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar