DOCSLIB.ORG

Principles of Agricultural Economics: Markets and Prices in Less Developed Countries

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Principles of Agricultural Economics: Markets and Prices in Less Developed Countries Principles of agricultural economics WYE STUDIES IN AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT Solving the problems of agricultural and rural development in poorer countries requires, among other things, sufficient numbers of well-trained and skilled professionals. To help meet the need for topical and effective teaching materials in this area, the books in the series are designed for use by teachers, students and practitioners of the planning and management of agricultural and rural development. The series is being developed in association with the innovative postgraduate programme in Agricultural Development for external students of the University of London. The series concentrates on the principles, techniques and applications of policy analysis, planning and implementation of agricultural and rural development. Texts review and synthesise existing knowledge and highlight current issues, combining academic rigour and topicality with a concern for practical applications. Most importantly, the series provides simultaneously a systematic basis for teaching and study, a means of updating the knowledge of workers in the field, and a source of ideas for those involved in planning development. Editorial Board: Henry Bernstein Director, Wye College External Programme Allan Buckwell Professor of Agricultural Economics, Wye College Ian Carruthers Professor of Agrarian Development, Wye College Dr Johnathan Kydd Lecturer in Agricultural Economics, Wye College Professor Ian Lucas Principal of Wye College Other titles in this series Peasant Economics Frank Ellis Extension Science Niels Roling Principles of agricultural economics MARKETS AND PRICES IN LESS DEVELOPED COUNTRIES DAVID COLMAN AND TREVOR YOUNG Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Manchester I CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS PUBLISHED BY THE PRESS SYNDICATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB2 1RP, United Kingdom CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 2RU, UK http://www.cup.cam.ac.uk 40 West 20th Street, New York, NY 10011-4211, USA http://www.cup.org 10 Stamford Road, Oakleigh, Melbourne 3166, Australia © Cambridge University Press 1989 This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 1989 Reprinted 1990, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1997 Printed in the United Kingdom at the University Press, Cambridge A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication data Colman, David. Principles of agricultural economics: markets and prices in less developed countries. David Colman and Trevor Young. p. cm. - (Wye studies in agricultural and rural development) Bibliography: p. Includes index. ISBN 0 521 33430 6 (hardback) ISBN 0 521 33664 3 (paperback) 1. Agriculture - Economic aspects - Developing countries. 2. Agriculture prices - Developing countries. I. Young, Trevor. II. Titles. III. Series. HD1417.C63 1989 338.1'09172'4-dcl9 88-10297 CIP Contents Acknowledgements ix 1 Introduction 1 2 Economics of agricultural production: theoretical foundations 5 2.1 Introduction 5 2.2 Physical relationships 6 2.2.1 The factor-product relationship 1 2.2.2 The factor-factor relationship 13 2.2.3 The product-product relationship 16 2.3 Economic relationships 18 2.3.1 Economic optimum: the factor-product relationship 18 2.3.2 Economic optimum: the factor-factor relationship 19 2.3.3 Economic optimum: the product-product relationship 27 2.3.4 Economic optimum: the general case 28 2.4 Summary points 29 3 Product supply and input demand 30 3.1 Introduction 30 3.2 Product supply 31 3.2.1 The need for a dynamic specification 36 3.3 Demand for inputs 40 3.3.1 The competitive model of input demand 41 3.3.2 Asset fixity in agriculture 46 3.4 Conclusions 47 3.5 Summary points 48 4 Topics in production economics 49 4.1 Introduction 49 4.2 Efficiency of resource use 50 4.2.1 Technical, allocative and economic efficiency 50 4.2.2 * The myth of efficiency' 52 4.3 Technological change 53 vi Contents 4.3.1 Technological change in economic modelling 53 4.3.2 Sources of technological change 59 4.3.3 Adoption and diffusion of new