Analysis of the Response of Small and Medium Farmers Incentives for Investment in Water Saving

Jamel eddine MKADMI^1,

¹Higher Institute of Administration of Gafsa, Street of Houssine Ben Kaddour Sidi Ahmed Zarrouk, Gafsa, Tunisia

Cite this paper:
Jamel eddine MKADMI. Analysis of the Response of Small and Medium Farmers Incentives for Investment in Water Saving. International Journal of Econometrics and Financial Management. 2014; 2(1):28-33. doi: 10.12691/ijefm-2-1-4

Abstract

The review of current water balance of Tunisia as a result of increasing demand and a stagnant supply reveals a situation of water stress, an endowment of nearly 450m³/an/habitant. The irrigated sector, the largest consumer of this resource (80%) would be the first affected by this situation. To reduce the effects of water scarcity on irrigated agriculture, the government has designed and implemented since 1995 a national program of water conservation. Significant positive incentives have been decided to encourage farmers to adopt new irrigation techniques offered by this program. It is clear that despite the importance of subsidies for investment in water-saving equipment (60% of the amount invested), the equipment rate remained below the expected objectives. The present work aims to define a methodological approach and test to explain the slow growth of water-saving program and analyzing adoption decisions of the proposed techniques by small and medium farmers. The data used to estimate the model specified is collected by survey of 40 small and medium farmers belonging to a private irrigated area Abida Kairouan Governorate. The results show that the effects of eliminating the interest subsidy is higher than the subsidy rate of capital. So the reaction of small and medium farmers is slow vis-à-vis technological change, and must be supplemented by other types of interventions. Thus, the instrument implemented is not effective. The remainder of paper is organized as follows: In the first section, we will present the general framework and then the specific context and the background information in order to introduce the problem and the research methodology. The second section will develop the background literature of our work. In the third section, we will discuss the various results of the work. Finally, the last section talks about the findings and to remember the different political implications of this research.

Keywords:
irrigated agriculture water saving private investment agricultural policies investment incentives

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Arcelus F.J., Mitra D. et Srinivasan G., (2005), On the incidence of deferred taxes, intangibles and non-linearities in the relationship between Tobin’s q and ROI, Journal of Economics and Business, 57, pp. 165-185.
[2]	Auerbach A. J. (1983), Taxation, corporate financial policy and the cost of capital, Journal of Economic Literature, 21, pp.905-940.
[3]	Blejer, M.I. and Khan, M.S. (1984), Government policy and private investment in developing countries, FMI, Staff papers, Vol. 31, N° 2.
[4]	Borrego C. A. et Bentolila S., (1994), Investment and q in Spanish manufacturing firms, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, vol 56, n°1, pp. 49-65.
[5]	Chirinko R. S., (2000), Investment tax credits, CESifo Working Paper Series n°243.
[6]	Crépon B. et Gianella C., (2001), Fiscalité et coût d’usage du capital: incidences sur l’investissement, l’activité et l’emploi, Economie et Statistique, n°341-342, pp. 107-12
[7]	Cummins J. et Hassett K., (1992), The effects of taxation on investment: new evidence from firm level panel data, National Tax Journal, 45, pp. 243-252.
[8]	Cummins J. G., Hassett K. A. et Hubbard. R. G., (1995), Tax reforms and investment: a cross-country comparison, NBER Working paper, n° 5232.
[9]	Feenberg D. R. et Poterba J., (2004), The alternative minimum tax effective marginal tax rates, National Tax Journal, vol 57, n°2, pp.407-427.
[10]	Gale W. G. et Orszag P. R., (2005), Deficits, interest rates, and the user cost of capital: a reconsideration of the effects of tax policy on investment, National Tax Journal, vol 58, n°3, pp.409-426.
[11]	Graham J. R., (1996a), Debt and the marginal tax rate, Journal of Financial Economics, 41, pp. 41-73.
[12]	Graham J. R., (1999), Do personal taxes affect corporate financing decisions?, Journal of Public Economics, 73, pp. 147-185.
[13]	Graham, J. R., Lemmon M. L. et Schallheim J. S., (1998), Debt, leases, taxes, and the endogeneity of corporate tax status, Journal of Finance, vol 53, n°1, pp. 131-161.
[14]	Hassett K.A. et Hubbard R.G., (1998), Tax policy and investment, NBER Working Paper, n°5683.
[15]	Investment Incentives Code. (2004).
[16]	Johnston, J. (1984), Econometric Methods, International student edition, third edition.
[17]	Lyon A. B., (1990), Investment incentives under the alternative minimum tax, National Tax Journal, vol XLIII, n°4, pp.451-465.
[18]	Mackie III J. B., (2002), Unfinished business of the 1986 tax reform act: an effective tax rate analysis of current issues in the taxation of capital income, National Tax Journal, vol 55, n°2, pp.293-337.
[19]	Malinvaud, E. (1970) ‘May - we measure changes in the user cost of productive capital’, Journal of Economics and Statistics, N°22, avril.
[20]	Malinvaud, E. (1983). Statistical methods of econometrics, Bordas, Wiley edition.
[21]	Mayer C. P., (1986), Corporation tax, finance and the cost of capital, Review of Economics Studies, 53, pp. 93-112.
[22]	Mckenzie K. J. et Thompson A. J., (1997), Taxes, the cost of capital and investment: a comparison of Canada and the United States, Technical Committee on Business Taxation, Working paper n°97-3.
[23]	Merguisie project, phase 1. (2000) Integrated management of water in the Merguellil, SERT-IRD, Evaluation Summary Report, november.
[24]	Ministry of Agriculture. (2002) approaches model the prediction of water demand, interim report, DGRE & BECHTEL / SCET-Tunisia.
[25]	National Institute of Statistics, Statistical Yearbook (various years).
[26]	Omer T. et Terrando W., (1999), The effect of risk and tax differences on corporate and limited partnership capital structure, National Tax Journal, vol 52, n ° 4, pp.699-715.
[27]	Plesko G. A., (1999), An evaluation of alternative measures of corporate tax rates, SSRN Working Paper, July 1999.
[28]	Porcano T. M., (1986), Corporate tax rates: progressive, proportional, regressive, Journal of the American tax association, vol. 8, n°1, pp.17-31.
[29]	Scholes, M.S. et Wolfson. M.A., (1996), Fiscalité et stratégie d’entreprise: une approche globale, Traduit de l’américain par une équipe d’étudiants du CEREG de l’Université Paris-Dauphine sous la direction de Bertrand Jacquillat, 1ère édition, Presses Universitaires de France.
[30]	Schulman C.T., D.W.Thomas, K.F. Sellers et Kennedy D.B., (1996), Effects of tax integration and capital gains tax on corporate leverage, National Tax Journal, 49, pp. 31-54.
[31]	Shackelford D. A et Shevlin T., (2001), Empirical tax research in accounting, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31, pp. 321-387.
[32]	Shevlin T., (1990), Estimating corporate marginal tax rates with asymmetric tax treatment of gains and losses, The Journal of the American Taxation Association, 12, pp. 51-67.
[33]	Stiglitz J.E., (1983), Some aspects of the taxation of capital gains, Journal of Public Economics, 21, pp. 257-294.
[34]	Taggart R. A. Jr, (1991), Consistent valuation and cost of capital expressions with corporate and personal taxes, Financial Management, vol 20, pp. 8-20.
[35]	World Bank. (1994) Water Sector Review, Report No. 13054-TUN.
[36]	Zimmerman J. L., (1983), Taxes and firm size, Journal of Accounting and Economics, n°5, pp. 119-149.