See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/298894839

Family farm inheritance in Slavonia region, Croatia

Article  in  Agricultural Economics (AGRICECON) · January 2010

DOI: 10.17221/14/2010-AGRICECON

CITATIONS READS

6 75

2 authors:

Đurđica Žutinić Ivo Grgić

University of Zagreb University of Zagreb
34 PUBLICATIONS   37 CITATIONS    92 PUBLICATIONS   57 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Conference: 44. SIMPOZIJ AKTUALNI ZADACI MEHANIZACIJE POLJOPRIVREDE, At Opatija, Croatia View project

Diverzifikacija ruralne ekonomije i utjecaj na kvalitetu života u ruralnim područjima View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ivo Grgić on 09 May 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Family farm inheritance in Slavonia region, Croatia

Dědění rodinných farem v oblasti Slavonie v Chorvatsku

Đurđica ŽUTINIĆ, Ivo GRGIĆ

Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Faculty of Agriculture,

University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

Abstract: The aim of the study was to determine the chances of the Slavonian family farms for social reproduction in the
next generation and to determine attitudes of farmers towards some aspects of family farm inheritance and the possible
ways of preventing the division of land. The research was carried out on a sample of 202 family farms. The analysis showed
that the chances to remain as integral production units in the next generation are realistic for only 48% of family farms. The
traditional pattern of behavior is obvious with regard to inheritance and to postponing the transfer of management and
control of the farm resources. The majority of the Slavonian farmers find that it would be proper if the state were to intro-
duce special measures to regulate the integrity of the land and to offer subsidies and easements for the “entry” of the young
into the agriculture.

Key words: family farm, inheritance, successor, Slavonia, Croatia

Abstrakt: Cílem předkládané studie bylo vymezit možnosti rodinných farem ve Slavonii vzhledem k sociální reproduk-
ci v dalších generacích a vymezit postoje farmářů ve vztahu k některým aspektům dědění rodinných farem a možných
cest, jak přitom zabránit drobení půdy. Výzkum zahrnoval vzorek 202 rodinných farem. Analýza ukazuje, že pouze 48 %
rodinných farem má reálnou šanci zůstat integrálními produkčními jednotkami v další generaci. Ve vztahu k dědění je zde
zřejmé přetrvávání tradičního vzorce a odkládání převodu řízení a kontroly farmy a jejích zdrojů. Převážná část rodinných
farmářů ve Slavonii by považovala za vhodné, aby stát zavedl zvláštní opatření k regulaci integrity půdy a nabízel dotace
a další formy podpory usnadňující vstup mladé generace do zemědělství.

Klíčová slova: rodinná firma, dědický proces, dědictví, následník, Slavonie, Chorvatsko

In the mixed economic model of the rural Croatian Gazette 86/2002) defines the family farm as “an inde-
regions development (dispersed concept of ruris), an pendent economic and social unit based on ownership
important position belongs to the production poten- and/or exploitation of production resources and family
tial of agricultural sector because of different climate management in carrying out farming activities”. Thus,
conditions, relief and soil, which enable growing of a family farm (sometimes also referred to as peasant
numerous cultures 1 . The production structure of farm) differs from companies, trades and cooperatives
Croatian agriculture is dominated by family farms, registered for agricultural business.
highly heterogeneous regarding their size and produc- In 2009, the Farm Register had 190 672 entries,
tion: from natural to mixed and highly specialized of which 96% were family farms and 4% agricultural
production. The Agriculture Act, Article 2 (Official companies and cooperatives (Ministry of Agriculture,

1TheCroatian territory is divided into three natural and geographical regions: Pannonian and Peripannonian region,
mountainous region and Adriatic region.
Supported by the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports of the Republic of Croatia (Project ID: 178-1782223-2360
“Sociodemografska reprodukcija obiteljskih poljoprivrednih gospodarstva – Socio-demographic Reproduction of Fam-
ily Farms).

