Countries do not present data on distribution of land size classes in a comparable manner or according to international standard classifications. This prompted the need to reclassify this data in classes which are comparable with other countries’ data. When comparisons among different countries are performed one critical problem is that the classification criteria differ from one country to another. It is then necessary to re-classify the data according to some uniform pattern.
What is the underlying distribution of agricultural holdings and their area by size? Is there any model which can fit properly to the observed data? this is the aspect your team will have to research and develop for your report. In 1984, FAO adopted a statistical technique to analyse distribution of holdings and area of WCA 1970 data and it was discovered that in situation where we have left skewed data, log-normal distribution is a good candidate to model the underlying information. From the analysis of the data on number and area of holdings for about 70 countries participating in the 1970 WCA, it was concluded that the log-normal hypothesis appear to be satisfactory for the distribution of number of holdings and area by land size classes. Therefore, the log-normal distribution was adopted henceforth to model the data. Please you can research more on log-normal distribution to grasp the concept very well.
| landsizeclasses | Holdings | Area |
|---|---|---|
| Total holdings with land | 200613 | 325810 |
| Less than 1 ha | 151929 | 47712 |
| 1-5 ha | 43731 | 86011 |
| 5-10 ha | 2922 | 19721 |
| 10-25 ha | 1283 | 19166 |
| 25-50 ha | 338 | 11896 |
| 50-100 ha | 170 | 11742 |
| 100-200 ha | 100 | 13707 |
| 200 ha and over | 140 | 115854 |
As you can see on the above, country’s distribution of holdings and area by land size classes is different from FAO’s recommendation in the WCA programme (see below). To reclassify this data, it is important to estimate how many holdings are in the classes 1-5 ha, 10-25 ha etc., according to FAO’s standard classes. That’s, we need to estimate the values for the land size classes 1-2 ha, 2-3 ha, 3-4 ha, 4-5 ha, 10-20 ha, and 20-50 ha using log-normal distribution model.
| FAO’s standard land size lasses |
|---|
| 0 - 1 ha |
| 1 - 2 ha |
| 2 - 3 ha |
| 3 - 4 ha |
| 4 - 5 ha |
| 5 - 10 ha |
| 10 - 20 ha |
| 20 - 50 ha |
| 50 - 100 ha |
| 100 - 200 ha |
| 200 - 500 ha |
| 500 - 1000 ha |
| 1000 - 2500 ha |
| 2500 ha and over |
999999 represents an infinite number which is usually classified in the last group of the classes (2500 ha and over).
For the purpose of this report, FAO and country’s upper land size classes are defined as c_i and d_i respectively. It is possible to call these classes directly into the interpolation function that was created for this activity. For clarity sake, they are listed below.
c_i <- c(1,2,3,4,5,10,20,50,100,200,500)
d_i <- c(0,1,5,10,25,50,100,200,500)
n_i <- c(151929, 43731, 2922,1283,338,170, 100,140)
#create a function called Interpolation
Interpolation <- function(d_i,n_i,c_i){
#calculate the mean and standard deviation by using the meanlog and sdlog respectively.
mean=mean(log(d_i[-1],2.718))
stdev=sd(log(d_i[-1],2.718)*sqrt((length(d_i)-2)/(length(d_i)-1)))
#sort the unique classes in the country and fao's land size classes
d_i.c_i=sort(unique(c(d_i,c_i)))
n_int=rep(0,length(d_i.c_i)-1)
j=1
#loop through the sorted data by distributing the values appling lognormality using the plnorm function and the calculated stdev and mean
for (int in 1:(length(d_i)-1)){
lim_inf=d_i[int]
lim_sup=d_i[int+1]
number_in=sum(c_i<lim_sup & c_i>lim_inf)
limits=c(lim_inf,c_i[which(c_i<lim_sup & c_i>lim_inf)],lim_sup)
for (k in 1:(length(limits)-1)){
n_int[j]=(plnorm(limits[k+1],mean,stdev)-plnorm(limits[k],mean,stdev))/
(plnorm(lim_sup,mean,stdev)-plnorm(lim_inf,mean,stdev))*n_i[int]
j=j+1
}
}
cbind(d_i.c_i[-1],n_int)
interval=rep(0,length(d_i.c_i)-1)
for (new_int in 1:length(c_i)){
temp=c_i[new_int]
for (i in 1:length(interval)){
if (interval[i]==0 & d_i.c_i[i+1]<=temp) interval[i]=new_int
}
}
total=data.frame(d_i.c_i[-1],n_int,interval)
output <- data.frame(tapply(total$n_int,total$interval,sum))
#combine the output with Fao standard land size classes and mutate next column that would indicate if a land size class is interpolated or not
total2 <- cbind(output,c_i) %>%
mutate(status=if_else(tapply.total.n_int..total.interval..sum. %in% n_i, "", "Interpolated" ))
}
| Standard classes | Value | Status | Unit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Holdings with land size 0-<1 | 151929 | No | |
| Holdings with land size 1-<2 | 13033 | Interpolated | No |
| Holdings with land size 2-<3 | 11485 | Interpolated | No |
| Holdings with land size 3-<4 | 10148 | Interpolated | No |
| Holdings with land size 4-<5 | 9065 | Interpolated | No |
| Holdings with land size 5-<10 | 2922 | No | |
| Holdings with land size 10-<20 | 954 | Interpolated | No |
| Holdings with land size 20-<50 | 667 | Interpolated | No |
| Holdings with land size 50-<100 | 170 | No | |
| Holdings with land size 100-<200 | 100 | No | |
| Holdings with land size 200-<500 | 140 | No |
As you can see, we have succeeded in interpolating the landsize classes provided of jamaica using FAO’s standard landsize classes. This makes the comparability of this land size classes of Jamaica with other countries easy using this standard classes recommended by FAO.