What Drives Landowners to Resist Selling Their Land? Insights from Ethical Capitalism and Landowners’ Perceptions
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Ethical Capitalism and the Need for Ethics in Large-Scale Land Transactions
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Study Area
3.2. Data Collection
3.3. Investigated Variables
3.4. Data Analyses
4. Results
4.1. Measurement Model
4.2. Structural Model of Landowners’ Resistance to Sell
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Burja, V.; Tamas-Szora, A.; Dobra, I.B. Land Concentration, Land Grabbing and Sustainable Development of Agriculture in Romania. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kay, S.; Peuch, J.; Franco, J. Extent of Farmland Grabbing in the EU. 2015. Available online: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2015/540369/IPOL_STU(2015)540369_EN.pdf (accessed on 20 January 2021).
- Giovannetti, G.; Ticci, E. Determinants of Biofuel-Oriented Land Acquisitions in Sub-Saharan Africa. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 54, 678–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Achiba, G.A. Navigating Contested Winds: Development Visions and Anti-Politics of Wind Energy in Northern Kenya. Land 2019, 8, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Benjaminsen, T.A.; Bryceson, I. Conservation, Green/Blue Grabbing and Accumulation by Dispossession in Tanzania. J. Peasant Stud. 2012, 39, 335–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ojeda, D. Green Pretexts: Ecotourism, Neoliberal Conservation and Land Grabbing in Tayrona National Natural Park, Colombia. J. Peasant Stud. 2012, 39, 357–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ryser, S. The Anti-Politics Machine of Green Energy Development: The Moroccan Solar Project in Ouarzazate and Its Impact on Gendered Local Communities. Land 2019, 8, 100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cochrane, L. Food Security or Food Sovereignty: The Case of Land Grabs. J. Humanit. Assist. 2011, 5. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Logan-Cochrane/publication/291166891_Food_Security_or_Food_Sovereignty_The_Case_of_Land_Grabs/links/569ed16608ae21a56424ef61/Food-Security-or-Food-Sovereignty-The-Case-of-Land-Grabs.pdf (accessed on 15 February 2021).
- Petrescu-Mag, R.M.; Petrescu, D.C.; Reti, K.-O. My Land Is My Food: Exploring Social Function of Large Land Deals Using Food Security–Land Deals Relation in Five Eastern European Countries. Land Use Policy 2019, 82, 729–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lavers, T. ‘Land Grab’as Development Strategy? The Political Economy of Agricultural Investment in Ethiopia. J. Peasant Stud. 2012, 39, 105–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Teklemariam, D.; Nyssen, J.; Azadi, H.; Haile, M.; Lanckriet, S.; Taheri, F.; Witlox, F. Commercial Land Deals and the Interactions between Investors and Local People: Evidence from Western Ethiopia. Land Use Policy 2017, 63, 312–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tellman, B.; Magliocca, N.R.; Turner, B.; Verburg, P.H. Understanding the Role of Illicit Transactions in Land-Change Dynamics. Nat. Sustain. 2020, 3, 175–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Constantin, C.; Luminița, C.; Vasile, A.J. Land Grabbing: A Review of Extent and Possible Consequences in Romania. Land Use Policy 2017, 62, 143–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petrescu-Mag, R.M.; Petrescu, D.C.; Petrescu-Mag, I.V. Whereto Land Fragmentation–Land Grabbing in Romania? The Place of Negotiation in Reaching Win–Win Community-Based Solutions. Land Use Policy 2017, 64, 174–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EUROSTAT Agricultural Land Prices and Rents. Land Prices Vary Considerably between and within Member States. 2018. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/2995521/8756523/5-21032018-AP-EN.pdf/b1d0ffd3-f75b-40cc-b53f-f22f68d541df (accessed on 15 January 2021).
- Cotula, L. Addressing the Human Rights Impacts of Land Grabbing. Brussels: Policy Department DG External Policies, European Parliament. 2014. Available online: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2014/534984/EXPO_STU(2014)534984_EN.pdf (accessed on 2 December 2020).
- Baker-Smith, K.; Szocs Boruss, M.A. What Is Land Grabbing? A Critical Review of Existing Definitions; Eco Ruralis: Cluj Napoca, Romania, 2016; pp. 1–16. Available online: http://www.fao.org/family-farming/detail/en/c/1010775/ (accessed on 2 December 2020).