technologies 60 4.4 Risk and uncertainty 64 4.5 Duality 66 4.6 Conclusions 69 4.7 Summary points 69 5 Theory of consumer behaviour 72 5.1 Introduction 72 5.2 The basic relationships 73 5.3 The analysis of consumer choice 76 5.4 Variations in the consumer's equilibrium 81 5.5 Income and substitution effects 85 5.6 Summary points 89 6 Economics of market demand 91 6.1 Introduction 91 6.2 Basic demand relationships 91 6.2.1 The market demand curve 91 6.2.2 The market demand function 92 6.2.3 Shifts in the market demand curve 94 6.3 Elasticities of demand 95 6.3.1 The own-price elasticity of demand 96 6.3.2 Cross-price elasticity of demand 100 6.3.3 The income elasticity of demand 101 6.4 Properties of demand functions 105 6.4.1 Homogeneity condition 105 6.4.2 The Slutsky equation and Slutsky symmetry 106 6.4.3 Engel aggregation 107 6.5 Dynamics in demand analysis 108 6.6 Conclusions 110 6.7 Summary points 112 7 Developments in demand theory 113 7.1 Introduction 113 7.2 ' New' theories of demand 113 7.2.1 Lancaster's model of consumer demand 113 7.2.2 Becker's model of consumer demand 119 7.3 Duality in demand analysis 121 7.4 Conclusions 122 7.5 Summary points 123 8 Equilibrium and exchange 125 8.1 Introduction 125 8.2 The definition of equilibrium 126 8.2.1 Partial vs. general equilibrium 128 Contents vii 8.2.2 Existence, uniqueness and stability of an equilibrium 130 8.2.3 Disequilibrium 132 8.2.4 Interference with equilibrium 134 8.3 Equilibrium in product markets 138 8.3.1 Comparative statics 138 8.3.2 Dynamics 146 8.4 Production and consumption activities within the agricultural household 152 8.4.1 The theory of the agricultural household 153 8.4.2 The Z-goods model of the agricultural household 163 8.5 Conclusions 164 8.6 Summary points 165 9 Analysis of agricultural markets 167 9.1 Introduction 167 9.2 Degrees of market competition 168 9.2.1 Many buyers and sellers 168 9.2.2 Monopoly 170 9.2.3 Monopsony 181 9.3 Structure and functions of agricultural markets 186 9.3.1 Market institutions 187 9.3.2 Market functions 189 9.4 Simultaneous equilibrium at two market levels 190 9.5 Marketing margins and farm prices 193 9.6 Conclusions 195 9.7 Summary points 196 10 Welfare economics 198 10.1 Introduction 198 10.2 Competitive markets and Pareto optimality 200 10.2.1 The exchange efficiency criterion 201 10.2.2 The production efficiency criterion 203 10.2.3 The top level criterion 205 10.3 Reasons for policy intervention in markets 206 10.4 Welfare criteria for policy choice 209 10.5 Consumer and producer surplus 211 10.6 The problem of the second best 217 10.7 Conclusions 220 10.8 Summary points 221 11 Economics of trade 224 11.1 Introduction 224 11.2 Trade theory 226 11.2.1 Theory of comparative advantage 226 11.2.2 Heckscher-Ohlin theory of trade 232 11.2.3 Yen t-for-surplus 234 viii Contents 11.3 Trade equilibrium with no transport costs 235 11.4 Trade with international transport and handling charges 240 11.5 Terms-of- trade 245 11.5.1 Measuring terms-of-trade 246 11.5.2 Interpreting measures of the terms-of-trade 249 11.6 Trade intervention 253 11.6.1 The effects of imposing import tariff's on trade 253 11.6.2 Non-tariff barriers to trade 255 11.6.3 Reasons for trade in ter ven tion 257 11.7 Conclusions 258 11.8 Summary points 262 12 Food and agricultural policy 264 12.1 Nature and principles of policy 265 12.1.1 The elemen ts of policy 265 12.1.2 Classification of instruments of policy 268 12.1.3 Rules of policy 272 12.2 Analysing the effects of policy instruments 273 12.2.1 Partial equilibrium analysis 273 12.2.2 Classifying the effects of agricultural policy 282 12.3 Economic analysis of selected agricultural policies 285 12.3.1 Export taxes for Thai rice 285 12.3.2 Egypt's wheat procurement and distribution policy 290 12.4 Conclusions 294 12.5 Summary points 296 Notes 298 References 308 Index 314 Acknowledgements Our warm appreciation is offered to the many colleagues who attempted to keep us on a straight and narrow path in the preparation of this book. Derek Ray, at Wye College, deserves particular mention for his advice on structural and presentational issues. Also at Wye we would like to thank both Henry Bernstein and Jonathan Kydd for their continual support and advice. Among our immediate colleagues at Manchester University, Martin Currie, Noel Russell, Ian Steedman and Colin Thirtle all made telling and much appreciated responses to drafts of different chapters of the book. Our thanks are also extended to Hartwig de Haen at the University of Gottingen and Joachim von Braun at the International Food Policy Research Institute for their correspondence in connection with material presented in Chapter 12. Needless to say none of those mentioned is in any way responsible for any tendencies to stray that the book exhibits or for any of the errors that we may have committed. We accept full responsibility for those.