Redistributive Land Reform: No April Rose. The Poverty of Berry and Cline and GKI on the Inverse Relationship

At the theoretical heart of the Griffin, Khan and Ickowitz (GKI) case for redistributive land reform (‘a many‐splendoured thing’) lies the highly influential study by Albert Berry and William Cline, Agrarian Structure and Productivity in Developing Countries, published for the ILO in 1979. That stud...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of agrarian change 2004-01, Vol.4 (1-2), p.45-72
1. Verfasser: Dyer, Graham
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 72
container_issue 1-2
container_start_page 45
container_title Journal of agrarian change
container_volume 4
creator Dyer, Graham
description At the theoretical heart of the Griffin, Khan and Ickowitz (GKI) case for redistributive land reform (‘a many‐splendoured thing’) lies the highly influential study by Albert Berry and William Cline, Agrarian Structure and Productivity in Developing Countries, published for the ILO in 1979. That study is regarded by many as the definitive work on the inverse relationship between farm size and land productivity. This paper subjects Berry and Cline, and by extension GKI, to critical scrutiny with respect to their policy implications, theoretical framework and empirical evidence. It also provides an alternative class‐theoretic approach to understanding the inverse relationship which undermines the use of the latter as the central rationale for redistributive land reform. If the approach of Berry and Cline can be shown to be theoretically, methodologically and empirically flawed, then perforce the argument and policy recommendations of GKI, who replicate that approach, can be shown to be fundamentally defective.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1471-0366.2004.00072.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60693374</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>60480629</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3532-d42683b54285d07384da73ba4454ab8347ab6b25ab9a47e42fcee0500547353b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkctu2zAQRYUgBZpH_4HIIjupIz5EKUAWrtA6bh0ncFNkSVDWCKEriy4pp_bfl7IDL7oKNxyA515geKKIpJCk4XxeJimXaQwsyxIKwBMAkDTZnkRnx4fT4yzyj9G590uAtBBpcRat5lgb3ztTbXrzimSqu5rMsbFudUNmlozWzrRkbj0m5OkFyaN9RdfviG3IF3RuRwa-bE2H-2n8Y0JsR_pATrpAegxlre6N7fyLWV9GHxrdevz0dl9Ev759fSrv4unDeFKOpvGCCUbjmtMsZ5XgNBc1SJbzWktWac4F11XOuNRVVlGhq0JziZw2C0QQAILLUFCxi-j60Lt29s8Gfa9Wxi-wbXWHduNVBlnBmOTvAHkOGS0CePUfuLQb14UlFAXOWSH2bfkBWjjrvcNGhd9babdTKajBllqqQYQapKjBltrbUtsQvT1E_5oWd-_Oqe8PozJMIR8f8kEmbo957X6rTDIp1PNsrKaz8uf8Hu4UZf8AyUSnng</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>204439574</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Redistributive Land Reform: No April Rose. The Poverty of Berry and Cline and GKI on the Inverse Relationship</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>Wiley Online Library (Online service)</source><creator>Dyer, Graham</creator><creatorcontrib>Dyer, Graham</creatorcontrib><description>At the theoretical heart of the Griffin, Khan and Ickowitz (GKI) case for redistributive land reform (‘a many‐splendoured thing’) lies the highly influential study by Albert Berry and William Cline, Agrarian Structure and Productivity in Developing Countries, published for the ILO in 1979. That study is regarded by many as the definitive work on the inverse relationship between farm size and land productivity. This paper subjects Berry and Cline, and by extension GKI, to critical scrutiny with respect to their policy implications, theoretical framework and empirical evidence. It also provides an alternative class‐theoretic approach to understanding the inverse relationship which undermines the use of the latter as the central rationale for redistributive land reform. If the approach of Berry and Cline can be shown to be theoretically, methodologically and empirically flawed, then perforce the argument and policy recommendations of GKI, who replicate that approach, can be shown to be fundamentally defective.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1471-0358</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-0366</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0366.2004.00072.x</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Agrarian Structures ; Agriculture ; class ; Distribution ; Farms ; Land economics ; Land Reform ; Productivity ; redistribution ; Social Class ; Social classes ; Studies</subject><ispartof>Journal of agrarian change, 2004-01, Vol.4 (1-2), p.45-72</ispartof><rights>Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Henry Bernstein and Terence J. Byres 2004.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3532-d42683b54285d07384da73ba4454ab8347ab6b25ab9a47e42fcee0500547353b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3532-d42683b54285d07384da73ba4454ab8347ab6b25ab9a47e42fcee0500547353b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1471-0366.2004.00072.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1471-0366.2004.00072.