- Hall, R. Land Grabbing in Southern Africa: The Many Faces of the Investor Rush. Rev. Afr. Political Econ. 2011, 38, 193–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suhardiman, D.; Giordano, M.; Keovilignavong, O.; Sotoukee, T. Revealing the Hidden Effects of Land Grabbing through Better Understanding of Farmers’ Strategies in Dealing with Land Loss. Land Use Policy 2015, 49, 195–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Margulis, M.E.; McKeon, N.; Borras, S.M., Jr. Land Grabbing and Global Governance: Critical Perspectives. Globalizations 2013, 10, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Land Matrix Deals. 2021. Available online: https://landmatrix.org/list/deals (accessed on 10 March 2021).
- Borras, S.M., Jr.; Franco, J.C. Global Land Grabbing and Trajectories of Agrarian Change: A Preliminary Analysis. J. Agrar. Chang. 2012, 12, 34–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hall, R.; Edelman, M.; Borras, S.M., Jr.; Scoones, I.; White, B.; Wolford, W. Resistance, Acquiescence or Incorporation? An Introduction to Land Grabbing and Political Reactions ‘from Below’. J. Peasant Stud. 2015, 42, 467–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Damen, M. Four EU Scenarios for Governance in a Post COVID-19 World. Lessons from Natural Resources Management. 2020. Available online: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/639317/EXPO_STU(2020)639317_EN.pdf (accessed on 15 February 2021).
- Petrescu, D.C.; Hartel, T.; Petrescu-Mag, R.M. Global Land Grab: Toward a Country Typology for Future Land Negotiations. Land Use Policy 2020, 99, 104960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cochrane, L.; Scholar, V. Land Grabbing. In Encyclopedia of Food and Agricultural Ethics; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; pp. 1–5. ISBN 978-94-007-0928-7. [Google Scholar]
- Holmes, G. What Is a Land Grab? Exploring Green Grabs, Conservation, and Private Protected Areas in Southern Chile. J. Peasant Stud. 2014, 41, 547–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davis, K.F.; D’Odorico, P.; Rulli, M.C. Land Grabbing: A Preliminary Quantification of Economic Impacts on Rural Livelihoods. Popul. Environ. 2014, 36, 180–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Margulis, M.E. Land Acquisitions for Food and Fuel. Encycl. Food Agric. Ethics 2014, 1325–1332. [Google Scholar]
- Petrescu-Mag, R.M.; Petrescu, D.C.; Ozunu, A. Scientist, Quo Vadis Without Ethics? An Introduction to Special Collection on “Environmental Ethics: Issues and Perspectives from Romania”. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2019, 32, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meijboom, F.L.; Brom, F.W. Ethics and Sustainability: Guest or Guide? On Sustainability as a Moral Ideal. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2012, 25, 117–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bunkus, R.; Theesfeld, I. Land Grabbing in Europe? Socio-Cultural Externalities of Large-Scale Land Acquisitions in East Germany. Land 2018, 7, 98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hausermann, H.; Ferring, D.; Atosona, B.; Mentz, G.; Amankwah, R.; Chang, A.; Hartfield, K.; Effah, E.; Asuamah, G.Y.; Mansell, C. Land-Grabbing, Land-Use Transformation and Social Differentiation: Deconstructing “Small-Scale” in Ghana’s Recent Gold Rush. World Dev. 2018, 108, 103–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van der Ploeg, J.D.; Franco, J.C.; Borras, S.M., Jr. Land concentration and land grabbing in Europe: A preliminary analysis. Can. J. Dev. Stud./Rev. Can. Études Dév. 2015, 36, 147–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borras, S.M., Jr.; Franco, J.C. Global Land Grabbing and Political Reactions ‘from Below’. Third World Q. 2013, 34, 1723–1747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Margulis, M.E.; Porter, T. Governing the Global Land Grab: Multipolarity, Ideas, and Complexity in Transnational Governance. Globalizations 2013, 10, 65–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Van Duy, L.; Amekawa, Y.; Isoda, H.; Nomura, H.; Watanabe, T. Are Socialist Domestic Land Grabs Egalitarian? Insights from a Case Involving a Rubber Plantation in Dien Bien Province, Vietnam. Geoforum 2020, 114, 89–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zoomers, A. Globalisation and the Foreignisation of Space: Seven Processes Driving the Current Global Land Grab. J. Peasant Stud. 2010, 37, 429–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pyle, L.A. Persistent Landownership at the Rural-Urban Fringe. Urban Geogr. 