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Economic Contribution of Agriculture and Forestry Production and Processing in Mississippi: an Input-Output Analysis
    The Economic Contribution of Agriculture and Forestry Production and Processing in Mississippi: An Input-Output Analysis Agriculture and forestry are major components of Data for the direct effects and estimation of the indirect Mississippi’s economy. In 2014 alone, agriculture and and induced effects came from a well-known input-output forestry production and processing sectors directly modeling system called Impact for Planning and Analysis, accounted for 113,934 jobs paying $3.04 billion in wages or IMPLAN, software that is updated annually by the and salaries (Table 1). In addition, agriculture and forestry IMPLAN Group LLC (2015). IMPLAN is a computerized related sectors also directly accounted for $26.4 billion in database and modeling system for constructing regional sales with a value-added generation of $8.4 billion. Clearly, economic accounts and regional input-output tables. The agriculture and forestry provide a major contribution to IMPLAN 536 sector input-output model is based primarily the Mississippi economy. on data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Yet, this contribution has a much larger effect on Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. the Mississippi economy. A larger total contribution Department of Agriculture, and U.S. Geological Survey. results when also accounting for the stimulative effect This study used an input-output model constructed with of spending by the employees of the agriculture and the most recent 2014 IMPLAN data. forestry industries. This report provides an estimate of the The total economic contribution of agriculture and economic contribution of agriculture and forestry sectors forestry (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Economics of Competition in the U.S. Livestock Industry Clement E. Ward
    Economics of Competition in the U.S. Livestock Industry Clement E. Ward, Professor Emeritus Department of Agricultural Economics Oklahoma State University January 2010 Paper Background and Objectives Questions of market structure changes, their causes, and impacts for pricing and competition have been focus areas for the author over his entire 35-year career (1974-2009). Pricing and competition are highly emotional issues to many and focusing on factual, objective economic analyses is critical. This paper is the author’s contribution to that effort. The objectives of this paper are to: (1) put meatpacking competition issues in historical perspective, (2) highlight market structure changes in meatpacking, (3) note some key lawsuits and court rulings that contribute to the historical perspective and regulatory environment, and (4) summarize the body of research related to concentration and competition issues. These were the same objectives I stated in a presentation made at a conference in December 2009, The Economics of Structural Change and Competition in the Food System, sponsored by the Farm Foundation and other professional agricultural economics organizations. The basis for my conference presentation and this paper is an article I published, “A Review of Causes for and Consequences of Economic Concentration in the U.S. Meatpacking Industry,” in an online journal, Current Agriculture, Food & Resource Issues in 2002, http://caes.usask.ca/cafri/search/archive/2002-ward3-1.pdf. This paper is an updated, modified version of the review article though the author cannot claim it is an exhaustive, comprehensive review of the relevant literature. Issue Background Nearly 20 years ago, the author ran across a statement which provides a perspective for the issues of concentration, consolidation, pricing, and competition in meatpacking.