522 Agric. Econ. – Czech, 56, 2010 (11): 522–531

Fisheries and Rural Development, 2009)2. Of the total revitalization of rural population, “shutting down” of
number, 63.1% farms have up to 3 hectares of land, one a number of farms as production and economic units
third (33.4%) from 3 to 20 hectares, and only 3.6% are and the increase in farms with a negligible production
farms with 20 hectares and more of land. According volume. Thus, from 1969 to 1991, the number of fam-
to the above data, a full-time farm has 5.3 ha of land ily farms decreased from 615 (1969) to 534 thousand
in average. Half of all farms are commercial farms, (1991). Additionally, the average size of farm decreased
while the other half are farmers with a considerably from 2.8 hectares to 2.7 hectares.
smaller production volume which produce to cover The second circumstance was socio-cultural in
their needs and sell part of their production in the nature, related to the family farm inheritance. Before
market. Although, compared to Europe, Croatia is the World War II, a patrilineal system of inheritance
rather rich in agricultural land per capita (0.6 hectare or primogeniture, namely the custom that (most
per capita) an average land area used per 1 farm is commonly) the oldest son takes over the estate was a
only 2.9 hectares 3. The age structure of farmers is deeply rooted tradition on the territory of the today
another disadvantage for the Croatian agriculture. Croatia. A family farm functioned on a traditional
Almost 35% of family farm owners are older than 60 structure of family relations (paternalistic authority)
years, and they cultivate 2.8 ha of land in average. A as a comparatively self-sufficient and independent
more vital part of family agriculture comprises only unit within a greater social community where the
13.4% of family farms owned by farmers younger than positions, functions and roles of the family members
40 years who cultivate less than one forth (21.5%) of were strictly defined. The interwoven family and farm
the total agricultural land in use, which makes 7.4 ha interests were the guarantee of the farm stability
per farm in average. Such unfavourable structure and continuity. This traditional pattern remained
has a serious impact on the process of adjustment of “a concept of life” of rural families and farms until
the Croatian agriculture to the requirements of the the 1960s. Structural changes caused by the indus-
European integration and enhancement of its com- trial development, improvement in communications,
petitive capacities on the national and international education, etc. that affected the Croatian rural areas
level (Radinović and Žutinić 2007). disrupted the traditional structure and changed the
Historically, three circumstances have caused the rural model of social promotion, and consequently
present agricultural structure in Croatia. The first the attitude of the young towards agriculture as their
were the political and economic barriers imposed on profession (Dilić 1989: 13). Individualism in attitudes
family farms in the former socialist system, such as the and behaviour of the descendants strengthens and
enforced collectivization, the limited private ownership, they, having the status of the family “help”, demand
the maximum land holding 10 hectares introduced in to be paid and to participate in the farm manage-
1953, insisting on the so-called “socially-owned” agri- ment, which resulted in inter-generational tensions
cultural sector and, generally, the treatment of family (First 1981) 4. Leaving the estate and village was one
farm as a historical remnant. This prevented family of the forms of resolving the inter-generational con-
farms from adopting a business model based on the flicts, so most farms remained without their young
Western European tradition in management of family generations. Actually, it was not only the youngest,
farms. Without an economic basis and political support, but the complete offspring was leaving. According
small fragmented farms could not offer an adequate to the than inheritance law, after the death of the
social security to the farmers who were determined parents, the estates were equally divided among the
to educate their children for other professions. Such heirs (most of whom had already moved to the cities),
educated young persons were often leaving the farms which contributed to the systematic fragmentation
and the villages (Žutinić 1999). This resulted in the of estates and land ownership absenteeism.

2According to the 2003 Agricultural Census, Croatia had 448 532 farm households with 1.9 hectares of agricultural land
on average. Most of these households produce to cover their own demand, and they are not entered into the Farm
Register. The Farm Register was generated in 2003, and registration is mandatory for all the farmers who sell their
products it the market and apply for subsidies or other agricultural supports.
3Total surface area of agricultural land in Croatia is almost 2.7 million hectares, of which 67% (1.8 million hectares) is

privately and 33% (about 890 000 hectares) state owned. The farms entered into the Directory use about 1.3 million
hectares.
4 In addition to maximum land holding introduced in the former state, high taxes were used to limit trade in private

agricultural land. Further, farmers were given an opportunity to enter into the disabled and pension schemes only in
1980.