1989, 10, 157–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grubbström, A. Emotional Bonds as Obstacles to Land Sale—Attitudes to Land among Local and Absentee Landowners in Northwest Estonia. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2011, 99, 31–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Grubbström, A.; Eriksson, C. Retired Farmers and New Land Users: How Relations to Land and People Influence Farmers’ Land Transfer Decisions. Sociol. Rural. 2018, 58, 707–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lai, P.-H.; Kreuter, U.P. Examining the Direct and Indirect Effects of Environmental Change and Place Attachment on Land Management Decisions in the Hill Country of Texas, USA. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2012, 104, 320–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asiama, K.O.; Bennett, R.; Zevenbergen, J.; Asiama, S.O. Land Valuation in Support of Responsible Land Consolidation on Ghana’s Rural Customary Lands. Surv. Rev. 2018, 50, 288–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mazzucato, M. Capitalism’s Greatest Weakness? It Confuses Price with Value. World Economic Forum. 2018. Available online: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/05/capitalisms-greatest-weakness-it-confuses-price-with-value/ (accessed on 10 January 2021).
- Lefebvre, H.; Nicholson-Smith, D. The Production of Space; Blackwell: Oxford, UK, 1991; Volume 142. [Google Scholar]
- Harvey, D. The Enigma of Capital and the Crises of Capitalism Profile Books; Profile Books: London, UK, 2010; ISBN 1846683092. [Google Scholar]
- Polanyi, K. Great Transformation; Beacon Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Farrell, H. The Free Market Is an Impossible Utopia. The Washington Post, 18 July 2014; Retrieved 25 August 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Bollier, D. Why Karl Polanyi Still Matters? On The Commons, 24 February 2009. [Google Scholar]
- De Maria, M. Understanding Land in the Context of Large-Scale Land Acquisitions: A Brief History of Land in Economics. Land 2019, 8, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Barry, A. Ethical capitalism. In Global Governmentality: Governing International Spaces; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2006; Volume 28, pp. 195–211. ISBN 1-134-38609-5. [Google Scholar]
- Langstaff, D.H. Ethical Capitalism—Who Should Care? 2014. Available online: https://www.aspeninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/files/content/upload/Ethical%20Capitalism-GATech-DHL%20FINAL-Feb192014.pdf (accessed on 7 January 2021).
- Bisanz, P. How to Make Capitalism More Ethical. World Economic Forum. 2014. Available online: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2014/11/how-to-make-capitalism-more-ethical/ (accessed on 7 January 2021).
- Cvetkovich, G.; Earle, T.C. Environmental Hazards and the Public. J. Soc. Issues 1992, 48, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borras, S., Jr.; Franco, J. From Threat to Opportunity-Problems with the Idea of a Code of Conduct for Land-Grabbing. Yale Hum. Rts. Dev. Lj 2010, 13, 507. [Google Scholar]
- Siciliano, G. Rural-urban Migration and Domestic Land Grabbing in China. Popul. Space Place 2014, 20, 333–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zoomers, A.; Van Noorloos, F.; Otsuki, K.; Steel, G.; Van Westen, G. The Rush for Land in an Urbanizing World: From Land Grabbing toward Developing Safe, Resilient, and Sustainable Cities and Landscapes. World Dev. 2017, 92, 242–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cox, E.M.; Pidgeon, N.; Spence, E.; Thomas, G. Blurred Lines: The Ethics and Policy of Greenhouse Gas Removal at Scale. Front. Environ. Sci. 2018, 6, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dell’Angelo, J.; Rulli, M.C.; D’Odorico, P. The Global Water Grabbing Syndrome. Ecol. Econ. 2018, 143, 276–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neef, A.; Touch, S.; Chiengthong, J. The Politics and Ethics of Land Concessions in Rural Cambodia. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2013, 26, 1085–1103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Holt Giménez, E.; Shattuck, A. Food Crises, Food Regimes and Food Movements: Rumblings of Reform or Tides of Transformation? J. Peasant Stud. 2011, 38, 109–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rowden, R. Indian Companies Engaged in Agricultural “Land Grabbing” in Africa: The Need for Indo-African Solidarity Linkages. Hum. Geogr. 2011, 4, 72–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nara, B.B.; Lengoiboni, M.; Zevenbergen, J. Implications of Customary Land Rights Inequalities for Food Security: A Study of Smallholder Farmers in Northwest Ghana. Land 2020, 9, 178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toft, K.H. Are Land Deals Unethical? The Ethics of Large-Scale Land Acquisitions in Developing Countries. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2013, 26, 1181–1198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Busscher, N.; Vanclay, F.; Parra, C. Reflections on How State–Civil Society Collaborations Play out in the Context of Land Grabbing in Argentina. Land 2019, 8, 116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zevenbergen, J.; Augustinus, C.; Antonio, D.; Bennett, R. Pro-Poor Land Administration: Principles for Recording the Land Rights of the Underrepresented. Land Use Policy 2013, 31, 595–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cotula, L. The International Political Economy of the Global Land Rush: A Critical Appraisal of Trends, Scale, Geography and Drivers. J. Peasant Stud. 2012, 39, 649–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deininger, K.; Byerlee, D. Rising Global Interest in Farmland: Can It Yield Sustainable and Equitable Benefits? World Bank Publications: Washington, DC, USA, 2011; ISBN 0-8213-8592-5. [Google Scholar]
- Edelman, M.; León, A. Cycles of Land Grabbing in Central America: An Argument for History and a Case Study in the Bajo Aguán, Honduras. Third World Q. 2013, 34, 1697–1722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fairbairn, M. Foreignization, Financialization and Land Grab Regulation. J. Agrar. Chang. 2015, 15, 581–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petrescu-Mag, R.M.; Petrescu, D.C.; Todoran, S.C.; Petrescu-Mag, I.V. Us and Them. Is the COVID-19 Pandemic a Driver for Xenophobia in Land Transactions in Romania? Land Use Policy 2021, 103, 105284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cuffaro, N.; Hallam, D. ’Land Grabbing’in Developing Countries: Foreign Investors, Regulation and Codes of Conduct. Regul. Codes Conduct. 2011, 3, 1–18. [Google Scholar]
- Corbera, E.; Hunsberger, C.; Vaddhanaphuti, C. Climate Change Policies, Land Grabbing and Conflict: Perspectives from Southeast Asia. Can. J. Dev. Stud. 2017, 38, 297–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- German, L.; Schoneveld, G.; Mwangi, E. Contemporary Processes of Large-Scale Land Acquisition in Sub-Saharan Africa: Legal Deficiency or Elite Capture of the Rule of Law? World Dev. 2013, 48, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petrescu, D.C.; Petrescu-Mag, R.M.; Tenter, A.R. The Little Chernobyl of Romania: The Legacy of a Uranium Mine as Negotiation Platform for Sustainable Development and the Role of New Ethics. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2019, 32, 51–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barnett, C.; Cloke, P.; Clarke, N.; Malpass, A. Consuming Ethics: Articulating the Subjects and Spaces of Ethical Consumption. Antipode 2005, 37, 23–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Petrescu-Mag, R.M.; Petrescu, D.C.; Robinson, G.M. Adopting Temperance-Oriented Behavior? New Possibilities for Consumers and Their Food Waste. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2019, 32, 5–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Resnik, D. What Is Ethics in Research & Why Is It Important? Available online: https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bioethics/whatis/index.cfm (accessed on 27 December 2020).