    [Show full text]
  • The Distributional Impacts of Agricultural Programs*
    II Division of Agricultural Sciences UNIVERSITY OF j CA~IFORNIA !". ~- .. - Working Paper No. 194 THE DISTRIBUTIONAL IHPACTS OF AGRICULTIJRAL PROGRAMS by Gordon C. Rausser and David Zilberman QIANNINI ,.OUNDAT10NO,. ACJltJCULTURAL ECONOMICS LIBRARY MAR 1 U1982 Financial support under Project No. 58-3J23-1-0037X is gratefully apprecia t ed . California Agricultural Experiment Station Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics March, 1982 ---.,All : " Giannini FDN Library , I1\\1 ~ \\111 \\1 II lllll 11\l1 IllIl III IIII 0052 19 THE DISTRIBUTIONAL IMPACTS OF AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS* 1. Introduction Scholars of all persuasions agree that economic policies emanating from our political system aim at slicing the pie in a particular fashion and/or increasing its size. As a result~ economists interested in policy analysis must not limit their analysis to efficiency issues but must also investigate equity implications. In the latter regard~ . it is our view that much remains to be accomplished by our profession on both conceptual and empirical fronts. Our efforts in developing methodologies and rmodels capable of analyzing distributional issues should intensify. The purpose of this paper is to present several new ap- pro aches for analyzing distributional impacts of agricultural policies. To gain some perspective on the potential value of these approaches~ we have to realize their role within the process of modeling for policy analysis. Figure 1 (Rausser and Hochman, 1979~ p. 22) depicts a graphical presentation of this process. The process outlined in this figure is useful for prescriptive or normative analysis--aiding policymakers in evaluating alternatives and selecting more nearly optimal poli- cies. It can also be used to structure positive analysis in order to improve our understanding of political economics of • 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Peasant Transformation in Kenya: a Focus on Agricultural Entrepreneurship with Special Reference to Improved Fruit and Dairy Farming in Mbeere, Embu County
    PEASANT TRANSFORMATION IN KENYA: A FOCUS ON AGRICULTURAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO IMPROVED FRUIT AND DAIRY FARMING IN MBEERE, EMBU COUNTY BY GEOFFREY RUNJI NJERU NJERU A THESIS SUBMITTED IN FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN DEVELOPMENT STUDIES, INSTITUTE FOR DEVELOPMENT STUDIES (IDS), UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI AUGUST 2016 DECLARATION This thesis is my original work and has not been submitted for a degree in any other university. Geoffrey Runji Njeru Njeru Signature……………………………………………. Date …………………………… This thesis was submitted for examination with our approval as university supervisors. Professor Njuguna Ng‟ethe Signature …………………………………….. Date……………………………………. Professor Karuti Kanyinga Signature ……………………………………. Date …………………………………….. Dr. Robinson Mose Ocharo Signature…………………………………….. Date …………………………………….. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION............................................................................................................... ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................ iii LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................... vii LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................... viii ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ........................................................................ ix ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Nathalie Lavoie
    NATHALIE LAVOIE Department of Resource Economics University of Massachusetts Amherst 80 Campus Center Way Amherst, MA 01003 Phone: (413) 545-5713 Fax: (413) 545-5853 [email protected] EDUCATION Ph.D., Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California, Davis, CA. Fall 2001. Dissertation: Price Discrimination in the Context of Vertical Differentiation: An Application to Canadian Wheat Exports. Advisor: Professor Richard Sexton. M.Sc., Agricultural Economics, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada. Fall 1996. Thesis: Viability of a Voluntary Price Pool Within a Cash Market. Advisors: Professors Murray Fulton and James Vercammen. B.Sc., Agricultural Economics, McGill University, Montreal, Canada, Spring 1994. FIELDS OF INTEREST Industrial Organization, International Trade, Agricultural Markets, Agricultural Policy. EMPLOYMENT AND RESEARCH EXPERIENCE Associate Professor, Department of Resource Economics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, 09/08 – current. Visiting Scholar, Institut National de Recherche Agronomique (INRA), Laboratoire Montpelliérain d’Économie Théorique et Appliquée (LAMETA), Université de Montpellier 1, Montpellier, France, 01/12-06/12. Assistant Professor, Department of Resource Economics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, 09/01 – 08/08. Instructor, Department of Resource Economics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, 08/00 – 08/01. Visiting Scholar, Institut National de Recherche Agronomique (INRA), Midi-Pyrénée School of Economics, Université des Sciences Sociales of Toulouse,
