Changing Structure Of Agriculture Research Articles

Trends, Adjustments, and Demographics, and Income of Agricultural Workers*

This paper examines changes in the structure of U.S. agriculture with emphasis on farm productivity, technology, labor, and other major input use. The composition of farm labor, which comprises self-employed and unpaid family, hired, and contract labor, has changed over the past two decades. Some U.S. agricultural production is more easily mechanized, e.g., field crops like corn and soybeans. In contrast, fresh fruit and vegetable harvesting remains very labor intensive with relatively low-skilled workers. For the United States and all regions, immigration legislation passed in 1986, as well as later changes, has meant hired and contract labor have become increasingly synonymous with immigrant workers (Huffman 2003). Important public policy issues are associated with the changing structure of agriculture, including shifts in the composition of farm labor, which affect the well-being of long-term residents and new immigrants (Borjas). In most of U.S. agriculture, the adoption of increasingly mechanized technique; the use of new chemical inputs, such as herbicides, insecticides and fertilizers; the availability of genetically improved crop varieties and animals; and countless other technical and organizational improvements have dramatically changed agricultural practices. The new biotechnology era started in the mid-1990s with herbicide-tolerant and insect-resistant crops that changed greatly the nature of U.S. field crop production. The widespread diffusion of new information technologies has accentuated the changing structure of agriculture (Huffman 2001).

The History of Recent Farm Legislation: Implications for Farm Families

In order to understand what is happening to contemporary farm families, one must examine the changing structure of agriculture (Haney, 1982). The current economic crisis of many farmers1 is hardly the first time major financial difficulties have been faced by this segment of American society. In fact, United States agricultural policy stems from the very creation of our country when colonials revolted against England's excessive taxation and control of agricultural exports (Rasmussen, 1985). This article reviews from a historical perspective current major agricultural and financial legislation affecting today's farmer. First, it demonstrates that legislation was created in response to domestic social and economic conditions of the United States. Secondly, it illuminates the impact of world economic conditions in recent years. The irrevocable inclusion of the American farm economy into the global macroeconomy in the 1970s will illustrate the complexity of the farm issue. Farm legislation in isolation cannot provide all the support necessary to improve the farmer's economic condition. Thirdly, the philosophical shift in emphasis of farm legislation from welfare of the farm family in the 1930s, to the commercialization of the farm in the 1970s, and to today's market orientation will be explored. Finally, it is argued that if family scientists are to understand what is happening to farm families today, the implications of the historical economic context within which these families are living must be examined. Major legislation in the early 1900s began with the Country Life Commission appointed by President Theodore Roosevelt in 1908. As a result, over the next 10 years laws were passed that created better conditions for rural America. In 1914 the Smith-Lever Act created the Cooperative Extension Service, and in 1916 the Federal Farm Loan Act set up the structure for the Farm Credit System. However, it was not until the 1930s that the Federal Government instituted major farm programs which are the forerunners of those that exist today.

Technology and Social Change in Rural Areas: A Festschrift for Eugene A. Wilkening. Edited by Gene F. Summers. Westview, 1983. 252 pp. $25.00

particular attention to the influence of the family and of social psychological factors on the behavior of rural people and agencies. The book consists of an introduction and thirteen concise, well-written chapters, organized in four parts. The topics represent Wilkening's dominant concerns over a period of thirty years, including the adoption and diffusion of technology, the changing structure of agriculture and its relation to technological changes, the effects of technological and social change on rural life both in the U.S. and in developing countries, and the appropriate movement. The introduction, by Gene Summers, provides a succinct and integrating overview of the book, particularly important for a collection of disparate essays characterized by very different styles and content. In addition, Summers highlights the aspects of technological development and social change that are implicitly or explicitly assumed by each of the chapter authors. First, technological determinism is rejected; technology and social change are viewed as mutually intertwined and reciprocally related. Since institutions are consequently regarded as essential elements in the development and implementation of technology, issues of their control and use and the role of citizen participation in decision-making are central themes in the book. The issue of citizen participation figures in the major debate between two standards of system performance: equity and efficiency in the allocation of resources. Within this context, the first three essays deal with the adoption and diffusion of technological innovations in agriculture. Fliegel and van Ess point out that interest has shifted from micro-level concern with farmers' adoption of innovations to structural and societal issues. Protest against technology, the obverse of innovation, is well-reviewed in Mazur's speculative essay, but it seems only tan

Effects of the changing structure of agriculture on nonwhite farming in the U.S., the South, and Georgia: 1954–1978

This paper examines the impact of selected changes in agriculture on nonwhite farming in America during the period 1954–1978. The issues addressed relate to the decline in the number of farms, the decline in non‐white land ownership, and the general economic situation of nonwhite farm households. Comparisons are made of the plight of nonwhite and white farm(er)s within the context of overall structural changes in American agriculture–economic, social, and technological changes which resulted in an 83 percent decline in the number of nonwhite‐operated farms compared to a 44 percent decline in the number of farms operated by whites between 1954 and 1978.

Changing Structure of Agriculture and Resulting Statistical Needs

A GOOD deal of literature on the topic of the changing structure of agriculture has been generated in the last few years. In fact, stated data needs on structure are now so extensive that a complete listing becomes a prohibitive task. Even a partial listing, however, calls for some priority basis for ordering statistics needed. Thus, it seems important to devote some brief attention initially to a definition of structure and to some of the important questions surrounding the structure of agriculture before moving on to an enumeration of certain key statistical needs. Structure, I take to mean essentially the number, size, and decision-making control that prevails for firms engaged in the production and marketing phases of our natural food and fiber industry.' Within this broader definition there are subsets of structure such as tenure, legal form, production composition of firms, degree of vertical integration, and financing basis. Though one's preference might be to neatly limit the structure of agriculture to production and marketing of farm commodities, it is clear that some segments of the food and fiber industry are integrated, formally or informally, into an interrelated continuum ranging all the way from the acquisition of raw materials used to produce farm supplies to the retailing of farm commodities and even to the point of disposition of some of them as prepared foods in eating establishments.

Changing Structure of Agriculture and Its Impacts on Labor]: Discussion

Changing Structure of Agriculture and Its Impacts on Labor]: Discussion