Historic, archived document Do not assume content reflects current scientific knowledge, policies, or practices. i A j g - Miscellaneous U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Publication 901 Economic Research Service Farm Economics Division 1 SOURCES CONSULTED Agricultural Index, 1950-61 Applied Science and Technology Index, I960 the Unite StateS * > 1918-1936. A Selected ^"Sti-i&i 01of R^ferencTsKeierences. U. S. R A ^STT Bur. Agr. Econ. Bibliog 70 1937 ^n? ^ Bercaw L o and Hannay, A. M. Bibliography on La^d Utilizationnation, U. S. Dept. Agr. Misc. 11918-36.9 ?8 36 Pub. 284, 1938. 1508 p Bibliography of Agriculture, 1950-61 Kelerences 1950-58. Agr. Misc. ' U. S. Dept. Pub. 825, I960. 212 p. Denman, D. R. , Switzer, J. F. Q and Sawvpr n w iwr D -ur Land Economy and Landownershtp l^^uLzh)*™^ "' RUra ' LJe l F '« -"gr. mbliog. Bui. 2Z, 1953. 293 p t J° Urnals v ' 1886-1924, 1925- 1 3 kcon. l " 9 9 and 1940- ^-±7.9 4 9 AmerAmer. ^"Eco^'rr^Assoc., Homewood, 111., 1961. Library of Congress card catalog Public Affairs Information Service Bulletin, 1950-60 Readers Guide Index, 1950-61 U. S. Dept. of Agriculture Library card catalog PREFACE This report is a compilation of selected references concerning agricultural rents in the United States and Great Britain. A list of sources consulted is sup- plied. However, it is realized that references may have been omitted either be- cause the publications were not available or because their titles did not suggest that they contained information on the subject. Descriptive studies of prevailing rental practices are cited in the section, "Empirical Studies on Rent at the Firm Level. " The primary intent of the bibliography is to serve as a reservoir of infor- mation for those who may have use for material pertaining to rent in theory and in practice. Such information may provide a valuable guide for further research on rent, and facilitate the exchange of ideas among researchers. It should also provide a basis for appraising the contributions to rent theory and analysis in specific areas of study that have been made over the last two centuries. No other such bibliography was found to exist. The bibliography is arranged by specific areas of rent analysis. Attention is focused on areas that have had the least development. This investigation was directed toward rent analyses and is only indirectly concerned with analyses of leases, land tenure, and land use. The author gratefully acknowledges the valuable counsel and assistance received from W. H. Scofield, Farm Economics Division, and Elizabeth Gould Davis, Division of Bibliography, U. S. Department of Agriculture Library. CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 Background 1 Recent Contributions to Rent Theory 4 AMERICAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO RENT THEORY 7 General 7 History 21 Aggregate Theory 24 Firm Theory 28 Statistical Studies 49 Empirical Studies on Rent at the Firm Level 51 BRITISH CONTRIBUTIONS TO RENT THEORY 56 General 56 History 54 Aggregate Theory 63 Firm Theory and Empirical Studies on Rent 79 OTHER CONTRIBUTIONS TO RENT THEORY 74 AUTHOR INDEX 78 Some abbreviations used: B. - bulletin; C. = circular; Col. = college; J. = journal; n. s. = new series; pt. = part; pub. = publication; Q. = quarterly; Ser. = series; Serv. = service; U. = university; U. S. D. A. = U. S. Department of Agricul- ture; v. = volume. March 1962 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. C. - Price 45 cents - AGRICULTURAL RENTS IN THEORY AND PRACTICE AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY Compiled by Carey B. Singleton, Jr. , agricultural economist Farm Economics Division, Economic Research Service INTRODUCTION Background Rent means different things to different people. The subject of rent has piqued economists for generations, particularly since the advent of the Ricardian Doctrine. Ricardo ( 3Z7 , p. 33) defined rent as: . .that portion of the produce of the earth which is paid to the landlord for the use of the original and indestructible powers of the soil. It is often, however, confounded with the interest and profit of capital, and, in popular language, the term is applied to whatever is annually paid by a farmer to his landlord. If, of two adjoining farms of the same ex- tent, and of the same natural fertility, one had all the conveniences of farming buildings, and besides, were properly drained and manured, and advantageously divided by hedges, fences, and walls, while the other had none of these advantages, more remuneration would naturally be paid for the use of one than for the use of the other; yet in both cases this remuneration would be called rent. But it is evident that a portion only of the money annually to be paid for the improved farm would be given for the original