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Agricultural Economics
    INTRODUCTION TO AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS Definitions of Agricultural Economics by various Authors • Agricultural economics is an applied field of economics concerned with the application of economic theory in optimizing the production and distribution of food and fibre—a discipline known as agricultural economics. Definitions contd. •Prof. Gray defines agricultural economics, “as the science in which the principles and methods of economics are applied to the special conditions of agricultural industry.” •No doubt both these definitions are wider in scope, but these are not explanatory and are characterised by vagueness unsettled. Definitions contd. • Prof. Hubbard has defined agricultural economics as, “the study of relationship arising from the wealth-getting and wealth-using activity of man in agriculture.” • This definition is based on Prof. Ely’s definition of economics and is mere akin to Marshall’s conception of economic activities and therefore it is also limited in scope. Definitions contd. • According to Lionel Robbins, economics deals with the problems of allocative efficiency i.e. choice between various alternative uses-particularly when resources are scarce— to maximize some given ends. • Thus it provides analytical techniques for evaluating different allocations of resources among alternative uses Prof. Taylor defines agricultural economics in Robbinsian tone. Definitions contd. • To use his words, “Agricultural economics treats of the selection of land, labour, and equipment for a farm, the choice of crops to be grown, the selection of livestock enterprises to be carried on and the whole question of the proportions in which all these agencies should be combined. • These questions are treated primarily from the point of view of costs and prices.” Definitions contd.
    [Show full text]
  • Behavioral Ecology and Household-Level Production for Barter and Trade in Premodern Economies
    UC Davis UC Davis Previously Published Works Title “Every Tradesman Must Also Be a Merchant”: Behavioral Ecology and Household-Level Production for Barter and Trade in Premodern Economies Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9hq2q96v Journal Journal of Archaeological Research, 27(1) ISSN 1059-0161 Authors Demps, K Winterhalder, B Publication Date 2019-03-15 DOI 10.1007/s10814-018-9118-6 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California J Archaeol Res https://doi.org/10.1007/s10814-018-9118-6 “Every Tradesman Must Also Be a Merchant”: Behavioral Ecology and Household‑Level Production for Barter and Trade in Premodern Economies Kathryn Demps1 · Bruce Winterhalder2 © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018 Abstract While archaeologists now have demonstrated that barter and trade of material commodities began in prehistory, theoretical eforts to explain these fnd- ings are just beginning. We adapt the central place foraging model from behavioral ecology and the missing-market model from development economics to investigate conditions favoring the origins of household-level production for barter and trade in premodern economies. Interhousehold exchange is constrained by production, travel and transportation, and transaction costs; however, we predict that barter and trade become more likely as the number and efect of the following factors grow in impor- tance: (1) local environmental heterogeneity diferentiates households by production advantages; (2) preexisting social mechanisms minimize transaction costs; (3) com- modities have low demand elasticity; (4) family size, gender role diferentiation, or seasonal restrictions on household production lessen opportunity costs to participate in exchange; (5) travel and transportation costs are low; and (6) exchange oppor- tunities entail commodities that also can function as money.
    [Show full text]
  • Concept of Peasant Society and Peasant Culture
    Concept of peasant society and peasant culture A peasant is a pre-industrial agricultural labourer or farmer with limited land ownership, especially one living in the Middle Ages under feudalism and paying rent, tax, fees, or services to a landlord. In Europe, three classes of peasants existed: slave, serf, and free tenant. Peasants hold title to land either in fee simple or by any of several forms of land tenure, among them socage, quit-rent, leasehold, and copyhold. In a colloquial sense, "peasant" often has a pejorative meaning that is therefore seen as insulting and controversial in some circles, even when referring to farm labourers in the developing world. as early as in 13th-century Germany the word also could mean "rustic," or "robber," as the English term villain. In 21st- century English, the term includes the pejorative sense of "an ignorant, rude, or unsophisticated person". The word rose to renewed popularity in the 1940s- 1960s , as a collective term, often referring to rural populations of developing countries in general - as the "semantic successor to 'native', incorporating all its condescending and racial overtones". The word peasantry is commonly used in a non-pejorative sense as a collective noun for the rural population in the poor and developing countries of the world The term peasant literally means a person working on the land with simple tools. Even tlie entire rural population including the big landlords and the agricultural labourers have been treated as peasantry. This treatment does overlook the differences between and among the categories both in terms of the land holdings, technology, employment of labour etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Implementing and Maintaining Neoliberal Agriculture in Australia
    IMPLEMENTING AND MAINTAINING NEOLIBERAL AGRICULTURE IN AUSTRALIA. PART II STRATEGIES FOR SECURING NEOLIBERALISM Bill Pritchard School of Geosciences, University of Sydney Introduction The formal attachment to this [multilateral agricultural liberalisation] agenda has displayed a quality akin to religious fervour, unqualified by the details of experience (Jones 1994:1). uring the 1960s and 1970s there was a seismic shift in the intellectual environment of the D discipline of agricultural economics in Australia. The discipline as a whole became more centred on the influence of the Chicago School paradigm, which emphasised the social benefits of free markets. By the 1980s, these views had inculcated key policy arenas within the Australian Government. In combination with a reformist Labour Party administration which sought to challenge the policy authority of National Party influence in rural affairs, 1 these perspectives gained centrality as a guiding vision for public policy interests in agriculture. The first instalment of this two-part series of articles (Pritchard, 2005a) detailed how, by the end of the 1990s, this intellectual juggernaut had radically transformed the relationships between the state and market within Australia’s rural economy. In this article, attention is focused to the issue of how these policy prescriptions have been maintained and justified. Such a focus is extremely timely, coming approximately ten years after the formation of the WTO. The Australian Government’s advocacy of market liberalisation in agriculture is extremely influential within that body. In her history of Australia and the world trading system, for example, Capling (2001:2) argues “Australia has wielded far more influence in multilateral trade institutions than is warranted by its size and power in the global economy”.
    [Show full text]
  • Market Power, Misconceptions, And
    American Journal of Agricultural Economics Advance Access published November 24, 2012 MARKET POWER,MISCONCEPTIONS, AND MODERN AGRICULTURAL MARKETS RICHARD J. SEXTON Although microeconomics textbook writers many other textbook writers: “Thousands of Downloaded from continue to point to agricultural markets as farmers produce wheat, which thousands of examples of competitive markets, in real- buyers purchase to produce flour and other ity probably none are, especially in light of products. As a result, no single farmer and no dramatically increased concentration in food single buyer can significantly affect the price manufacturing (Rogers 2001) and grocery of wheat,” (p. 8). Yet, the U.S. Department of retailing (McCorriston 2002; Reardon et al. Justice (1999) sued to prevent the merger of http://ajae.oxfordjournals.org/ 2003), emphasis on many dimensions of prod- Cargill and Continental Grain Company,alleg- uct quality and differentiation (Saitone and ing that, “Unless the acquisition is enjoined, Sexton 2010), and the rapid increase in vertical many American farmers likely will receive coordination through integration and contracts lower prices for their grain and oilseed crops, (MacDonald and Korb 2011; Goodhue 2011). including corn, soybeans, and wheat.”1 Sales For the basic precept of a competitive mar- from the production of the “thousands” of ket to hold, namely that all buyers and sellers farmers in Canada, the second-largest wheat are price-takers, three conditions must be met: exporting country, were until August 1, 2012, under the control of a single state trader, and at Libraries-Montana State University, Bozeman on March 20, 2013 • Buyers and sellers must be small relative wheat is a highly differentiated product based to the total size of the market, meaning upon protein content and other factors (Wil- there must be many of each; son 1989; Lavoie 2005).
