Author's note: Information for this paper was gathered during three trips to Egypt in 1979 and 1980, while I was working for the Agricultural Development Systems Project of the Ministry of Agriculture, University of California USAID. Neither the Project nor the sponsoring institutions bears the least responsibility for the views expressed here. I would like to thank Frank Child, Jim Fitch, Nicholas Hopkins, and Philip Martin for helpful comments on an earlier draft.

¹ Conversations with agricultural economists at Zagazig University; conversation with Abd arRahman Shazli, Agricultural Director, Behera Governorate.

² See, e.g., Izz, al-Din Kamil, Al-Zirayat al-'Aliyya (Cairo, 1976), passim;Google ScholarFathĪ, 'Abdel Fattāh, Al-Qariah al-Misriyya Bayn al-Islah wyal-Thawra, 1952–1970 (Cairo, 1974), pp. 170–184.Google Scholar

³ This information comes from an unpublished, untitled Arabic report prepared for the Office of the Undersecretary of Agriculture for Engineering Affairs. From the text it appears to have been done in 1979. 1 am indebted to Dr. Eng. A. M. al-Hossari, Undersecretary of Agriculture for Engineering Affairs, for showing me this report (hereafter al-Hossari's “Report”).

⁴ Izz al-Din, p. 124.

⁵ ibid., pp. 106–107.

⁶ U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperating with the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Egyptian Ministry of Agriculture, Egypt: Major Constraints to Increasing Agricultural Productivity, United States Department of Agriculture Foreign Agricultural Economic Report No. 120 (Washington, D.C., 1976), hereafter Constraints;Google Scholarel-Tobgy, H. A., Contemporary Egyptian Agriculture (2d ed.; Cairo, 1976).Google Scholar

⁷ Hanumantha Rao, C., “Farm Mechanization in a Labour-Abundant Economy,” Economic and Political Weekly, Annual No., pp. A-201–211, 02, 1972;Google ScholarRichard, H. Day and Singh, Inderjit, Economic Development as an Adaptive Process: The Green Revolution in the Indian Punjab (Cambridge, 1977).Google Scholar

⁸ James, B. Fitch, Ahmad, A. Goueli, and Mohammad, el-Gabely, “The Cropping System for Maize in Egypt,” paper presented to the Food and Agricultural Organization workshop on “Improved Farming Systems in the Nile Valley” Cairo, 05 8–14, 1979.Google Scholar

⁹ World Bank, Report on Egyptian Agriculture (Washington, D.C., 1978), p. 35.

¹⁰ El-Tobgy, , p. 135. This is, of course, a worldwide problem. As Day and Singh argue in their study of the Indian Punjab, “When animals provide the main source of farm power, greater attention must be paid to finding the ways and means of keeping this source cost effective, at least in the short run” (p. 177).Google Scholar

¹¹ Birsim precedes about 80 percent of the cotton crop.

¹² World Bank, “Arab Republic of Egypt: Agricultural Development Project (Minufiyya-Sohag); Staff Appraisal Report, 1977,” p. 40. Recent field research has found that birsim's return over variable costs is roughly 200 percent that of wheat, 800 percent that of rice, 255 percent that of maize, and 133 percent that of cotton. I am indebted to Dr. Gene Quenemeon of Montana State University for this information.Google Scholar

¹³ Bell, Clive and Zusman, Pinhas, “A Bargaining-Theoretic Approach to Crop-Sharing Contracts,” American Economic Review, 66 (09, 1976), pp. 578–588;Google ScholarRichards, Alan, “Land and Labor on Egyptian Cotton Farms, 1882–1940,” Agricultural History, 52, 4 (10, 1978), 503–518.Google Scholar

¹⁴ ERA 2000, Inc., Further Mechanization of Egyptian Agriculture (Gaithersburg, Md., 1979), pp. ix-9.Google Scholar

¹⁵ IBRD, 1977, A2, p. 11.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Al-Hossari's, “Report” places the gains at 33 percent, p. 10.Google Scholar