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,1412,27905,27906,33755,33756,45555,45556</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dyer, Graham</creatorcontrib><title>Redistributive Land Reform: No April Rose. The Poverty of Berry and Cline and GKI on the Inverse Relationship</title><title>Journal of agrarian change</title><description>At the theoretical heart of the Griffin, Khan and Ickowitz (GKI) case for redistributive land reform (‘a many‐splendoured thing’) lies the highly influential study by Albert Berry and William Cline, Agrarian Structure and Productivity in Developing Countries, published for the ILO in 1979. That study is regarded by many as the definitive work on the inverse relationship between farm size and land productivity. This paper subjects Berry and Cline, and by extension GKI, to critical scrutiny with respect to their policy implications, theoretical framework and empirical evidence. It also provides an alternative class‐theoretic approach to understanding the inverse relationship which undermines the use of the latter as the central rationale for redistributive land reform. If the approach of Berry and Cline can be shown to be theoretically, methodologically and empirically flawed, then perforce the argument and policy recommendations of GKI, who replicate that approach, can be shown to be fundamentally defective.</description><subject>Agrarian Structures</subject><subject>Agriculture</subject><subject>class</subject><subject>Distribution</subject><subject>Farms</subject><subject>Land economics</subject><subject>Land Reform</subject><subject>Productivity</subject><subject>redistribution</subject><subject>Social Class</subject><subject>Social classes</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>1471-0358</issn><issn>1471-0366</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkctu2zAQRYUgBZpH_4HIIjupIz5EKUAWrtA6bh0ncFNkSVDWCKEriy4pp_bfl7IDL7oKNxyA515geKKIpJCk4XxeJimXaQwsyxIKwBMAkDTZnkRnx4fT4yzyj9G590uAtBBpcRat5lgb3ztTbXrzimSqu5rMsbFudUNmlozWzrRkbj0m5OkFyaN9RdfviG3IF3RuRwa-bE2H-2n8Y0JsR_pATrpAegxlre6N7fyLWV9GHxrdevz0dl9Ev759fSrv4unDeFKOpvGCCUbjmtMsZ5XgNBc1SJbzWktWac4F11XOuNRVVlGhq0JziZw2C0QQAILLUFCxi-j60Lt29s8Gfa9Wxi-wbXWHduNVBlnBmOTvAHkOGS0CePUfuLQb14UlFAXOWSH2bfkBWjjrvcNGhd9babdTKajBllqqQYQapKjBltrbUtsQvT1E_5oWd-_Oqe8PozJMIR8f8kEmbo957X6rTDIp1PNsrKaz8uf8Hu4UZf8AyUSnng</recordid><startdate>200401</startdate><enddate>200401</enddate><creator>Dyer, Graham</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200401</creationdate><title>Redistributive Land Reform: No April Rose. The Poverty of Berry and Cline and GKI on the Inverse Relationship</title><author>Dyer, Graham</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3532-d42683b54285d07384da73ba4454ab8347ab6b25ab9a47e42fcee0500547353b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Agrarian Structures</topic><topic>Agriculture</topic><topic>class</topic><topic>Distribution</topic><topic>Farms</topic><topic>Land economics</topic><topic>Land Reform</topic><topic>Productivity</topic><topic>redistribution</topic><topic>Social Class</topic><topic>Social classes</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dyer, Graham</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Journal of agrarian change</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dyer, Graham</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Redistributive Land Reform: No April Rose. The Poverty of Berry and Cline and GKI on the Inverse Relationship</atitle><jtitle>Journal of agrarian change</jtitle><date>2004-01</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>4</volume><issue>1-2</issue><spage>45</spage><epage>72</epage><pages>45-72</pages><issn>1471-0358</issn><eissn>1471-0366</eissn><abstract>At the theoretical heart of the Griffin, Khan and Ickowitz (GKI) case for redistributive land reform (‘a many‐splendoured thing’) lies the highly influential study by Albert Berry and William Cline, Agrarian Structure and Productivity in Developing Countries, published for the ILO in 1979. That study is regarded by many as the definitive work on the inverse relationship between farm size and land productivity. This paper subjects Berry and Cline, and by extension GKI, to critical scrutiny with respect to their policy implications, theoretical framework and empirical evidence. It also provides an alternative class‐theoretic approach to understanding the inverse relationship which undermines the use of the latter as the central rationale for redistributive land reform. If the approach of Berry and Cline can be shown to be theoretically, methodologically and empirically flawed, then perforce the argument and policy recommendations of GKI, who replicate that approach, can be shown to be fundamentally defective.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1471-0366.2004.00072.x</doi><tpages>28</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1471-0358
ispartof Journal of agrarian change, 2004-01, Vol.4 (1-2), p.45-72
issn 1471-0358
1471-0366
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60693374
source Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Business Source Complete; Sociological Abstracts; Wiley Online Library (Online service)
subjects Agrarian Structures
Agriculture
class
Distribution
Farms
Land economics
Land Reform
Productivity
redistribution
Social Class
Social classes
Studies
title Redistributive Land Reform: No April Rose. The Poverty of Berry and Cline and GKI on the Inverse Relationship
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T13%3A51%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Redistributive%20Land%20Reform:%20No%20April%20Rose.%20The%20Poverty%20of%20Berry%20and%20Cline%20and%20GKI%20on%20the%20Inverse%20Relationship&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20agrarian%20change&rft.au=Dyer,%20Graham&rft.date=2004-01&rft.volume=4&rft.issue=1-2&rft.spage=45&rft.epage=72&rft.pages=45-72&rft.issn=1471-0358&rft.eissn=1471-0366&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1471-0366.2004.00072.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E60480629%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=204439574&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true