«Dissertation Zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Doctor rerum agriculturarum (Dr. rer. agr) eingereicht an der Landwirtschaftlich-Gärtnerischen ...»
In this theory, the important variable is the conflict between the shareholders and the cases will be defined in Table 3.4.
Together with land distribution, land-use change lies at the base of conflicts and land degradation. Hence, conflicts on the basis of land-use change are another important variable in this theory.
The relation between land degradation LD and property rights is dependent on three different variables: land being distributed between shareholders denoted by Ldis, land being transferred between shareholders and other persons ‘LT’, and land distribution conflicts arising between shareholders ‘Cdis’.
The first step explains the effects of property rights on the land degradation. For this purpose, the study will use three variables, viz., land distribution, land transfer, and conflicts attributable to land distribution, as independent variables and will regress all of them to land degradation as in Equation 3.1.
L D = f ( L dis, L T, C dis ) (3.1) To establish the hypothesis, a negative trend of these two ‘Ldis’ and ‘LT’ and a positive impact of the third ‘Cdis’ are required. These trends will explain the theoretical concept of increasing land degradation because of the improper implementation of land property rights of land distribution. If these laws are not appropriately executed, more conflicts will be generated and cause the occurrence of more degraded land.
In the case of land-use change, the efficiency of the different available options will be calculated in this study, as will the effect of different conflicts related to land use on land degradation on order to establish the second hypothesis. For the effect of land-use conflicts on land degradation, another regression is presented in Equation 3.2.
L D = f ( C LUC ) (3.2) L D = f ( C use 1, C use 2 ) (3.3) L D = f ( C dis, C LUC ) (3.4) In this Equation, the ‘positive’ value of CLUC will establish that, with an increase in land-use conflicts, land degradation will also increase, whereas Cuse1 and Cuse2 indicate the response of respondent 1 and respondent 2 with regard to whether they will avail themselves of the option of land-use change or not. The positive signs of all these variables indicate that they all affect land degradation. The positive trend of these two variables supports the positive relationship between the land degradation and land-use conflicts. The last equation, Equation 3.3, will establish the second hypothesis, as inappropriate land distribution and improper decisions for land use will cause land degradation.
3.7 Summary and Conclusion Institutions and property rights affect the functioning of land and cause land degradation. In order to analyze such a situation in a particular region, three theories have been proposed and explained in this chapter: distributional theory of institutional change, the theory of property regime, and property right theory in case of conflicts. The framework has been built on the Institutions of Sustainability framework proposed by Hagedorn et al. (2002). In this framework, on the basis of the characteristics of the land and actors, some situations are created in the action arena, and as a result, some outputs are obtained as conflicts, which can be tested for the reason of land degradation.
On a theoretical analysis, this establishes that private land is more efficient with regard to ownership than any other type of ownership of land, and that land-use rights play an important role in the degradation of land. Similarly, distribution theory of institutional change is in favor of the distribution of land but is based on bargaining and some high costs. This theory concludes that if one party has a source of income other than the land, the members of that party are in a better position for bargaining and are the risk takers. They can set their own time preferences according to their resources and income. Because of the heir asymmetric power, they have a strong influence on the decisions regarding land distributions, causing land-use conflicts.
The property right theory applied to conflicts explains the situation of land degradation attribuTable to the land distribution and land-use conflicts. There are increased chances of land degradation because of land distribution resulting in family conflicts and land-use conflicts. To the best of my knowledge, no work has been done at the level of family conflicts with regard to land distribution and land-use change causing land degradation. This study will provide information to fill this gap by collecting data from the selected regions.
4 Methodology and Descriptive Case Study Analysis
4.1 Introduction For the analysis of the relationship between land degradation and property rights, a case study approach was followed, and the case regions were selected through published documents of the monthly statistical bulletin of Pakistan, February 2008, and the soil survey of Institute of Soil Fertility, Lahore. Three main regions were selected with different levels of land degradation among the twenty one villages (seven villages in each region). These villages were randomly selected on the basis of their distance from the grand trunk road and link roads among the large cities. Later, one village had to be eliminated from the study because of a disturbed law-and-order situation attribuTable to one family conflict regarding land distribution. Data for three main variables, viz., (1) intergenerational land distributional conflicts, (2) conflicts regarding land transfer to the actual landowners, and (3) land-use change conflicts, for the empirical investigation of land degradation was collected from these three regions. The field study was conducted over a period of three months, and during the selection of regions and villages, officials and experts in various research institutes and government offices were also visited for the collection of documents related to the study.
Once the problems of the areas had been explored, detailed interviews of the landowners were conducted. For this investigation, a case study approach was followed, and after group discussions, a household survey was conducted for one hundred and fifty households, which were selected through stratified random sampling. Each stratum was designated as affected land because of degradation.
This chapter is arranged as follows: First, I link the theory discussed in the previous chapter to the empirical data as a research strategy in Section 4.2. In Section 4.3, I explain why I have used a case study approach for this study, and research process and its different stages are explained in the next Section 4.4. The various sources of data collection are given in Section 4.5, and triangulation is explained in Section 4.6. The background of the case study site is given in Section 4.7, and procedures for the selection of cases and villages are detailed in Section 4.8. Section 4.9 interprets the descriptive analysis of the cases, and Section 4.10 explains the selection of variables for the study. Finally, a brief summary of the Chapter is given in Section 4.11.
4.2 Research Strategy
Increasing scholarly interest in research can be utilized to explain various problems; research is a diverse phenomenon and cannot be restricted to a single pattern. Scholars have to approach problems in various ways, to set diverse questions for the collection of data, and to apply different theories to explore the solution to their problem; only then are they able to contribute to useful research. This linkage of data collection and theories for empirical analysis serves as a research strategy (Van de Ven 1992: 169, Bryman 2001: 8).
Before I present a further explanation of the research strategy used in this study, my intentions are to refer to some broad methods of reasoning, namely the deductive and inductive approach. Deductive thinking works from the general to the specific and starts from a general theory where we draw up our hypotheses. These hypotheses are to be tested during the research procedure, and then observations are collected to address the hypotheses, which may or may not be accepted. In case of the deductive approach, the researcher’s views about theory are not final, and often he changes his views as the analysis proceeds, so that finally theories may or may not be confirmed (William 2006: 19, Bryman 2001: 9).
In the case of inductive thinking, the direction is the reverse, i.e., from specific observations to generalizations. From such specific observations, we can infer patterns, and on the bases of these patterns, some tentative hypotheses are formulated that can be explored. On the results of these hypotheses, a final conclusion or theory can be drawn up. Sometimes, data is not sufficient for the testing of hypotheses, and so researchers need to collect more observations. This is a back and forth procedure and is known as an iterative method (William 2006: 19, Bryman 2001: 10). Some researchers use both inductive and deductive approaches in their research (ibid). I have also used a combination of these two research approaches. The deductive approach departs from the general development of a preposition to establish principles in the study process, and inductive reasoning has been compared for different observed values between three regions.
Working with the theoretical prepositions, drawn up on the basis of the theoretical background described in previous chapter, it is necessary to make clear which empirical research approach will be used to answer the questions: qualitative or quantitative. For the study of institutions, the qualitative approach plays a large role (Furubotn and Richter 2005).
According to Creswell (1997), qualitative research is a process of inquiry with the goal of understanding a social or human problem from multiple perspectives; conducted in a natural setting with an objective of building a complex and holistic picture of the phenomenon of interest, qualitative research gives an in-depth understanding of human behavior, with close emphasis on people's words, actions, and records. These methodologies are designed to help the researcher with the perspective of target audience members through immersion in a culture or situation and direct interaction with the people under study. According to this technique, theories should be produced from observations and should be generated by the inductive and deductive way of interpretation. Hypotheses are generated during data collection and analysis, and measurement tends to be subjective. In the qualitative paradigm, the researcher becomes the instrument of data collection, and results may vary greatly depending upon who conducts the research (Neumann 1997: 14, Miles and Huberman 1994: 5). Whereas a quantitative paradigm is measured through objective facts derived through theoretical conception and independent of the researcher, they are supposed to control for bias. The aim of this approach is to formulate a valid theory (Stake 1995: 37, Welman and Kurger 2001: 69). The discussion above makes it clear that the qualitative paradigm is based on basic prepositions, created from the theories as in the present study.
Proceeding from the above search strategies, further steps for investigation provide an action plan that include questions, prepositions, and units of analysis (the actual source of information) (Yin 2003: 21). This action plan helps the researcher to obtain empirical results, and in order to understand this action plan, it is important to build a conceptual framework that explains the relationship among the main aspects to be studied, e.g., theory, variables, and empirical findings (Miles and Huberman 1994: 18).
Table 4.1 illustrates the building of the conceptual framework for this study based on the relevant theories and hypothesis derived from these theoretical backgrounds and preliminary
results that explain the scope of the study. In this investigation, two theories are applied:
distributional theory of institutional change and the theory of institutional change in case of conflicts. One hypothesis from each theory is derived, and the test of this hypothesis provides some results to improve the understanding of the case, whereas the final findings might establish whether the new theory is acceptable or not.