¹⁷ IBRD, 1977, pp. 13. Diesel fuel is also subsidized (see below, p. 417).Google Scholar

¹⁸ Garrett, Roger, “Impressions with Respect to Mechanization,” USAID mimeo, 1978.Google Scholar These numbers are cited repeatedly by students of Egyptian farm mechanization; they also appear, for example, in Izz, al-Din, p. 115,Google Scholar and al-Hossari's, “Report,” p. 12. They all appear to have the same source: a set of trials conducted at the Cairo University experimental farm.Google Scholar

¹⁹ ”Debate on Egyptian Agricultural Mechanization,” L'Egypte Contemporaine, 331 (01, 1968), 191–209 (in Arabic).Google Scholar

²⁰ IBRD, 1977; ERA 2000, incl. chaps. iv and x.Google Scholar

²¹ Binswanger, Hans, The Economics of Tractors in the Indian Sub-Continent. An Analytical Review (Hyderabad, 1978), p. 19.Google Scholar

²² IBRD, 1977, AI, p. 3.Google Scholar

²³ IBRD, “Arab Republic of Egypt: Agricultural Development Project (Minufiyya-Sohag), Staff Appraisal Report, 1978,” p. 16. Al-Hossari also recognizes this point (interview of March 1980, Cairo).Google Scholar

²⁴ A point recognized by Izz, al-Din, pp. 144 ff.Google Scholar

²⁵ Preliminary data from the Ford Foundation Farm Management Survey. I am indebted to James B. Fitch for this information.

²⁶ IBRD (Minufiyya-Sohag), 1978, p. 38.Google Scholar

²⁷ ERA 2000, Inc., pp. x, 45, 51.Google Scholar

²⁸ Fitch, et al. , pp. 7, 11.Google Scholar

²⁹ Richard, H. Day, “The Economics of Technological Change and the Demise of the Sharecropper,” American Economic Review, 57, 3 (06, 1967), 427–449; Day and Singh, chap. 6.Google Scholar

³⁰ Constraints, p. 15.Google Scholar

³¹ CfMellor, John W., “Food Price Policy and Income Distribution in Low Income Countries,” Economic Development and Cultural Change, 27, 1 (10, 1978), 1–26. Of course, the poor may be protected from such effects by government subsidies. In that case the government would have to increase its food imports, thereby reducing foreign exchange and raising the social opportunity cost of capital.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³² ERA 2000; al-Hossari's “Report,” p. 8.Google Scholar

³³ al-Hossari's, “Report,” p. 10.Google Scholar

³⁴ I am indebted to Dr. Gene Quenemeon for this information.

³⁵ Business Week, 09 24, 1979, p. 74.Google ScholarChoucri, Nazli, Richard, S. Eckaus, Amr, Mohie-Eldine, “Migration and Employment in the Construction Sector: Critical Factors in Egyptian Development,” Cairo University/Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1978).Google Scholar

³⁶ See, e.g., the report of Mahmoud Marzouk of the LINK project, in Business Week, 10 22, 1979, pp. 96, 100.Google Scholar

³⁷ See below p. 15 on possible trends in Egyptian labor migration.

³⁸ The agricultural labor force is reported to have changed as follows:

I have been unable to locate more recent figures. Source: Ministry of Agriculture, Center for Agricultural Economics Research.

³⁹ Waterbury, John, “Urbanization and Income Distribution in Egypt,” Princeton University Income Distribution Project (Princeton, N.J., 1979), draft, mimeo.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Birks, J. S. and Sinclair, C. A., International Migration and Development in the Arab Region (Geneva, 1980), p. 151. The study was based on 1975 data. It is very likely that the current number of Egyptians abroad is probably between one and one-and-one-half million.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Choukri, , Eckaus, , and Eldine, Mohie, p. 13.Google Scholar

⁴² Economist Intelligence Unit, “Saudi Arabia,” 3rd Quarter, 1979, p. 18;Google ScholarCastoriades, Gerard, “Bouncy Contracting Market Draws Far East Challenge,” Middle East Economic Digest, 06 6, 1980, p. 11.Google Scholar

⁴³ Izz, al-Din, pp. 132–135.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Kudrle, Robert (Agricultural Tractors [Lexington, Mass., 1977], chap. 2), estimates that the least cost plant size for tractor manufacture is a factory producing at least 90,000 tractors per year. He notes that the entire non-communist world could be served by no more than eight plants of such size.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ I am indebted to Ahmad Bahgat of the Catholic Relief Service, Cairo, for information on threshing manufacture. The capital:labor ratios are from Barbour, K. M., The Growth, Location, and Structure of Industry in Egypt (New York, N.Y., 1972), pp. 118 ff.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Bernard, de Mandeville, The Fable of the Bees (London, 1714);Google ScholarMellor, John, The New Economics of Growth: A Strategy for India and the Developing World (Ithaca, N.Y., 1976).Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Krishna, Raj, “Measurement of the Direct and Indirect Employment Effects of Agricultural Growth with Technical Change,” in Lloyd, G. Reynolds, ed., Agriculture in Development Theory (New Haven, 1975), pp. 297–323.Google Scholar Some other studies have contradicted this finding, arguing that because tractors had promoted large increases in cropping intensity, they may have increased the demand for labor. See Roy, Shyamal and Melvin, G. Blase “Farm Tractorization, Productivity and Labor Employment: A Case Study of Indian Punjab,”Journal of Development Studies, 14 (01, 1978), 193–209. However, as Binswanger notes (p. 16) in general in India, tractors have not led to increased cropping intensities. And we have seen that there is little likelihood that cropping intensities will increase markedly in Egypt. (The average cropping intensity in Egypt is well above the intensity achieved using tractors in the Punjab).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴⁸ I am indebted to Professor Henry J. Bruton of Williams College for this information.

⁴⁹ Izz, al-Din, p. 140;Google Scholaral-Hossari's, “Report,” p. 9.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ I am indebted to Professor Henry J. Bruton for this information.

⁵¹ Izz, al-Din, pp. 110, 118.Google Scholar

⁵² Mechanization of plowing and threshing alone and retaining hand labor for harvesting might reduce the man-hours per feddan of wheat to 18 (Izz, al-Din, p. 110).Google Scholar

⁵³ Hank, Ilya and Abdel-Basit, Hassan, “Socio-economic Profile of Rural Egypt” (Cairo, 03 15, 1979), mimeo.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ I am indebted to Professor Saad Gadalla of the American University in Cairo for this information.

⁵⁵ International Institute for Strategic Studies, The Military Balance (London, Annual Issues 1973-1979).Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Such changes would probably include some mechanization. The problem seems to be the classic one that the techniques need to relieve drudgery while minimizing labor displacement do not currently exist.

⁵⁷ Data from the Center for Agricultural Economics Research of the Ministry of Agriculture show that whereas the average yearly percentage rise in price for wheat, maize, rice, and cotton in 1975–1978 was 6⅓23; percent, 12⅓23; percent, 18⅔23; percent, and 10⅔23; percent, respectively, costs of the same crops rose 14⅓13; percent, 20 percent, 13⅓13; percent, and 14⅔23; percent, respectively, during the same period (see table 2). Birks and Sinclair argue that even if migration is as low as they believe, the highly segmented labor market in Egypt magnifies shortages. This is an interesting hypothesis, and further work is underway to test it. Casual observation generates some skepticism, however. For example, it is not unusual to see large numbers of women working on construction sites and in agricultural tasks that were formerly performed only by men.

⁵⁸ Land prices and rents are controlled, of course. As usual, the market works around such controls; in some areas land rents doubled from 1978 to 1979 (cf. also table 2).

⁵⁹ Ayrout, H. H., The Egyptian Peasant (Boston, 1963), p. 53.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ As so eloquently argued by Moore, Barrington, Jr, Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy (Boston, 1966).Google Scholar

⁶¹ CfHirschman, Albert, The Strategy of Economic Development (New Haven, 1958).Google Scholar