and indestructible powers of the soil; the other portion would be paid for the use of capital which had been employed in ameliorating the quality of the land, and in erecting such buildings as were necessary to secure and preserve the produce. Today, the definition of rent is more or less a semantic nightmare to econ- omists. The concept of rent has been a puzzling and at times a thoroughly dis- turbing idea and doctrine in economic thought for almost two centuries. Land, the core of the Ricardian model and the basis of Henry George's reform pro- gram, has been all but abandoned by present-day rent theorists. In the many twists and turns of economic thought, the term "land rent" was gradually sup- planted by a more generalized notion of economic rent which can appear at times in any and all income payments. In everyday usage, rent means money paid out at a specified interval for the use of physical property of all kinds- apartments, office buildings, land, machines, automobiles, trailers, boats, clothing, and so on. The result has been a departure from the theoretical rent approach based primarily on land toward a concept of rent in which land has be- come a less significant factor of production. Even the Internal Revenue Service has been called upon to make a ruling concerning the definition of rent. The Serv- ice held that farm rents do not cover income derived by a landowner under an agreement to share crops and costs with tenants. It reasoned that the income came from actual farm operations and was not a passive return on an investment. Thus if income is a passive return on an investment, it is rent; if income is re- ceived from actual entrepreneurial operations, it is income but not rent. 1 Underscored numbers in parentheses refer to items in the Bibliography. 2 Wall Street Journal. June 21, 1961, p. 1 The term"economic rent" as used by economists today describes an "unearned increment"; that is, a surplus or a reward in excess of that required to bring forth a desired effect or return. Ely (2_2, p. 441) states: The rent of any piece of land is measured by the difference between the money value of the products obtained from it by the use of the most ad- vantageous amounts of labor and capital and the money value of the prod- ucts which could be obtained by the use of the same amounts of labor and capital on marginal land, or at the intensive margin of cultivation. Rent has been looked upon by some economists as a "producer's surplus"; that is, a differential surplus obtained by producers who have an advantage over marginal producers. R. T. Bye (1_2, p. 404) applies this concept to land rent in the following statement: The rent yielded by a piece of land is equal to the value of the surplus product yielded by the labor and instrumental capital applied to that land, over the yield of an equal amount of labor and instrumental capital applied at the intensive or extensive margins of cultivation. Carlton ( 113 ) views rent as a monopoly income: Land is in a sense produced, but it differs from a tool in that it occupies of necessity a certain fixed space, in that it stands in certain peculiar rela- tions to markets, which relations cannot be duplicated. This peculiarity, which is in a sense a monopoly privilege, is a factor entering into the price of that piece of land. ... If all land areas were equally desirable in location as regards markets, pure land rent would. probably be an unknown phe- nomenon. All franchises, rights of way, patents, monopoly privileges, and business advantages, as well as land, stand in peculiar relations to markets. Their value is due to the exclusive and peculiar position which they occupy. The conditions and relations which they bear to particular or to all markets cannot be duplicated or reproduced. This monopoly power has come into being because of the existence of a complexly organized society (p. 55). Land rent in its restricted sense is only one form of 'rent. ' Rent is an in- come received because of the existence of some economic privilege or desirable market opportunity which is not susceptible of depreciation in the sense of physical wear and tear (p. 61). Marshall ( 3Z5 ) distinguished rent in its pure form from land rent. He indicates that: . .the rent of land is no unique fact, but simply the chief species of a large genus of economic phenomena; and that the theory of the rent of land is no isolated economic doctrine, but merely one of the chief applications of a particular corollary from the general theory of demand and supply; that there is a continuous gradation from the true rent of those free gifts which have been appropriated by man, through the income derived from permanent improvements of the soil, to those yielded by farm and factory buildings, steam engines and less durable goods (p.