Agric. Econ. – Czech, 56, 2010 (11): 522–531 523

 The third circumstance emerged at the beginning heritance, and retirement, the decisions relating to
of the period of transition. Regardless of the fact that which are inseparable (Gasson and Errington 1993).
the Croatian independence gained in 1990 resulted Unlike an act of inheritance which follows after the
in bringing down of the family farm development retirement or death of the farm owner, the succession
barriers, such as the maximum land holding, in the and namely the transfer of management functions and
processes of transformation and privatization of the control of the use of farm resources is a longer
the state-owned farms (former combines and co- process carried out in several phases, which starts
operatives) 5, the farmers were deprived of the right when the potential heirs are still rather young. The
to participate in the distribution and the privileged planned succession and presence of an heir at the
purchase of land or shares, although they contrib- farm effects the development curve or advancement
uted to their growth and development through the of a family farm, which is not the case at the farms
so- called socialist cooperation. Thus, a chance was where it happens “spontaneously” or where it does
lost for land consolidation and a faster development not happen at all (Fenell 1981).
of a productive model of family farm 6. The study conducted by Kimhi and Lopez (1997)
Considering the Croatian agricultural structure of among Israeli farmers shows that the retirement plans
today, the agriculture is facing a new challenge – choos- are related with the demographic characteristics of
ing a method of family agriculture restructuring, namely the farmer and specific characteristics of the farm.
the increase of the number of farms with production Older, better educated and richer farmers plan to retire
sufficient to make them viable in the market and thus later. The study of the importance of the succession
prevent a further fragmentation of estates. This revives considerations for retirement plans of farmers leads
an issue of the family farm inheritance and the legisla- the authors to the conclusion that that retirement
tion that would encourage the attempts to avoid the and succession considerations in family farms are
division of agricultural land owned by them. not separable (Kimhi and Lopez 1997). On the basis
Family farm inheritance has long been studied as of a survey of 1650 Upper Austrian farm households,
a socio-economic phenomenon in numerous socio- Glauben et al. (2004) analyzed three aspects of suc-
logical, economic and related studies (Fennell 1981; cession: (a) the probability of family succession; (b)
Huston 1987; Symes 1990; Gasson and Errington 1993; the likelihood of having a successor designated; and
Gamble et al. 1995; Potter and Lobley 1996; Kaine et (c) the timing of succession. They determined that
al. 1997; Baker et al. 2001; Barclay et al. 2007; etc.). It the succession and having the successor designated is
is a very complex process affected by numerous fac- more probable in large and highly specialized farms,
tors differing considerably by their nature – from the that the number of family members living in the farm
objective socio-economic conditions in the society, has a considerable influence on the succession plans,
the local community or farm to the socio-cultural and and that the time of succession is postponed with an
psychological characteristics of the family (Dunemann increase in farmer’s age. There is a significant cor-
and Barrett 2004; Pardo-del-val 2009). relation between different aspects of succession, and
Survival of many family farms depends on the suc- the authors conclude that the decisions on family
cess of the inter-generational transfer (Weiss 1999; succession, the designation of a successor, as well as
Mishra et al. 2004), and the entry of the ‘next gen- the timing of succession are not separable. According
eration’ into agriculture determines the structure to Kaine et al. (1997), there are critical events in the
of the country’s economy and the total number of life of a farm family that affect the succession plan or
farmers and farm families (Gale 1994). Williams and cause its change. Such critical events could be the birth
Farrington underline that “the successional process of a child, the end of education of a child which starts
has become increasingly complex as the patterns of working in agriculture, the assumption of a large debt,
succession and inheritance continue to adapt to the unfavourable conditions for agricultural production,
changing economic and social conditions” (Williams the illness or death of a family member.
and Farrington 2006: 4). The process of planning succession and retirement
The inter-generational transfer of family farm is of farmers often does not include the potential suc-
a multilayered process that includes succession, in- cessors, although this matter affects their future. The

5Before privatization (until 1990), about 400 agricultural and industrial combinates had about 1.2 million hectares of
cultivated land (Šundalić 2002: 211).
6It should be stressed that change in political and economic system happened under the war circumstances, which made

the transition process considerably more difficult and slowed it down. It affected agricultural development and the
consequences are still present – about 19 600 hectares of agricultural land is still contaminated with landmines.

524 Agric. Econ. – Czech, 56, 2010 (11): 522–531

study conducted among the Australian farmers in 2002 is their general standing with regard to the possible
and 2003 shows that almost one third of older farmers measures for the prevention of fragmentation of land
had still not shared their plans with the successors, owned by the family farms? The aim of the study was
while almost all young persons expressed a desire to to determine the chances of family farms for social
get involved into or at least informed about the suc- reproduction in the next generation, and to determine
cession decisions (Gamble and Blunden 2004). if there are any differences in the patterns of inherit-
The patterns of inheritance and succession deter- ance between the full-time and part-time farms.
mine whether a farm will be transferred to a single or
shared among several successors. An equal treatment
of all children could cause the division of a family METHODOLOGY
farm. These, and the rights of the potential succes-
sors, are regulated differently by the law in different The study was carried out early in 2009, using the
countries, in order to prevent the fragmentation of questionnaire on a sample of family farms from the
family farms in the future. Generally, European coun- Slavonia region which stretches over the central and
tries prefer three types of farm transfer. The first type, Eastern part of Croatia. The Slavonia region is a
when the farm is transferred as a complete unit to a typical agricultural region with dominant arable land
single successor who has to compensate other heirs and, considering the prevalent Croatian conditions,
(e.g. in France), or such compensation is given by larger farms. The sample was not taken randomly,
the parents (e.g. in Denmark). The second type also and the basic criteria for the selection of farms were:
prefers the transfer of the estate to a single succes- (a) farm owner aged 45 and over, and (b) agriculture
sor, while others do not receive any or receive mini- as an important source of income and employment
mum compensation in money (e.g. The Netherlands, for the household members. The final sample encom-
Germany, Great Britain). The third type is practiced passed 202 family farms, of which 128 or 63.4% were
in the countries of Southern Europe (e.g. in Spain) full-time and 74 or 36.6% part-time farms.
where the inheritance is divided into equal or almost Socio-demographic data on household members
equal shares, which results into the fragmentation of and the main production characteristics of the farm
the estate (van der Veen et al. 2002). were collected from the head of the farm. A separate
Unlike the past, when the social reproduction of part of the survey included questions on the plans
family farms in Croatia was a topic studied by nu- regarding the transfer and inheritance of farms, and
merous researchers (Puljiz 1980; Brkić et al. 1983; a set of questions consisting of 10 statements on the
Brkić and Žutinić 1993), only one empirical study prospective of family farming in Croatia and the pos-
performed on a sample of 111 family farms in Istria sible solutions regarding the methods of the division
region (Ilak Peršurić 2003) was published during the of land. The agreement of the respondents with these
last fifteen years. The author determined in their study statements was measured using the Likert five-level
that over one forth of farms has no heir or the heir scale (5 – strongly agree to 1 – strongly disagree).
is a non-farmer who does not intend to get involved The data were processed using the standard statisti-
in agriculture, which could result in “shutting down” cal techniques for the analysis of frequency distribu-
of such farms as production and economic units in tion, percentages and means, and the significance of
the future. difference between the full-time and part-time farms
The research the results of which are partly pre- was valuated using the χ² test and C coefficient at the
sented in this paper is an integral part of the scientific level of significance P < 0.05.
research project “Sociodemografska reprodukcija
obiteljskih poljoprivrednih gospodarstva (Socio-de-
mographic Reproduction of Family Farms, ID: 178- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
1782223-2360) funded by the Ministry of Science,
Education and Sports of the Republic of Croatia. Characteristics of the respondents, families
Within the project, a field study was carried out of and farms
family farms in order to investigate into the forms
and possibilities of their social reproduction in the Most respondents were male (90.6%), since in
next generation. Croatia, they are traditionally farm operators and
Our intention was to consider two issues: first, legal owners of the land and other physical resources
have the Croatian farmers maintained the traditional at the farm. The women are farm operators in the
attitude towards inheritance of family farms (prefer- households where the husbands have died (8 cases)
ence for one heir, a male offspring) and, second, what or work off the farm (11 cases). A summary descrip-

Agric. Econ. – Czech, 56, 2010 (11): 522–531 525

Table 1. Basic family and farm characteristics

Full-time Part-time Total

Characteristics
(n = 128) (n = 74) (n = 202)
Family characteristic
Average age of farmer (respondent) 55.7 51.5 53.0
Education of farmer (respondent) (%)
51.5 25.7 40.1
basic school
45.4 62.2 53.5
secondary school
3.1 12.1 6.4
high school or university
Farm owners:
62.5 54.1 59.4
solo owner-man
6.2 – 4.0
solo owner-woman
31.3 45.9 36.6
owner in partnership with wife or husband
Average number of members per household 4.5 4.2 4.4
Average number of children per family 2.4 2.0 2.3
Number of sons per family 1.5 1.4 1.5
Number of daughters per family 1.6 1.4 1.5
Family type by child gender (%)
26.6 21.6 24.8
only son/s
14.8 24.3 18.3
only daughter/s
50.0 51.3 50.5
son/s and daughter/s
8.6 2.8 6.4
without children
Farm characteristics
Size of land owned by the family (%)
27.3 56.8 38.1
up to 5 ha
32.8 32.4 32.7
5.1–10 ha
22.7 6.8 16.8
10.1–20 ha
17.2 4.0 12.4
20 ha and more
Average farm size* (ha) 44.9 13.6 33.4
Main activity on the farm (%)
39.1 27.0 34.6
animal production
25.0 43.2 31.7
crop production
35.1 25.7 31.7
mixed crops and animal production
0.8 4.1 2.0
organic farming

*includes owned and leased agricultural land used

Source: Questionnaire Survey of Farm Inheritance – own research (2009)

tion of the basic socio-demographic characteristics more than 20 hectares of land (47.0%). The land area
of the respondents, their families and farms is given used by the farms ranges from 3 to 570 hectares.
in Table 1. The contingency analysis (χ² test) shows that most
The surveyed farms have more members than an socio-economic characteristics indicate no significant
average Croatian rural household (3.3 members). This differences between the full-time and part-time farms.
could be attributed to the fact that the farm families Statistically significant differences were noticed in the
generally have more children and the descendants level of education of the farm operators (χ² = 13.66,
commonly live together with the parents (cohabi- Cс = 0.26, P = 0.00), the size of agricultural land used
tation), which is true even for the young married (χ² = 48.31, Cс = 0.43, P = 0.00) and the prevalent
couples. Several generations quite often live together agricultural production (χ² = 10.75, Cс = 0.32, P =
in the same household 7. 0.01). In other words, the part-time farm operators
The surveyed farms use agricultural land areas which have a higher level of education than the full-time
are in average larger than it is common in Croatia, farm operators, the full-time farms cultivate, in aver-
so they are more relevant for the study. A large share age, considerably larger agricultural land areas, and
of farms (74.8%) takes the land under lease, and uses they are more oriented towards animal production

7Due to the economic conditions, the young, even the young married couples in Croatia frequently live with their par-
ents. A recent study on a representative sample of the young in Croatia shows that 76.6 % of the young aged 15–29
live with their parents (Ilišin and Radin 2002) .

