Progress 05/01/01 to 09/30/05
Outputs
Over the past five years, this project has focused on a number of different research topics. The first research topic addressed the question of why farmers quit farming, and resulted in the publication of a now widely cited 2001 article in the Am. J. Agr. Econ. Conventional ordinary least squares analysis using all counties suggests that off-farm employment has no statistical effect on the (net) number of farmers quitting between 1987 and 1997, ceteris paribus. A more refined analysis, which separates counties losing farmers from those that gained farmers, reveals subtle and less clear-cut effects of off-farm employment (and federal program payments) on farm exits. A related study examined the broad question of whether or not farmers have benefited from technology gains over time, or whether consumers have benefited at the expense of farmers. This article, also now widely cited, appeared in the J. Ag. and Appl. Econ. This article concludes that "Since inception, land
grant universities and colleges of agriculture had a strong focus on doing whatever was necessary to help improving the lives of people. As the years passed in the 20th century, this people-centered focus gradually shifted to be increasingly centered on improving the productivity of crop and livestock enterprises. What began as a means to an end (increasing the productivity of crop and livestock enterprises in an effort to boost farm and non-farm incomes) gradually became an end in itself. Few bothered to address the question of whether or not this increasingly crop and livestock (production-centered) focus did in fact gradually improve the lives of people (farm and non-farm residents) living in rural areas. Agricultural production scientists simply assumed that technical productivity gains made the lives of people better--if producers did not gain then surely consumers would reap the benefits of technology-induced productivity gains. Few agricultural scientists questioned these
values and beliefs in part because they were intertwined with the public political support and increased funding for colleges of agriculture." A series of research studies were conducted that examined questions relating to how incomes of people living in rural areas affect and are affected by environmental quality measures. These studies commonly employed cross-sectional data for over 3,000 US counties. A PhD dissertation was completed that linked economic growth and environmental quality, and a paper from this dissertation subsequently appeared in Growth and Change. Another series of papers dealt with corporate agribusiness strategies in tobacco and fast food, and their effects on farmers. The newest research under this project examines the role of social capital as well as geographical and cultural amenities in attracting people to live in rural areas. This has culminated in a recent (2005) paper titled "Amenities and Social Capital" that appears in the Southern Business and
Economics Journal.
Impacts
Impacts include the following: 1. measurement of the impacts of technological change on US farmers versus consumers, and whether consumers have benefited at the expense of farmers from technological change. 2. A better understanding of the reasons why some US farmers exit from farming. 3. A better understanding of the role of environmental amenities on the economic growth or decline of rural areas 4. An understanding of the linkages between economic growth, geographic and cultural amenities with a particular reference to the role of social capital in economic growth.
Publications
- Goetz, S. J. and Debertin, D. L. Why Farmers Quit::A County-Level Analysis Amer. J. Agr. Econ 83(4) November, 2001 1010-1023.
- Debertin, D. L., "Corporate Strategy in the Tobacco Manufacturing Industry: The Case of Philip Morris." Review of Agricultural Economics 23(2) Fall/Winter 2001 510-522.
- Debertin, D. L. "Are American Farmers Better Off as a Result of Public and Private Sector Technology Gains?" Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 33:2 2001 327-339.
- Debertin, D. L. "Yo Quiero Taco Bell Amarillo" Choices. Spring, 2002 pp. 31-33.
- Debertin, D. L. Review of Char Miller ed. "Fluid Arguments: Five Centuries of Western Water Conflict." Growth and Change 33, 2002.
- Rupasingha, A., Goetz, S. J., Debertin, D. L., and Pagoulatos, A. "The Environmental Kuznets Curve for US Counties: A Spatial Econometric Analysis With Extensions."Papers in Regional Science: Journal of the Regional Science Association International 83(2) April 2004, 407-424.
- Pagoulatos, A., Goetz, S. J., Debertin, D. L., and Johannson, T. Interactions Between Economic Growth and Environmental Quality in US Counties. Growth and Change 35(1) Winter, 2004 90-108.
- Debertin, D. L. and Goetz, S. J. Rural Poverty, Amenities and Social Capital Southern Business and Economics Journal 28:3 Summer/Fall 2005.
|
Progress 01/01/04 to 12/31/04
Outputs
Recent research investigated the role of social capital in alleviating rural poverty. Traditional theories focus on explanations relating to (1) inherent geographic location problems that put a rural community at a comparative disadvantage in attracting firms which could supply jobs with high enough rates of pay to lead people out of poverty; and (2) a lack of education and specific job. A competing viewpoint suggests that in rural economic development, although the traditional view may still have some vailidity, community amenities--natural, cultural and social--play an increasingly important role. This process feeds on itself and soon others will have the same idea. Before long, the community is no longer a high-poverty locale. Although rural communities can do nothing to alter a remote geographic location or the natural amenities that may be available, they may be able to take steps to provide better access and promotion of natural amenities that are available.
Social and cultural amenities are closely linked, and these are amenities that can be altered through the work of local residents. Within rural communities, cultural activities frequently flourish if a high level of social capital is present. Thus, a strategy for reducing rural poverty focuses directly on building social capital among rural residents. The article from this work will carry a 2005 publication date. The Growth and Change publication is an outgrowth of a dissertation completed by Tulin Johannson in which I served as a dissertation co-director and Dr. Pagoulatos as major professor after Dr. Goetz left for his current Penn State position. Dr. Pagoulatos was responsible for pulling material from the dissertation upon which the article was based. The Papers in Regional Science article is work completed under our NRI Grant which is joint with Dr. Goetz at Penn State. The analysis used county-level data to investigate the presences of an Environmental Kuznets curve.
Impacts
The project is currently investigating ways in which local communities might better position themselves to provide the necessary cultural and social amenities as well as employment opportunities so that many rural residents may continue to live on farms, while enjoying the benefits of higher incomes obtained from employment in the non-farm sector.
Publications
- Rupasingha, A., Goetz, S.J., Debertin D.L. and Pagoulatos, A. The Environmental Kuznets Curve for US Counties: A Spatial Econometric Analysis With Extensions. Papers in Regional Science: Journal of the Regional Science Association International 83(2) April, 2004, 407-424.
- Pagoulatos, A.,Goetz, S.J., Debertin, D.L., and Johannson, T. Interactions Between Economic Growth and Environmental Quality in US Counties. Growth and Change 35(1) Winter, 2004 90-108.
|
Progress 01/01/03 to 12/31/03
Outputs
Traditional views of rural regions have placed the farming at the center of economic activity, with economic activity within the non-farm sector as dependent on the well-being of the farm economy. But this view of rural areas is accurate for only a very small and declining number of rural counties, and these rural counties are largely now located on the Great Plains, a region of the US where crop and livestock production has traditionally been the major engine of economic activity. For most other rural regions, the non-farm economy is largely supporting the farm economy. For the vast majority of US farmers, income from the sale of crops and livestock is at most a secondary source of income, and a small and ever-declining share of family income. The lion's share of farm families now support themselves primarily with income from non-farm sources. This, in effect, means that jobs in the non-farm economy are largely making it possible for rural residents to continue to
live on farms and enjoy a rural lifestyle. Continuation of this is highly dependent on the ability of rural communities to make satisfactory off-farm employment opportunities possible. Recently I have been examining issues related to what attracts good jobs to rural areas. Most jobs in rural areas do not involve agricultural commodities produced within the area, and ag-related off-farm jobs frequently tend to be low-wage jobs. Social capital and related concerns that make the rural community a desirable place for industries to operate appear to be very important and are also being examined.
Impacts
The project is currently investigating ways in which local communities might better position themselves to provide the necessary employment opportunities so that many rural residents may continue to live on farms, while enjoying the benefits of higher incomes obtained from employment in the non-farm sector.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
Progress 01/01/02 to 12/31/02
Outputs
Approximately 90 percent of farm proprietor income comes from other than the sale of crops and livestock. Yet the research and educational focus of most colleges of agriculture still heavily emphasizes efforts directed toward improving farm-level crop and livestock production. In recent years, agricultural leaders have directed efforts toward increasing the value added from farm-level crop and livestock production by doing more in-state processing of raw agricultural commodities. Adding value to raw farm commodities may not provide the kind of employment opportunities that genuinely improve the well being of rural people. Jobs in the "agricultural value added" sector are often low-paid and tedious, and are not the kinds of jobs one would expect to devote a career over a lifetime. A related issue is an examination of the focus in colleges of agriculture in increasing aggregate cash receipts from crop and livestock sales without any concern for how these cash receipts
are to be distributed among farmers. If the lives of rural people are to be enhanced, Colleges of Agriculture must be sensitive to these broader problems and issues being examined in this project.
Impacts
The project will determine ways in which colleges of agriculture can provide greater assistance toward improving the quality of life among farmers, and more broadly, within rural areas as a whole.
Publications
- Debertin, David L. "Yo Quiero Taco Bell Amarillo" Choices. Spring, 2002 pp. 31-33.
- David L. Debertin. "Why has US Agriculture Not Fully Shared in US Economic Prosperity?" Selected Paper, 2002 SAEA meetings, Orlando, FL, Jan, 2002.(abstract in August 2002 issue of Journ Ag. Appl. Econ.
- Debertin, David L. and Patricia Duffy. "The Contemporary Agricultural Economy and its Impact on the Lives of Rural People." 2002 SAEA meetings, Orlando, FL, Jan, 2002. (abstract in August 2002 issue of Journ Ag. Appl. Econ)
|
Progress 01/01/01 to 12/31/01
Outputs
An article "Are American Farmers Better Off as a Result of Technology Gains?" (appearing in the August 2001 issue of the J. Ag. Econ. and Appl. Econ..) examines the issue of whether or not American farmers have benefitted from the long list of advances in production agriculture over the past 50 years. Results of the analysis suggest that as a result of these advances, farm commodity prices have declined more rapidly than output has increased. As a consequence, inflation-adjusted aggregate gross farm income has not risen over the past 50 years. Neither has farm-level profitability improved. Net farm income represents only about 20 percent of gross income from the sales of crops and livestock in recent years whereas it was 40 percent or more in the late 40s and early 50s. The article also addresses the question of whether consumers are able to purchase food cheaper as a result of technological progress. The analysts suggests that until the last dozen years or so, food
prices were declining relative to the overall price level within the US economy, but since the late 1980s, this is no longer the case. The article offers a number of explanations as to why this has changed and suggests that large agribusiness firms-not farmers nor consumers-may now be the primary beneficiaries of technological change in agriculture.
Impacts
This research directly addresses the question of the extent to which agricultural research in the public and private sector benefits farmers, consumers and agribusiness firms
Publications
- Goetz, Stephan J. and David L. Debertin. "Why Farmers Quit::A County-Level Analysis" Amer. J. Agr. Econ 83(4) November, 2001 1010-1023.
- Debertin, David L., Corporate Strategy in the Tobacco Manufacturing Industry: The Case of Philip Morris Review of Agricultural Economics 23(2) Fall/Winter 2001 510-522.
- Debertin, David L. "Are American Farmers Better Off as a Result of Public and Private Sector Technology Gains?" Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 33:2 2001 327-339.
|
|