- Donohoe, M. Causes and Health Consequences of Environmental Degradation and Social Injustice. Soc. Sci. Med. 2003, 56, 573–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bawden, R. How Should We Farm? The Ethical Dimension of Farming Systems. In Farming Systems Research into the 21st Century: The New Dynamic; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; pp. 119–139. [Google Scholar]
- Liao, C.; Jung, S.; Brown, D.G.; Agrawal, A. Spatial Patterns of Large-scale Land Transactions and Their Potential Socio-environmental Outcomes in Cambodia, Ethiopia, Liberia, and Peru. Land Degrad. Dev. 2020, 31, 1241–1251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davis, K.F.; Yu, K.; Rulli, M.C.; Pichdara, L.; D’Odorico, P. Accelerated Deforestation Driven by Large-Scale Land Acquisitions in Cambodia. Nat. Geosci. 2015, 8, 772–775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schoneveld, G.C. Host Country Governance and the African Land Rush: 7 Reasons Why Large-Scale Farmland Investments Fail to Contribute to Sustainable Development. Geoforum 2017, 83, 119–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krishna, V.V.; Kubitza, C.; Pascual, U.; Qaim, M. Land Markets, Property Rights, and Deforestation: Insights from Indonesia. World Dev. 2017, 99, 335–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cardoso, S.P.; James, H.S., Jr. Ethical Frameworks and Farmer Participation in Controversial Farming Practices. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2012, 25, 377–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferrell, O.C.; Gresham, L.G. A Contingency Framework for Understanding Ethical Decision Making in Marketing. J. Mark. 1985, 49, 87–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, T.M. Ethical Decision Making by Individuals in Organizations: An Issue-Contingent Model. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1991, 16, 366–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Meijboom, F.L.; Stafleu, F.R. Farming Ethics in Practice: From Freedom to Professional Moral Autonomy for Farmers. Agric. Hum. Values 2016, 33, 403–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brugha, R.; Varvasovszky, Z. Stakeholder Analysis: A Review. Health Policy Plan. 2000, 15, 239–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Presidential Administration of Romania. Romania. 2021. Available online: https://www.presidency.ro/ro/presedinte/romania (accessed on 10 January 2021).
- Romanian Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. National Rural Development Programme for the 2014–2020 Period. Official Version 28/01/2021. Available online: https://www.madr.ro/docs/dezvoltare-rurala/2021/PNDR.2020_V12_26.01.2021.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2021).
- Statista. Romania: Share of Economic Sectors in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) from 2009 to 2019. 2020. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/373136/share-of-economic-sectors-in-the-gdp-in-romania/#:~:text=This%20statistic%20shows%20the%20share,sector%20contributed%20about%2058.16%20percent (accessed on 10 January 2021).
- United Nations Development Programme. Human Development Report. 2020. Available online: http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/latest-human-development-index-ranking (accessed on 7 January 2021).
- James, H.S., Jr.; Hendrickson, M.K. Perceived Economic Pressures and Farmer Ethics. Agric. Econ. 2008, 38, 349–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Stuart, D. Constrained Choice and Ethical Dilemmas in Land Management: Environmental Quality and Food Safety in California Agriculture. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2009, 22, 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vaske, J.J.; Miller, C.A.; Toombs, T.P.; Schweizer, L.A.; Powlen, K.A. Farmers’ Value Orientations, Property Rights and Responsibilities, and Willingness to Adopt Leopold’s Land Ethic. Soc. Nat. Resour. 2018, 31, 1118–1131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Messerli, P.; Heinimann, A.; Giger, M.; Breu, T.; Schönweger, O. From ‘Land Grabbing’to Sustainable Investments in Land: Potential Contributions by Land Change Science. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2013, 5, 528–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tripathi, A.; Mishra, A.K. Knowledge and Passive Adaptation to Climate Change: An Example from Indian Farmers. Clim. Risk Manag. 2017, 16, 195–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jha, S.; Kaechele, H.; Lana, M.; Amjath-Babu, T.; Sieber, S. Exploring Farmers’ Perceptions of Agricultural Technologies: A Case Study from Tanzania. Sustainability 2020, 12, 998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Liu, H.; Luo, X. Understanding Farmers’ Perceptions and Behaviors towards Farmland Quality Change in Northeast China: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hair, J.F., Jr.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ringle, C.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM); Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2016; ISBN 1-4833-7743-1. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, X.; Zhang, P.; Wei, Y.; Li, Y.; Zhao, H. Measuring the Efficiency and Driving Factors of Urban Land Use Based on the DEA Method and the PLS-SEM Model—A Case Study of 35 Large and Medium-Sized Cities in China. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019, 50, 101646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garson, G.D. Partial Least Squares. Regression and Structural Equation Models; 2016 Edition; Statistical Associates Publishers: Asheboro, NC, USA, 2016; ISBN1 -10: 1626380392. ISBN2 -13: 978-1-62638-039-4. [Google Scholar]
- Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sinkovics, R.R. The Use of Partial Least Squares Path Modeling in International Marketing. In New Challenges to International Marketing; Emerald Group Publishing Limited: Bingley, UK, 2009; ISBN 1-84855-468-0. [Google Scholar]
- Chin, W.W.; Newsted, P.R. Structural Equation Modeling Analysis with Small Samples Using Partial Least Squares. Stat. Strateg. Small Sample Res. 1999, 1, 307–341. [Google Scholar]
- De Schutter, O. How Not to Think of Land-Grabbing: Three Critiques of Large-Scale Investments in Farmland. J. Peasant Stud. 2011, 38, 249–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bardy, R.; Drew, S.; Kennedy, T.F. Foreign Investment and Ethics: How to Contribute to Social Responsibility by Doing Business in Less-Developed Countries. J. Bus. Ethics 2012, 106, 267–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thomas, M.; Buckmaster, L. Paternalism in Social Policy: When Is It Justifiable? Research Paper no. 8 2010–11. 2010. Available online: https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2011-01/apo-nid23596.pd (accessed on 5 March 2021).
- Rawls, J. A Theory of Justice, 2nd ed.; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- The United Nations Organization. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 1948. Available online: https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights (accessed on 9 November 2020).
- Romanian Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Strategy for the Development of the Agri-Food Sector on Medium and Long Term. Horizon 2020–2030. 2015. Available online: https://www.madr.ro/docs/agricultura/strategia-agroalimentara-2020-2030.pdf (accessed on 10 January 2021).
- Popescu, A. Cercetari cu privire la rolul asocierii si cooperarii in cresterea eficientei valorificarii produselor agroalimentare [Research on the Role of Association and Cooperation to Increase the Efficiency of Agri-Food Products]. Ph.D. Thesis, Banat University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Timișoara, Timisoara, Romania, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Budy, F.C. Political Reactions from below to Sime Darby Land Grab: Generational Shift, Geographical Reach, Rural Influencers and Multi-Stakeholder Alliance. J. Rural Stud. 2020, 17, 193–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fafchamps, M. Solidarity Networks in Preindustrial Societies: Rational Peasants with a Moral Economy. Econ. Dev. Cult. Chang. 1992, 41, 147–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vermeir, I.; Verbeke, W. Sustainable Food Consumption: Exploring the Consumer “Attitude–Behavioral Intention” Gap. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2006, 19, 169–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Foley, J.A.; DeFries, R.; Asner, G.P.; Barford, C.; Bonan, G.; Carpenter, S.R.; Chapin, F.S.; Coe, M.T.; Daily, G.C.; Gibbs, H.K. Global Consequences of Land Use. Science 2005, 309, 570–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Verburg, P.H.; Van De Steeg, J.; Veldkamp, A.; Willemen, L. From Land Cover Change to Land Function Dynamics: A Major Challenge to Improve Land Characterization. J. Environ. Manag. 2009, 90, 1327–1335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, J. Rapid Urbanization in China: A Real Challenge to Soil Protection and Food Security. Catena 2007, 69, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Colin, J.-P. Securing Rural Land Transactions in Africa. An Ivorian Perspective. Land Use Policy 2013, 31, 430–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boyd, W. Just Price, Public Utility, and the Long History of Economic Regulation in America. Yale J. Reg. 2018, 35, 721. [Google Scholar]
- Werhane, P.H. Moral Imagination. Wiley Encycl. Manag. 2015, 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Solomon, R.C. It’s Good Business: Ethics and Free Enterprise for the New Millenium; Rowman & Littlefield: Maryland, MD, USA, 1997; ISBN 0-8476-8804-6. [Google Scholar]
Investigated Variables | Association with the Identified Land Grabbing Narratives | Questionnaire Question/Statement | Answer Options |
---|---|---|---|
Perceived gravity of foreign land grabbing over the next 10 years (independent variable) (LG gravity) | “Future overall gravity–land grabbing” narrative | How do you assess the gravity of foreign land grabbing in the next 10 years in Romania? | 1 = Not serious at all to 5 = Very high gravity |
Perceived effect of foreign land grabbing on the natural environment (independent variable) (LG impact on the nat environment) | “Environment depletion–land grabbing” narrative | The purchase of large agricultural land by foreigners will have negative consequences on the state of the natural environment (reverse coding). | 1 = Total disagreement to 5 = Total agreement |
Perceived effect of agricultural land conversion to urban land (independent variable) (Effect of land conversion agric to urban) | “Agricultural land loss to urban sprawl–land grabbing” narrative; “Food insecurity–land grabbing” narrative | It is good that cities expand and build on the agricultural land? | 1 = Total agreement to 5 = Total disagreement |
Influence of the land price offered by the potential foreign buyer (independent variable) (Influence of price received) | - | How much does the price influence your decision to sell your land to foreign investors? (variable not linked to any narrative) | 1 = Very little to 5 = Very much |
Perceived need for state intervention to limit foreign land grabbing phenomenon (independent variable) (Need for state intervention) | “Lack of collaborative governance–land grabbing” narrative | How big is the need for the Romanian state to take measures to limit the phenomenon of land grabbing? | 1 = Very small to 5 = Very high |
Importance of buyer attributes (independent variables, computed as a mean of three items: a. to c.) (Importance of buyer attributes) | “Questioning of business ethics–land grabbing” narrative; “Food insecurity–land grabbing” narrative; “Environment depletion–land grabbing” narrative | Show how important the following aspects related to the buyer are for you when you decide to sell your land: a. Future land destination | 1 = Not at all important to 5 = Very high importance |
“Xenophobia–land grabbing” narrative | b. Nationality: if the buyer is Romanian or a foreigner c. Age (demographic variable not linked to any narrative) | ||
Probability to join an association for farmers rights defense to limit the land grabbing phenomenon (Probability to join a farmers’ rights association) (independent variable) | “Weak solidarity among farmers” narrative | What is the probability that you join an association that defends farmers’ rights to limit the phenomenon of land grabbing? | 1 = Very low probability to 5 = Very high probability (reverse coded here compared to how it was presented to respondents) |
Probability of not selling the land to foreign investors, even if they offer a good price, to limit the land grabbing phenomenon (dependent variable) (Resistance to sell) | “Xenophobia–land grabbing” narrative | What is the probability that you do not sell your land to foreign investors, even if they offer you a good price, to limit the phenomenon of land grabbing? | 1 = Very low probability to 5 = Very high probability (reverse coded here compared to how it was presented to respondents) |
Variables | Categories | Percent |
---|---|---|
Gender | Female | 42.5 |
Male | 57.5 | |
Residence | Rural | 55.7 |
Urban | 44.3 | |
Family income | Max 1000 lei (200 Euro)/month | 2.4 |
1001–2000 lei (201–400 Euro/month | 19.6 | |
2001–4000 lei (401–800 Euro)/month | 37.3 | |
4001–6000 lei (801–1200 Euro)/month | 25.0 | |
Over 6001 lei (1201 Euro)/month | 15.7 | |
Education level | 8 years (Primary education) | 6.3 |
12 years (Secondary education) | 50.6 | |
Higher education | 43.1 | |
Age | Mean of age = 51 years, Range of age = 17 to 87 years |
Variables | N | Mean | Std. Deviation |
---|---|---|---|
Perceived gravity of foreign land grabbing gravity over the next 10 years (1 = Not serious at all; 5 = Very high gravity) | 332 | 4.25 | 0.92 |
Perceived effect of foreign land grabbing on the natural environment (negative effect was tested; 1 = Total disagreement; 5 = Total agreement) | 332 | 3.10 | 1.04 |
Perceived effect of agricultural land conversion to urban land (positive effect was tested; 1 = Total agreement; 5 = Total disagreement) | 332 | 3.49 | 0.95 |
Influence of the land price offered by the potential foreign buyer (1 = Very little; 5 = Very much) | 332 | 3.88 | 1.28 |
Perceived need for state intervention to limit foreign land grabbing phenomenon (1 = Very small; 5 = Very high) | 332 | 4.25 | 0.91 |
Importance of buyer attributes * (1 = Not at all important; 5 = Very high importance) | 332 | 2.92 | 0.78 |
