Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T10:21:52.042Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Middle Sized Farming Operation: A Goods-and-Services Firm?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

J. A. Ginzel ,
E. W. Kehrberg  and
G. D. Irwin
J. A. Ginzel
Affiliation:
Purdue University
E. W. Kehrberg
Affiliation:
Purdue University
G. D. Irwin
Affiliation:
Purdue University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Traditionally, the economics of farm number adjustments have been inferred from the relative positions of firms on a longrun average cost curve. The steep slope of the left portion of the commonly drawn curve suggests demise of the smaller units as fast as off-farm and inter-farm markets can absorb their labor and land resources. On the less steeply declining middle portion of the curve, insufficient volume of output (income) is suggested as a cause of firms quitting. The argument is supported by the fact that most empirical estimates do not show the long-run cost curve rising at large outputs. This places downward pressure on product prices, reducing per unit margins, and creating income problems for the middle group of firms. Adjustments in the farming sector are then viewed as constrained by the limitations of factor and product markets, as well as by values and traditions of farm people.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , December 1971 , pp. 123 - 128
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Dean, G. W. and Carter, H. D., “Cost-Size Relationships for Cash-Crop Farms in a Highly Commercialized Agriculture,” J.of Farm Econ., Vol. 43, No. 2, pp. 264–277, 1961.Google Scholar
2.Duvick, R. D., “Part-Time Farming in Two Areas of Southern Michigan, 1959-1963,” Quarterly Bulletin of the Michigan Agr. Exp. Sta., Vol. 49, No. 8, pp. 64–78, Aug. 1966.Google Scholar
3.Faris, J. E. and Armstrong, D. L., “Economies Associated with Size, Kern County Cash-Crop Farms, California,” Giannini Foundation Report No. 269, Calif. Agr. Exp. Sta., Dec. 1963.Google Scholar
4.Hunter, E. C. and Madden, J. P., Economies of Size for Specialized Beef Feedlots in Colorado, USDA A. E. Rep. No. 91, May 1966.Google Scholar
5.Irwin, G. D., “Discussion: Firm Growth Research Opportunities and Techniques,” J. of Farm Econ., Vol. 48, No. 5, pp. 1532–1535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Johnson, G. L. and Hardin, L. S., Economics of Forage Evaluation, Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. No. 623, Purdue University, April 1955.Google Scholar
7.Krause, K. and Kyle, L., “Economic Factors Underlying the Incidence of Large Farming Units, the Current Situation and Probable Trends,” paper presented at the American Agr. Econ. Assoc. Meetings, Aug. 10, 1970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Loomis, R. A., McKee, D. E., and Bonnen, J. T., “The Role of Part-Time Farming in Agricultural Adjustment in Southern Michigan,” Quarterly Bulletin, Vol. 44, No. 4, pp. 644–653, May 1962.Google Scholar
9.Madden, J. P., Economies of Size in Farming, USDA A. E. Rep. No. 107, Feb. 1967.Google Scholar
10.Nikolitch, R., The Expanding and Contracting Sectors of American Agriculture, USDA A. E. Rep. No. 74, May 1965.Google Scholar
11.Tweeten, L. and Schreiner, D., “The Economic Impact of Public Policy and Technology on Marginal Farms and the Non-Farm Rural Population,” unpublished paper, Oklahoma State University, 1970.Google Scholar
12.United States Census of Agriculture (1964), Dept. of Commerce, Washington, D. C.Google Scholar
13.Wayt, W. A. and Dix, T. J., Adjusting the Commercial Family Farm to Part-Time Operations in Southern Ohio, Ohio Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Cir. No. 97, March 1961.Google Scholar
14.Wirth, M. E. and Rogers, L. F., ‘The Changing Nature and Environment of U.S. Farm Firms,” A New Look At Agricultural Finance Research, Agr. Finance Program Rep. No. 1, University of 111., 1970.Google Scholar