Postwar Agricultural Credit Problems and Suggested Adjustments

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

TWO assumptions must be made regarding postwar land ownership and agricultural tenure if any discussion of credit needs in that period will be most meaningful. They are: (1) Fee simple ownership of land will continue to be the predominant type of ownership, and (2) Owner-operation will continue to be the predominant pattern of tenure. The assumption of continued fee simple ownership, as the predominant pattern, does not imply the same unrestricted freedom in the use of privately owned land which our forebears knew in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries; it is recognized that various restraints upon the use of private land will persist which have developed since a conservation conscious nation became aware of the social value of wise land use. Indeed, such restraints will probably increase in number and scope. However, they need not, and probable will not, interfere with the basic right of a fee simple owner to transfer title to whomever and in whatever manner he chooses. Nor will such restraints on land use seriously affect the utilization of credit to implement the transfer of land ownership. On the other hand, they may necessitate modifications in the extension of credit for production. The second assumption-namely, that owner-operation will continue as the predominant pattern of tenure-implies neither increase nor decrease from present levels of tenancy. A minimum amount of tenancy is desirable and necessary as a step on the road to owner-operation. In this paper separate treatment will be accorded a number of facets of the post-war agricultural credit problem. The discussion will be neither exhaustive nor definitive, but will serve chiefly to raise issues which should be resolved if future credit needs of agriculture are to be served soundly and efficiently.