Structure and Finances of U.S. Farms: 2005 Family Farm Report

Hoppe, Robert; Banker, David E.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.923592

Cited by 133 publications

(181 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

175

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our respondents skew to higher income categories, possibly due to the number of active small commercial farms responding to our survey, whereas the Census of Agriculture gathers data from all farms, including "point farms" that are not farming but that are capable of generating at least US$1,000 in farm income per year (Hoppe, 2014).…”

Section: Farm Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oregon producer and consumer engagement in regional food networks: Motivations and future opportunities

Brekken

Parks

Lundgren

2017

J. Agric. Food Syst. Community Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Local and regional food marketed through direct and intermediated channels has been increasing in the U.S., with studies of producers and consumers conducted at different places and times illuminating the trend. Oregon producers and consumers have shown long-running interest in local agriculture, with direct markets providing a wellestablished connection between fresh and local food. To examine motivations and barriers for the continued development of the Oregon regional food network (RFN), we conducted in-depth surveys of Oregon producers and consumers across economic, social, and environmental variables. We identify some salient characteristics of farm enterprises that contribute to the RFN through different types of marketing channels, and consumer perceptions and utilization of RFN marketing channels. By analyzing producer and consumer surveys side by side, we identify opportunities for greater integration of food system actors within the RFN if producers, supply-chain partners, and consumers come together to realize the potential in regional marketing channels, particularly sales to retail, institutions, and regional distributors with differentiated products based on place of origin. Using Oregon as an example, we find overall trends and nuanced distinctions by looking across the diverse agricultural and marketing landscapes, giving some insight into local and regional food Advance online publication system motivations that may also be useful to farmers, policy makers, and researchers in this and other regions.

show abstract

Section: Farm Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oregon producer and consumer engagement in regional food networks: Motivations and future opportunities

Brekken

Parks

Lundgren

2017

J. Agric. Food Syst. Community Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the U.S. over 98 percent of all farms are family farms, and those farm families own 93.5 percent of all farmland (Hoppe and Banker, 2006). In Iowa, the average length of ownership of family farms was 83 years (Korsching, Lasley, and Gruber, 2007).…”

Section: Introduction and Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Farm Succession and Retirement: Some International Comparisons

Lobley

Baker

Whitehead

2010

JAFSCD

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increasing age of farmers and the reluctance to transfer management from the owning generation to the successor generation has been well documented by several studies. In this article we review the literature relating to the succession of farm businesses. Drawing on data from the international FARMTRANSFERS project, we explore attitudes toward retirement and also rates and patterns of succession in several contrasting countries and states in the United States. Lastly, we (0)1752 585913 discuss the implications of the research and provide recommendations for public policies that would enhance the opportunities for successors to succeed in the continuation of the farm family business.

show abstract

“…14 Phase II data were used to define conservation program participants versus nonparticipants (for each survey): (1) to ensure maximum use of the larger usable sample sizes for CEAP-ARMS Phase II data when evaluating alternative conservation practice issues; and (2) because the Phase III conservation program participation information applies to the whole farm and not necessarily to the detailed field-level, Phase II conservation practice data linked to the NRI environmental data. 15 For a detailed definition of the full ERS farm typology, see the ERS Family Farm Report, 2010 Edition (EIB-66) by Hoppe and Banker (2010) at http://www.ers. usda.gov/media/184479/eib66 1 .pdf.…”

Section: Data: Usda's Integrated Ceap-arms Surveysmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors influencing environmental stewardship in U.S. agriculture: Conservation program participants vs. non-participants

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tUnited States Department of Agriculture (USDA) conservation policy has increasingly shifted from a traditional land-retirement focus to greater emphasis on producer adoption of working-land conservation practices. This research made use of USDA integrated field/farm surveys, the Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) and Agricultural Resources Management Survey (ARMS), to (1) enhance understanding of operator, field, farm, economic, and environmental characteristic differences between conservation program participants and non-participants across a farm typology, and (2) to enhance understanding of the relative importance of these factors on influencing farm stewardship intensity in corn and wheat production, i.e., how these factors influence differences in producer adoption of alternative levels of land and pest-management practices between conservation program participants and non-participants. The research used a cost-function acreage-based technology adoption model to examine farm stewardship differences. Results indicate that program non-participants invest more heavily in land conserving and pest-management practices than program participants. Relative prices, structural, and socio-environmental factors play significantly different roles across crops, and between conservation program participants and non-participants, in their influence on producer adoption decisions for land and pest-management intensity. The environmental effectiveness and cost efficiency of conservation programs will likely improve when their implementation more explicitly recognizes farm heterogeneity as well as differences in farmer motivations for stewardship investments. Recognizing these differences can help improve targeting of conservation incentive structures.

show abstract

Structure and Finances of U.S. Farms: 2005 Family Farm Report

Cited by 133 publications

References 7 publications

Oregon producer and consumer engagement in regional food networks: Motivations and future opportunities

Oregon producer and consumer engagement in regional food networks: Motivations and future opportunities

Farm Succession and Retirement: Some International Comparisons

Factors influencing environmental stewardship in U.S. agriculture: Conservation program participants vs. non-participants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About