Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T11:33:25.413Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some Fallacies in Agricultural Economics: A Macroeconomic Interpretation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Mike Belongia  and
Douglas Fisher
Mike Belongia
Affiliation:
Economic Research Service
Douglas Fisher
Affiliation:
North Carolina State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The relevance of macroeconomic theory to the analysis of economic behavior in the agricultural sector is a recurring theme in applied research in this area. On the one hand, it is possible to find the view that the agricultural sector should be treated in isolation as an independent market or set of markets not subject to the influences of changes in monetary and fiscal policy or (other) changes in aggregate demand and supply. On the other hand, it is also possible to find literal acceptance of the usefulness of macroeconomics—perhaps in the form of a particular version of the theory—with the controversial part surfacing in the particular view of macroeconomics and how it bears on (and is influenced by) agricultural markets. The fact that this dichotomy exists is highlighted by the contrasting views expressed recently by Breimyer (1981) and Tweeten. At the same time that Breimyer advocated that “macro-economics should be struck from the lexicon,” Tweeten chose to devote his AAEA Presidential address to a discussion of the implications of current developments in macroeconomic theory and policy for the agricultural sector; his particular emphasis is on the important role of “supply-side” macroeconomics.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , July 1982 , pp. 117 - 123
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1982

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

Berman, Peter I.Inflation and the Money Supply in the United States 1956-1977. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1978.Google Scholar
Breimyer, Harold F. “What Inflation Is and Does.” in Inflation, Special Report 244, Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Missouri, Columbia, December 1979, pp. 5–10.Google Scholar
Breimyer, Harold F. “The Fallacy of Macroeconomics.” AAEA Newsletter 3(1981):2.Google Scholar
Fisher, Douglas. Monetary Theory and the Demand for Money. New York, N.Y.: John Wiley and Sons, Halsted Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Friedman, Milton. The Counter Revolution in Monetary Theory. IEA, Occasional Paper No. 33, 1970.Google Scholar
Gardner, Bruce. “How Agriculture Fares in an Inflationary Economy” in Inflation, Special Report 244, Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Missouri, Columbia, December 1979, pp. 32–39.Google Scholar
Hart, A. G. “Assets, Liquidity and Investment.” Amer. Econ. Rev. 39(1949): 171–81.Google Scholar
Heien, Dale. “Markup Pricing in a Dynamic Model of the Food Industry.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 62 (1980): 10–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamm, R. McFall. “Dynamics of Food Price Inflation.” W. J. Agr. Econ. 4(1979): 119–32.Google Scholar
Lamm, R. McFall and Westcott, Paul C.. “The Effects of Changing Input Costs on Food Prices.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 63(1981): 187–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucus, Robert E. “Two Illustrations of the Quantity Theory of Money.” Amer. Econ. Rev. 70(1980): 1005–14.Google Scholar
Mehra, Yash P. “An Empirical Note on Some Monetarist Propositions.” S. Econ. J. 45(1978): 154–67.Google Scholar
Popkin, Joel. “Consumer and Wholesale Prices in a Model of Price Behavior by Stage of Processing.” Rev. Econ. and Statis. 56(1974):486–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stigler, George J. “Imperfections in the Capital Market.” J. Pol. Econ. 75(1967):287–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tweeten, Luther G. “Macroeconomics in Crisis: Agriculture in an Underachieving Economy.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 62(1980):853–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar