Personal distribution of well‐being of farm families relative to all U. S. families is substantially improved when wealth is considered along with money income. The “live poor and die rich” paradox facing older farm families could often be overcome by providing an easier means whereby they could use up equity in family living.
Even the most casual review of literature suggests that there are numerous definitions of small farm. Range in definitions varies from acres of land, units of livestock, value of farm products sold, days worked off-farm, level of farm income, to level of total family income [3]. Many authors combine two or more of these classificatio ns to arrive at a more limited definition. Some authors even display wisdom by not attempting to specifically define what they mean by small farms. It becomes clear that the small farm is not precisely defined either within the agricultural research community or for the general public. As William W. Wood recently points out "Small becomes less a descriptive term than it is a philosophical one. .. . Policy objectives and small-farm categories are interrelated, and they are identified on the basis of the concerns of interested parties or participants" [6]. Public discussion of small-farm issues is also confounded by a lingering set of beliefs about farming-some of which may no longer be valid. These beliefs include: 1 , o The economic performance of the farm establishment is an accurate reflection of the economic well-being of the farm family. o Small farms are problems while family farms have problems. Images of the family farm are inherently positive while images of the small farm are inherently negative.
The Americal'l Agricultural Economics Association devoted a full seminar ~ session at the 1972 meetings to discussing 11 our obsolete data systems.'' At M-that time, the AAEA Economic Statistics Committee pointed out quite vividly .....____ that the 11 • • • conceptual foundation of the (data)' system i~ crumbl ing-and has been for some time. 11 [l, p. 867]. The Economic Research Service, USDA, has also been exploring problem~_associated•with economic accounting in the food and fiber sector [2, 3]. Thus, economists both in and out of government .have been concerned about economic accounting for agriculture and the future direction it should take. The purpose of this paper is to suggest new con-\J" ceptual views of the food and fiber sector and its implications for account-; ng sys terns. Certain caveats are in order. The subject will be presented only in rough outline form. Volumes have been written.on accounting in economics. as the subject is both 11 broad 11 as well as 11 deep. 11 We shal 1 start with the premise that we are suggesting an ideal system; for it is recognized that at times ideals must be sacrificed in the real world. Many problems exist in implementing the suggestions below, one of which is the lack of data on some elements. The discussion will be limited to aggregate economic accounts for
Total money income typically is used to indicate the relative economic status of people. A family with total money income below some commonly recognized standard may be deemed to be poor. For example, the official low-income standard is the benchmark used by most analysts to indicate persons in poverty [15]. Historically, the proportion of farm people with low incomes has been greater than that for nonfarm people. In the 1960's, however, the income gap between farm and nonfarm people narrowed due primarily to increased off-farm income [2]. Growth in off-farm income in recent years ranks among several major changes affecting families in the farming sector [3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 16].We recognize that the concept of economic status is multi-dimensional including elements other than current money income. Some of these include aspects of permanent income [4], net worth [18], and the general quality of life [1, 6].
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.