526 Agric. Econ. – Czech, 56, 2010 (11): 522–531

Table 2. Patterns of the family farm inheritance (%)

Basic inheritance types Full-time (n = 128) Part-time (n = 74) Total (n = 202)

Type 1: Solo heir 49.2 44.6 47.5

Type 2: Several heirs 22.7 18.9 21.3

Type 3: No identified heir 28.1 36.5 31.2

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source: Questionnaire Survey of Farm Inheritance – own research (2009)

unlike the part-time farms, which are more focused several heirs, which might result in marginalization
on plant production. of a farm as the production unit. Almost one third
of farms have an uncertain situation regarding the
succession (at least for the time being), since the
Patterns of inheritance owners have not decided who will take over the estate
or there is no successor. Considering the basic types
Most respondents consider their involvement in of inheritance, it was determined that there are no
farming to be a continuation of the family tradition, statistically significant differences between the full-
63.4% took the farm over from their parents, 28.2% time and part-time farms (P > 0.05).
by marrying into a farm family, and 8.4% bought land A more detailed description of the inheritance types
and established their own farm. and the identified heirs is given in Table 3. The table
A large majority of families surveyed has one or clearly shows that in the situation when only one heir
more children (93.6%), which might but need not be is designated (Type 1); the heads of the farm prefer
a guarantee that the farm will survive in the future. it to be a male heir. Traditionally, these are generally
Earlier studies carried out in Croatia have shown that sons or, to a smaller degree, other male relatives in
there is frequently a gap between the subjective desires families without children or with female descendants
and expectations of farmers and the motivation of only. Generally, farm inheritance by females is rare in
their heirs to take over the farm and get involved in Croatia, and in our case, a daughter or daughters as
agriculture (Brkić and Žutinić 1993). Answers to two the only heirs were found only in households without
questions (“Which relative will inherit the farm?” and a male descendant. We have even recorded the cases
“Has a potential heir assumed an obligation to take at the farms with children of different sex where the
over the farm?”) enabled us to establish the forms/ heads of the farms preferred the division of a farm
types of farm inheritance (Table 2). From these data, among the sons only. This confirms that the traditional
it is concluded that 50% of full-time farms and 45% of attitude towards inheritance has been maintained as
part-time farms will remain integral production units a life philosophy of many farmers.
in the near future. In one fifth of the surveyed farms, We have also determined that the preference of one
the land and other property will be divided among heir is more frequent at the farms with larger land

Table 3. Family farm heirs (%)

Inheritance Full-time Part-time Total

Identified heir(s)
types (n = 128) (n = 74) (n = 202)
Type 1 son 41.4 33.8 38.6
daughter 4.7 8.1 5.9
another relative (nephew, son-in-law) 3.1 2.7 3.0
Type 2 sons in same shares 6.3 5.4 5.9
daughters in same shares 1.6 1.4 1.5
sons and daughters in same shares 14.8 12.1 13.9
Type 3 owner who has children but has not decided
21.1 35.1 26.2
who will inherit the farm
owner has no successor 7.0 1.4 5.0
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source: Questionnaire Survey of Farm Inheritance – own research (2009)

Agric. Econ. – Czech, 56, 2010 (11): 522–531 527

area, which complies with the findings of earlier stud- with a statement and the mean values by the observed
ies. Equal distribution of estate among the children, groups of farms are given in Table 4.
regardless of their sex, is more frequent at the farms The full-time and part-time farmers expressed the
operated by younger heads of the farms (45–55 years highest level of agreement with the statements v3.
of age). Also, most farmers that still have not chosen (State should regulate the integrity of family farm land
their successor although they have adult descendants by special measures) and v5. (State should encourage
belong to this age group. the young to “enter” the agriculture by the allocation
Planning of retirement, and the division of respon- of state-owned land and favourable loans). This is not
sibility (partnership) between the father (and farm strange since, at least for the time being, Croatia has
owner) and his heir is very rare among the Croatian a gap in legislation that would specifically regulate
farmers as was also confirmed by some international the integrity of agricultural land. Also, the measure
studies (Baker et al. 2001; Mishra et. al. 2003; Gamble referred to as the “support to entry of the young into
and Blunden 2004; Barclay et al. 2007). According the agriculture” has been declaratively determined
to the responses, 87.1% of respondents (i.e. 88.2% by the Agriculture Act as an instrument for the de-
of full-time and 85.1% of part-time farmers) have velopment of family farming. Regretfully, there are
neither a retirement plan nor a plan to transfer the no concrete activities and programs focusing on the
farm management function as long as they find them- young farmers and the young who want to work in
selves physically and psychically fit to carry on. This agriculture in general, with rare exceptions.
is also unfavourable for the selected heirs because A comparatively large share of the respondents
they lack the independence in the farm management. (77.3% full-time and 81.1% part-time farmers)
Consequently, the “successor effect” would be missing agrees or agrees in most part with the statement
which, if the succession is planned in advance, usually v1. (Agricultural land belonging to a family farm
results in a new capital investment and development should not be divided among the heirs, and the farm
of the farm (Fenell 1981). In a group of farms from should be taken over by a single successor), which
our study which identified a single successor (n = 96), somewhat disagrees with their expressed intention
all successors are of 18 years of age and more, even to keep the successor on the farm (see Table 2). The
to 50 years of age, and only 11.3% participate in the same was observed for the statement v6. (Farmers
decision-making process on the farm business and should plan to retire at an earlier age), particularly
investment on an equal standing. on the full-time farmer sample. Almost two thirds of
the full-time farmers (61.4%) expressed their agree-
ment with this statement, which does not correspond
Attitudes towards inheritance and family with their actual behaviour since most of them have
farming prospective not developed their retirement plan although their
average age is 56 years.
On the level of macro analysis, the inheritance of The distribution of level of agreement percentages
farms is related to the global socio-economic situation, for the statement v2. (It is better for a farm if the
including the level of development of labour market, successor were a male child) points to a persistent
the capital, the tax policy, the land and agricultural traditional preference of a male heir among our re-
policy, etc. Due to the prevailing circumstances, spondents, particularly when these are the heads of
family farming in Croatia has long been pushed to the full-time farms. Still, half of the full-time farm-
the margins of the society, which caused structural ers consider that the heirs should compensate their
disturbances in agriculture, abandoning of arable brothers and sisters (statement v.4), unlike the part-
land, fragmentation of land, etc., which affected the time farm operators who agree with such statement
development of the Croatian villages and agriculture in a smaller percentage (45.6%). A possible reason
in general. Agricultural economists consider small for such response might be the fact that the part-
and fragmented family farm land to be one of the time farms have smaller land areas (according to
main reasons that the Croatian agriculture lacks the available data 56.8% of such farms have up to
competitive capacities. 5 hectares of land).
We used the below set of questions/statements Although it is a common practice in the countries
to determine the attitudes of the Slavonian farmers with developed agriculture that the farmers get a
towards some aspects of the family farm inheritance professional aid for the succession planning, this is
and the possible ways of preventing the division of obviously not acceptable for most Slavonian farm-
land, and their general standing on the prospective ers. Only 36.7% heads of the full-time and 33.8% of
of family farming in Croatia. The level of agreement the part-time farms expressed their full or partial

528 Agric. Econ. – Czech, 56, 2010 (11): 522–531

Table 4. Intensity of acceptance of the attitudes on inheritance and the division of land

Full-time Part-time
level of agreement* level of agreement*
Statement P
(%) mean (%) mean
1+2 4+5 1+2 4+5
v1.
Agricultural land belonging to a family farm should
14.1 77.3 4.17 9.5 81.1 4.43 0.75
not be divided among the heirs, and the farm should
be taken over by a single successor
v2.
It is better for a farm if the successor were a male 25.8 55.5 3.57 37.8 43.3 3.01 0.03
child
v3.
State should regulate the integrity of family farm land 3.1 96.1 4.82 1.4 89.2 4.70 0.01
by special measures
v4.
28.9 51.6 3.41 19.1 46.5 3.45 0.03
Farm heir should compensate his brothers and sisters
v5.
State should encourage the young to “enter” the
2.3 95.3 4.77 1.4 91.7 4.68 0.34
agriculture by the allocation of state-owned land
and favourable loans
v6.
8.6 61.4 3.90 19.2 38.3 3.36 0.00
Farmers should plan to retire at earlier age
v7.
It would be best for a farmer without a successor
46.1 37.5 2.89 32.5 41.9 3.18 0.16
to give his estate/farm to the state in exchange
for a lifelong support
v8.
Farmers need a professional help in the succession 50.0 36.7 2.58 44.6 33.8 2.64 0.57
planning
v9.
The young in rural areas are not interested
50.0 23.8 2.61 46.6 26.0 2.75 0.88
in agriculture because the farmers have a poor
reputation in the society
v10.
There is a promising future for family farming 9.4 74.0 3.92 18.9 50.9 3.66 0.40
in Croatia

