Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T11:20:32.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Do Purchasing Patterns Differ Between Large and Small Dairy Farms? Econometric Evidence from Three Wisconsin Communities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Jeremy D. Foltz ,
Douglas Jackson-Smith  and
Lucy Chen
Jeremy D. Foltz
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Connecticut
Douglas Jackson-Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology, Social Work, and Anthropology, Utah State University
Lucy Chen
Affiliation:
Program on Agricultural Technology Studies, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Get access

Abstract

Using farm data from three dairy-dependent communities in Wisconsin, this study addresses the question: Do small farms spend more locally than large farms? The work develops a theoretical model of farm cost functions with transaction costs varying between local and distant input sources. This model is then tested econometrically, describing farm costs and where they were spent as a function of transaction/search costs and farm characteristics. The results suggest that scale does matter to farm spending patterns.

Keywords

community economicsdairy industryfarm sizepurchasing patterns
Type
Articles
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 31 , Issue 1 , April 2002 , pp. 28 - 38
Copyright
Copyright © 2002 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barnes, D., and Blevins, A. (1992). “Farm Structure and the Economic Well-Being of Nonmetropolitan Counties.” Rural Sociology 57(3), 333–346.Google Scholar
Batey, P. (1991). “Household Structure and Extended Input-Output Models: A New Formulation.” In Dewhurst, J., Hewings, G., and Jensen, R. (eds.), Regional Input-Output Modeling: New Developments and Interpretations (pp. 118–140). Aldershot, UK: Avebury Publishing.Google Scholar
Blair, P., and Wyckoff, A. (1989). “The Changing Structure of the U.S. Economy: An Input-Output Analysis.” In Miller, R., Polenske, K., and Rose, A. (eds.), Frontiers of Input-Output Analysis (pp. 293–307). New York/London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chambers, R. (1988). Applied Production Analysis. New York/London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chism, J. W., and Levins, R. A. (1994, Spring). “Farm Spending and Local Selling: How Do They Match Up?” Minnesota Agricultural Economist, No. 676. Minnesota Extension Service, University of Minnesota, St. Paul.Google Scholar
Cowell, D. K., and Green, G. P. (1994). “Community Attachment and Spending Location: The Importance of Place in Household Consumption.” Social Science Quarterly 75(3), 637–655.Google Scholar
Dewhurst, J., Hewings, G., and Jensen, R., eds. (1991). Regional Input-Output Modeling: New Developments and Interpretations. Aldershot, UK: Avebury Publishing.Google Scholar
Gilles, J. L., and Dalecki, M. (1988). “Rural Well-Being and Agricultural Change in Two Farming Regions.” Rural Sociology 53(1), 40–55.Google Scholar
Goldschmidt, W. (1978). As You Sow. Montclair, NJ: Allaneld, Osmun & Co. [Original printing 1947, Harcourt, Brace & Co., New York.]Google Scholar
Hayes, M. N., and Olmstead, A. L. (1984). “Farm Size and Community Quality: Arvin and Dinuba Revisited.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66(4), 430–436.Google Scholar
Ivey, M. (2000, May 11). “State Aided Bid of Farm over Town” Capital Times, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
Korsching, P. F. (1985). “Farm Structural Characteristics and Proximity of Purchase Location of Goods and Services.” In Fear, F. A. and Schwarzweller, H. K. (eds.), Research in Rural Sociology and Development, Vol. 2 (pp. 261–287). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, Inc.Google Scholar
Labao, L. M. (1990). Locality and Inequality: Farm and Industry Structure and Socioeconomic Conditions. Albany, NY: The State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Labao, L. M., and Schulman, M. (1991). “Farming Patterns, Rural Restructuring, and Poverty: A Comparative Regional Analysis.” Rural Sociology 56(4), 565–602.Google Scholar
Lawrence, J., Otto, D., and Meyer, S. (1997, Spring). “Purchasing Patterns of Hog Producers: Implications for Rural Agribusiness.” Journal of Agribusiness 15(1), 1–18.Google Scholar
Maddala, G. S. (1983). Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics. New York/London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marousek, G. (1979, December). “Farm Size and Rural Communities: Some Economic Relationships.” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics 11(2), 57–61.Google Scholar
Miller, N. J. (1998). “Local Consumer Spending: A Reflection of Rural Community Social and Economic Exchange.” Journal of the Community Development Society 29(2), 166–185.Google Scholar
Miller, R., Polenske, K., and Rose, A., eds. (1989). Frontiers of Input-Output Analysis. New York/London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mowris, J. (2000, April 26). “Town Says No to Big Dairy Farm” Capital Times, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
Pinkerton, J. R., Hassinger, E. W., and O'Brien, D. J. (1995). “In-Shopping by Residents of Small Communities.” Rural Sociology 60(3), 467–480.Google Scholar
Richardson, H. (1985). “Input-Output and Economic Base Multipliers: Looking Backward and Forward.” Journal of Regional Science 25(4), 607–662.Google Scholar
Strange, M. (1988). Family Farming: A New Economic Vision. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. (1999, March). 1997 Census of Agriculture. USDA/National Agricultural Statistics Service, Washington, DC.Google Scholar