    [Show full text]
  • Benefits to Agricultural Workers Under the Unemployment Compensation Amendment of 1976
    BENEFITS TO AGRICULTURAL WORKERS UNDER THE UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION AMENDMENT OF 1976 By G. Joachim Elterich* n January 1978, under P.L. 94­ The "Unemployment Compensation Under the employment compensa­ 566, Unemployment Insurance Amendments of 1976" are expected to tion program, eligible workers are p!:o­ I provide income protection for about two­ (UI) coverage was extended to agri­ fifths of all hired agricultural workers. The vided with partial income protection cultural workers in establishments program became effective in January 1978. should they become unemployed employing 10 or more workers for 20 Of these insured workers, three-tenths are expected to receive benefits, expected to with cause. Only those working for weeks or more, or with a quarterly average about 14 percent of average annual employers subject to the law are eli­ payroll of at least $20,000. Recent earnings if 1970 employment relationships gible to receive benefits. They must studies of the impact of the law on hold. Nearly one-fourth of unemployed farm workers who receive benefits will meet the following additional condi­ agricultural employers and trust funds likely exhaust their entitlements before tions. Unemployment for UI purposes found: finding new jobs. Large interstate varia­ is defined in monetary and nonmone­ tions are expected around these averages tary terms. To qualify monetarily, a Only about six percent of all as a result of differing State qualifying regulations, benefit schedules, and per­ worker must show "SUbstantial agricultural (five percent of sonal work histories. farm) employers will be attachment" to the covered labor affected by the law, and these Keywords: force, either for a sufficient number employers cover about half 0f Unemployment insurance of weeks or its equivalent in earnings.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Agricultural Economics and Economics
    THE COLLEGE of AGRICULTURE Department of Agricultural Economics and Economics The Agricultural Economics and Economics Department at Montana State University offers a unique opportunity for students with diverse interests to learn skills in critical analysis, logical problem solving, data and policy analysis, written and oral communication, and business management. Our award-winning faculty has expertise in a wide variety of fields, conduct cutting- edge research, and take an active interest in their students by keeping class sizes small and implementing innovative teaching methods. Our programs have an excellent reputation with local, regional, national and international firms, as well as graduate schools in law, economics, and public policy. CURRICULUM OPTIONS B.S. Agricultural Business ities on the other, is growing rapidly. The MSU B. S. Economics Agricultural businesses are involved in agribusiness management curriculum has Offered as an interdisciplinary program from producing, transporting, processing and established an excellent reputation with em- the College of Agriculture and the College of distributing food and fiber products. Almost ployers and is specifically designed for man- Letters and Science, the Economics major 20 percent of the U.S. economy’s output agement training with emphasis on finance, offers training and applied knowledge in involves the food and fiber sector—90 accounting, and managerial economics in economic development, environmental policy percent of which occurs beyond the farm agriculture-related businesses and industries. and natural resource economics, industrial gate. Agribusiness is a dynamic industry with organization, international economics and a high degree of global and technological Farm and Ranch Management Option trade, labor economics, money and banking, sophistication.
    [Show full text]