*1 = strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = neither agree nor disagree/do not know; 4 = agree; 5 = strongly agree

agreement with the statement v8. (Farmers need a CONCLUSION

professional help in succession planning). They are also
quite reserved about the possibility that the farmers A summary of the basic findings on possibilities
without successors leave their farm to the state in of social reproduction of family farms in Slavonia
exchange for a lifelong support (statement v7.). region and attitudes of the farmers towards inherit-
The full-time farmers are more optimistic than ance are as follows:
the part-time farmers about the future of agriculture The farms surveyed differ considerably from the
(statement v10.), but their disagreement with the Croatian average by their average size and used ag-
statement v9 that ‘the young in rural areas are not ricultural land (33.4 ha) and the average number of
interested in agriculture because the farmers have a household members.
poor reputation in society’ is almost equal. Chances to remain as integral production units in
The average value of the level of agreement for all the next generation (a single successor to the farm
offered statements shows some differences between who assumed the obligation to take over the estate)
the full-time and part-time farmers, but statistically are realistic for 50% of full-time and 45% of the part-
significant differences were determined only for the time farms, i.e. only 48% of all farms. The land and
statements v.2, v3. v4 and v6 (P > 0.05). other property of one fifth of the surveyed farms

Agric. Econ. – Czech, 56, 2010 (11): 522–531 529

(21.3%) will be divided among several heirs, which duction on peasant farms in the Zagreb sub-region).
will probably cause marginalization of such farms Sociologija sela, 31: 153–164.
with regard to the production. It should be expected Dilić E. (1989): Sociologijski aspekti ruralnog razvoja (Soci-
that 5% of farms will “shut down” because they have ological aspects of rural development). IDIZ, Zagreb.
no heir, and the succession for 26.2% of farms is Dunemann M., Barrett R. (2004): Family business and
uncertain since, although the heads of the farms are succession planning – A review of the literature. Family
53 years old in average, they have still not made a and Small Business Research Unit, Faculty of Business
decision on the successor. and Economics, Monash University, pp. 1-47. Available
The traditional pattern of behaviour is obvious with at http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/units/fsbru/fbsp-
regard to the inheritance, particularly among the heads fsbru-report.pdf (accessed 21.11.2009).
of the full-time farms. They prefer male heirs, and Fennell R. (1981): Farm succession in the European Com-
their agreement with the statement that “it is better munity. Sociologia Ruralis, 21: 19–41.
for a farm if the successor were a male child” is higher First R. (1981): Seoska porodica danas: kontinuitet ili
(55.5%). The traditional attitude is also common with promjene (Rural families today: continuity or change).
regard to postponing the transfer of the management IDIS, Zagreb.
functions and the control of the farm resources, since Gale H. Jr. (1994): Longitudinal analysis of farm size over
87.1% of farmers (88.2% of full-time and 85.1% of the farmer’s life cycle. Review of Agricultural Econom-
part-time farmers) have no retirement plans and they ics, 16: 113–123.
will be carrying on until their death. Gamble D., Blunden S., Kuhn-White L., Voyce M. (1995):
The majority of the Slavonian farmers find that it Transfer of the Family Farm Business in a Changing Rural
would be proper if the state were to introduce special Society. Rural Industries Research and Development Cor-
measures to regulate the integrity of the land and to poration, Research paper No. 95/8, Canberra, ACT.
offer subsidies and easements for the “entry” of the Gamble D., Blunden S. (2004): Talking Agribusiness; Plan-
young into the agriculture. Therefore, we are con- ning Farm Succession as a Family. Ground Cover 49.
vinced that the political discussions on the possible Available at http://www.grdc.com.au/growers/gc/gc49/
measures for a more successful transfer of family agribusiness.htm (accessed 16.09.2008).
farms to the next generation and the integrity of land Gasson R., Errington A. (1993): The Farm Family Business.
have to involve the farmers as well. CAB International, Wallingford.
The development concept of the Croatian agricul- Glauben T., Tietje H., Weiss C.R. (2004): Intergenera-
ture, which focuses on the family farm, asks for wisdom tional succession on family farms: evidence from Up-
and a visionary knowledge, and the comprehensive per Austria. Review of Economics of the Household,
empirical understanding of the possibilities of social 2: 443–462.
reproduction since the future of family farming de- Huston J. (1987): Fathers and sons: family farm, family
pends on that factor to a large degree. businesses and the farming industry. Sociology, 21:
215–229.
Ilak Peršurić A.S. (2003): Sociodemografska reprodukcija
REFERENCES obiteljskih gospodarstava Istarske županije (Socio-demo-
graphic reproduction of family farms in Istra country).
Baker J., Duffy M., Lamberti A. (2001): Farm succession in Sociologija sela, 41: 47-66.
Iowa. Iowa State University, USA. Available at http:// Ilišin V., Radin F. (2002): Mladi uoči trećeg milenija:
www.extension.iastate.edu/bfc/pubs/FarmSuccession. društveni kontekst i metodologija istraživanja (Young
pdf (accessed 11. 10. 2008). people on the eve of the third millennium: the social
Barcley E., Foskey R., Reeve I. (2007): Farm Succession and context and methodology). In: Ilišin V., Radin F. (eds.):
Inheritance: Comparing Australian and International Mladi uoči trećeg milenija. IDIZ, Zagreb.
Trends. Rural Industries Research and Development Kaine G.W., Crosby E.M., Stayner R.A. (1997): Succes-
Corporation, Canberra, ACT. sion and Iheritance on Australian Family Farms. TRDC
Brkić S., Lješević R., Tanić S., Žimbrek T. (1983): So- Publication No. 198, The rural development Centre,
cio-demografska i ekonomska obilježja individualnih University of New England, Armidale, NSW.
poljoprivrednih gospodarstava u općini Dugo Selo (So- Kimhi A., Lopez R. (1997): Retirement Planning and Suc-
cio-demographic and economic characteristics of family cession Considerations of Maryland Farmers. Evidence
farms in the Dugo Selo municipality). Glasnik poljo- from a Household Survey. In: 11 th Annual Conference
privredne proizvodnje, prerade i plasmana, 32: 12–21. of the European Society for Population Economics.
Brkić S., Žutinić Đ. (1993): Socijalna reprodukcija seljačkih Kimhi A., Lopez R. (1999): A note of farmers’ retirement
gospodarstava u Zagrebačkoj subregiji (Social repro- and succession considerations: Evidence from a house-

530 Agric. Econ. – Czech, 56, 2010 (11): 522–531

 hold survey. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 50: Symes D.G. (1990): Bridginig the generations: Succession
154–162. and iheritance in a changing world. Sociologia ruralis,
Mishra A.K., Jonson J.D., Morehart M.J. (2003): Retirement 30: 200–211.
and Succession Planning of Farm Households: Results Šundalić A. (2002): Evolucija seljačkog posjeda i njezin
from a National Survey. In: National Public Policy Educa- utjecaj na seoski okoliš (The evolution of rural estates
tion Committee, Salt Lake City. Available at http://www. and its impact on the rural environment). In: Štambuk
farmfoundation.org/news/articlefiles/85-Mishrapaper10- M., Rogić I., Mišetić A. (eds.): Prostor iza: Kako mod-
1-03_Version3.pdf (accessed 10.9. 2009). ernizacija mijenja hrvatsko selo. Institut društvenih
Mishra A.K., El-Osta H.S., Jonson J.D. (2004): Succession znanosti Ivo Pilar, Zagreb, pp.197–220.
in Family Farm Business: Empirical Evidence from the van der Veen H.B., van Bommel K.H.M., Venema G.S.
U.S. Farm Sector. In: AAEA Meeting, Denver. Available (2002): Family farm transfer in Europe. A focus on the
at http://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea04/20114.html (ac- financial and fiscal facilities in six European coun-
cessed 1.09.2009). tries. Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI),
Official Gazete (2001). No. 86, Agriculture Act, Article 2. The Hague. p. 135. Available at http://www2.lei.wur.
Pardo-del-val M. (2009): Succession in family firms from a nl/publicaties/PDF/2002/6xxx/60204.pdf (accessed
multistaged perspective. International Entrepreneurship 15.12 2008).
and Management Journal, 5:165–179. Weiss C.R. (1999): Farm growth and survival: econometric
Potter C., Lobley M. (1996): Unbroken threads? Succession evidence from individual farms in Upper Austria. Ameri-
and its effects on family farms in Britain. Sociologia can Journal of Agricultural Economics, 81: 103–116.
Ruralis, 36: 286–306. Williams F., Farrington J. (2006): Succession and the Fu-
Puljiz V. (1980): Socijalna reprodukcija mješovitih doma- ture of Farming: Problem or Perception? In: The Rural
ćinstava (Social reproduction of part-time farms). In: Citizen: Governance, Culture and Wellbeing in the 21 st
Puljiz V. (eds.): Mješovita domaćinstva i seljaci-radnici Century. University of Plymouth. Available at http://
u Jugoslaviji. IDIS, Zagreb. www.ruralfuturesconference.org/2006/Williams.pdf
Radinović S., Žutinić Đ. (2007): Može li Hrvatska imati (accession 10.9.2009).
konkurentnu obiteljsku poljoprivredu? Prilog istraživanju Žutinić D. (1999): Aspirations of the pupils and the students
agrarne strukture (Can Croatia have competitive fam- of agricultural schools and faculties towards family
ily farming? A contribution to the research of agrarin farming in Croatia. Scientificus, 64: 21–32.
structure). Društvena istraživanja, 87–88: 175–197.
Arrived on 12th February 2010

Contact address:

Ivo Grgić, Deparment of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture,
Svetošimunska 25, HR – 10 000 Zagreb, Croatia
e-mail: [email protected]

Agric. Econ. – Czech, 56, 2010 (11): 522–531 531

View publication stats