Probability of joining an association that defends farmers’ rights to limit the land grabbing phenomenon (1 = Very low probability; 5 = Very high probability) | 332 | 2.70 | 1.22 |
Probability of not selling the land to foreign investors, even if they offer a good price, to limit the land grabbing phenomenon (1 = Very low probability; 5 = Very high probability) | 332 | 3.01 | 1.192 |
Formative Construct | Formative Indicators | Outer Weights (Outer Loading) | t-Value | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|---|
Importance of buyer attributes | Age | 0.196 | 2.267 | 0.024 |
Future land destination | 0.223 | 2.501 | 0.013 | |
Nationality | 0.849 | 14.456 | 0.000 |
Path From → To | Effect Type | Coefficients | T Statistics | p-Values |
---|---|---|---|---|
“Effect of land conversion agric to urban” → “Resistance to sell” | DIR | 0.144 | 2.67 | 0.008 |
“Importance of buyer attributes” → “Resistance to sell” | DIR | 0.135 | 2.204 | 0.028 |
“Influence of price received” → “Importance of buyer attributes” | DIR | −0.344 | 7.274 | 0.000 |
“Influence of price received” → “Resistance to sell” | DIR | −0.216 | 3.503 | 0.001 |
“Influence of price received” → “Importance of buyer attributes” → “Resistance to sell” | IND | −0.046 | 2.036 | 0.042 |
“Influence of price received” → “Resistance to sell” | TOT | −0.263 | 4.472 | 0.000 |
“LG gravity” → “Importance of buyer attributes” | DIR | 0.405 | 7.354 | 0.000 |
“LG gravity” → “Resistance to sell” | DIR | −0.007 | 0.119 | 0.906 |
“LG gravity” → “Need for state intervention” | DIR | 0.419 | 7.393 | 0.000 |
“LG gravity” → “Importance of buyer attributes” → “Resistance to sell” | IND | 0.055 | 2.155 | 0.032 |
“LG gravity” → “Need for state intervention” → “Resistance to sell” | IND | 0.044 | 1.890 | 0.059 |
“LG gravity” → “Resistance to sell” | TOT | 0.092 | 1.819 | 0.069 |
“LG impact on the nat environment” → “Resistance to sell” | DIR | 0.141 | 2.754 | 0.006 |
“Probability to join a farmers’ rights association” → “Resistance to sell” | DIR | 0.303 | 5.847 | 0.000 |
Probability to join a farmers’ rights association” → “Need for state intervention” | DIR | 0.114 | 2.428 | 0.016 |
“Probability to join a farmers’ rights association” → “Need for state intervention” → “Resistance to sell” | IND | 0.012 | 1.338 | 0.181 |
“Probability to join a farmers’ rights association” → “Resistance to sell” | TOT | 0.315 | 6.117 | 0.000 |
“Need for state intervention” → “Resistance to sell” | DIR | 0.105 | 2.042 | 0.042 |
Constructs | SSO | SSE | Q2 (=1 − SSE/SSO) | R2 | R2adj. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Importance of buyer attributes | 996 | 877.785 | 0.119 | 0.3 | 0.295 |
Resistance to sell | 332 | 237.494 | 0.285 | 0.332 | 0.317 |
State intervention | 332 | 267.149 | 0.195 | 0.207 | 0.202 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Petrescu-Mag, R.M.; Rastegari Kopaei, H.; Petrescu, D.C. What Drives Landowners to Resist Selling Their Land? Insights from Ethical Capitalism and Landowners’ Perceptions. Land 2021, 10, 312. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10030312
Petrescu-Mag RM, Rastegari Kopaei H, Petrescu DC. What Drives Landowners to Resist Selling Their Land? Insights from Ethical Capitalism and Landowners’ Perceptions. Land. 2021; 10(3):312. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10030312
Chicago/Turabian StylePetrescu-Mag, Ruxandra Malina, Hamid Rastegari Kopaei, and Dacinia Crina Petrescu. 2021. "What Drives Landowners to Resist Selling Their Land? Insights from Ethical Capitalism and Landowners’ Perceptions" Land 10, no. 3: 312. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10030312
APA StylePetrescu-Mag, R. M., Rastegari Kopaei, H., & Petrescu, D. C. (2021). What Drives Landowners to Resist Selling Their Land? Insights from Ethical Capitalism and Landowners’ Perceptions. Land, 10(3), 312. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10030312