Comparative Analysis of Agricultural Credit System and Organization in Selected Countries

Abstract

Abstract:The agricultural sector has been a key economic force in all countries, developed and developing alike. To assist farmers with their financing needs, countries have established different agricultural credit systems and organizations depending on their overall needs, goals, and historical contextual background. Such structural considerations as the aggregate size of farm lands, diversity in production systems, and farmers' needs and wants have played an important role in shaping the evolution of agricultural credit organizations around the world. In this study, the agricultural credit systems in select developed and developing countries which offer a mix of very advanced, intermediate, and evolving systems are compared. This research aims to identify key difference of agricultural credit systems with regards to the main actors involved (governmental/private banks, credit cooperative, etc.), application processes, terms and conditions, types, and priorities. The study identifies several agricultural credit systems which reflect countries' political, economic and structural properties.

Political debates and agricultural policies: Discourse coalitions behind the creation of Brazil’s Pronaf

“…References Goal 1: increasing farm incomes / rural salaries Delgado, 2010;Guyomard et al, 2004 Goal 2: increasing productivity Fuglie et al, 2012;Gasques et al, 2012;Pretty et al, 2010 Goal 3: stimulating technological innovation De Souza Filho et al, 1999;Vicente and Vosti, 1995; Vieira Filho and de Silveira, 2012 Target 1: profit-oriented (vs. subsistence farmers) Delgado, 2010;Diaz Osorio, 2007;Hazell et al, 2007 Target 2: family farmers (vs. juridical persons) Delgado, 2010;Diaz Osorio, 2007;Grisa and Schneider, 2014;Hazell et al, 2007 Target 3: specific productions (vs. single farm payment) Helfand, 2001;Helfand and de Rezende, 2004 Target 4: small farms (vs. large farms) Castro, 2010;Helfand, 2001;Wolford, 2005 Target 5: export productions (vs. self-consumption goods) Delgado, 2010;Grisa and Schneider, 2014;Helfand, 2001 Instrument 1: financial sustainability of the credit programme Bittencourt et al, 2005;Grisa and Schneider, 2014;Kumar, 2005 Instrument 2: tax concessions for commercialization Aksoy and Beghin, 2005;Schiff and Valdés, 1992 Instrument 3: fair access to land (property rights), even by means of expropriation Dethier and Effenberger, 2012;Norder, 2014;Ondetti, 2016 Instrument 4: reduction of the power of informal financial intermediaries Braverman and Guasch, 1986;Gagliardi, 2008 Instrument 5: monitoring for financing continuity Gunes and Movassaghi, 2017;Westercamp et al, 2015 Instrument 6: linking...…”

Organic Certification: A Case Study of Organic Valley, Nepal

“…There are two different processes of organic certification one is called Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS) and another is Internal Control System (ICS) prevailing in most of the organic farm. As Countries' political, economic and structural properties are important for agricultural credit systems [14] similarly organic certification system and procedure may vary from place to place.…”