Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T10:42:54.203Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some Evidence on Pecuniary Economies of Size for Farm Firms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Bernard V. Tew ,
Stan Spurlock ,
Wesley N. Musser  and
Bill R. Miller
Bernard V. Tew
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Georgia
Stan Spurlock
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Georgia
Wesley N. Musser
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Georgia
Bill R. Miller
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Georgia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Economies of size for farm firms in the United States are a traditional interest of agricultural economists (Heady). Continued interest in this topic is related to the implication of economies of size for the size structure of farm firms. The structure issue has the potential to affect not only current farm firms but also agricultural marketing firms, rural communities, and consumers of agricultural commodities (Krause and Kyle). In the past, the relationship between economies of size and farm firm growth was the basis for research. More recently, the relationship of economies of size to public policy issues has gained attention (Bardnam, Hall and LeVeen, Seckler and Young).

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , July 1980 , pp. 151 - 154
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1980

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

Bardnam, Pranab. “Agricultural Development and Land Tenancy in a Peasant Economy: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis.” A mer. J. Agr. Econ. 61(1979):48–57.Google Scholar
Bressler, Raymond G. Jr. and King, Richard A.. Market Prices and Interregional Trade. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
Carter, H. O. and Dean, G. W.. “Cost-Size Relationships for Cash Crop Farms in a Highly Commercialized Agriculture.” J. FarmEcon. 43(1961):264–77.Google Scholar
Faris, J. Edwin and Armstrong, David L.. Economics Associated with Size, Kern County Cash-Crop Farms. Giannini Foundation Res. Rep. 269, University of California, 1963.Google Scholar
Hall, Bruce F. and LeVeen, E. Phillip. “Farm Size and Economic Efficiency: The Case of California.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 60(1978):589–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heady, Earl O.Economies of Agricultural Production and Resource Use. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1952, pp. 349–81.Google Scholar
Krause, Kenneth R. and Kyle, Leonard R.. “Economic Factors Underlying the Incidence of Large Farming Units: The Current Situation and Probable Trends.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 52(1970):748–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MatuKch, Scott C. “Efficiencies in Large-Scale Dairying; Incentives for Future Structural Change.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 60(1978):642–8.Google Scholar
Musser, Wesley N. and Marable, Ulysses Jr. “The Impact of Energy Prices on Optimum Machinery Size and the Structure of Agriculture: A Georgia Example.” S. J. Agr. Econ. 8(1976):205–11.Google Scholar
Raup, Phillip M. “Economies and Diseconomies of Large-Scale Agriculture.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 51(1969):1274–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seckler, David and Young, Robert A.. “Economics and Policy Implications of the 160-Acre Limitation in Reclamation Law.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 60(1978):575–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar