ebook img

the economics of very small farms PDF

125 Pages·2017·9.33 MB·English
by  
Save to my drive
Quick download
Download
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.

Preview the economics of very small farms

The World’s Largest Open Access Agricultural & Applied Economics Digital Library This document is discoverable and free to researchers across the globe due to the work of AgEcon Search. Help ensure our sustainability. Give to AgE con Search AgEcon Search http://ageconsearch.umn.edu [email protected] Papers downloaded from AgEcon Search may be used for non-commercial purposes and personal study only. No other use, including posting to another Internet site, is permitted without permission from the copyright owner (not AgEcon Search), or as allowed under the provisions of Fair Use, U.S. Copyright Act, Title 17 U.S.C. •No. 9 './‘0 1Dt'INNIG pniversity of Reading Department of Agricultural Economics & Management GIANNINI FOUNDATION OF AGRICULTURAL ECOMICS V\*C) #C4, ig9,0 THE ECONOMICS OF VERY SMALL FARMS A FURTHER LOOK D. J. Ansel!, A. K. Giles and J. Rendell Special Studies in Agricultural Economics Report No 9 1990 UNIVERSITY OF READING Department of Agricultural Economics & Management The Economics of VERY SMALL FARMS — A Further Look D. J. Ansell, A. K. Giles and J. Rendell Special Studies in Agricultural Economics Report No. 9. 0 7049 0593 0 1990 Price £6.00 CONTENTS Page Preface and Acknowledgements Summary 1 Some Extracts from Provincial Reports 3 Introduction 5 Section A: Analysis of Survey Results by 10 Type of Holding Section B: Provincial Reports 39 Introduction 39 Centres: Wye 43 Reading 49 Exeter 56 Cambridge 62 Nottingham 69 Manchester 74 Askham Bryan 82 Newcastle 86 Aberystwyth 90 Section C: The European Community Regions 108 Definitions of Terms Used in the Summary Tables 114 Annex 1: Reports on Special Studies in Agricultural Economics Annex 2: Provincial Centres of Agricultural Economics Erratum PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The agriculture of the UK is characterised by large farm businesses, which produce most of the industry's output. For many years the share in total production of these larger enterprises has tended to grow. By 1989 almost three-quarters of the area of cereals was in farms with 50 ha. or more cereals and more than 40% of our dairy cows were in herds of 100 or more. In the light of this, it might seem that from the point of view of food the farms studied here are insignificant. Indeed, they have usually been excluded from official agricultural statistics on those grounds. Very small farms, however, do occupy a distinctive role in our countryside. They are the homes of a large number of people. Those who live in them devote a significant part of their time and energy to farming activities. Some small farms make an important contribution to special, niche, markets; their owners may be pioneers - or fanatics. Most, however, cope with conventional farming enterprises, facing the ups and downs of the market in common with all farmers and having to undertake additional non-farm work in order to make ends meet. Clearly such farmers value their way of life and, in doing so, contribute to the rural communities of which they are part. This report, which has been written and edited by Professor Giles and Mr. Ansell, helps to provide a factual background to the economic situation of such farms. It, together with the two earlier reports, gives, an insight into how such businesses are affected by the changes taking place in agriculture in the European Community and the UK. As attention switches from policies designed to promote food production to policies which are of a more socially' and environmentally sensitive nature, the significance of very small farms, which help to keep village communities alive, is of growing importance. The balance of agricultural and non- farming activities may affect the stability of this important group of rural business and their influence in the future development of rural Britain. This University would, of course, not have been able to carry out its work as national co-ordinator of this study without the helpful collaboration of many individuals and institutions to whom we are grateful. Our thanks, therefore, go to members of the Economics (Farm Business) Division of MAFF, who have helped in initiating the study; to members of the Planning Group; to the investigational staff at all of the Centres involved, and in particular to the local co-ordinators and authors; and to John Rendell, now retired from this Department, but who has again undertaken the mammoth task of analysing the data. We have, as in previous years, included as much of the data as seems manageable in a simple report, but would do our best to meet any requests for additional information that may be hidden in our computer. As always in these matters special thanks must go to the co-operating farmers: many of them, up and down the country who - in their busy and sometimes worrying lives - have patiently given us their time and answered our questions. We will have met them for a second time before this study is in print and we are grateful to them. Finally, we have to end on a sad note: for it was with the deepest sadness that we and our colleagues around the country heard of the sudden news, late in 1989, of Mike Pick's death. A graduate of this University and a loyal servant of MAFF, he had, in various ways, endeared himself to all who knew and worked with him. He had fought stubbornly against uncertain health, but his death was unexpected. In recent years he had a major influence on the new series of Special Studies in Agricultural Economics of which Number 1 was the first in the sequence of reports on Very Small Farms. When the four-year study is complete it will stand as a major part of the testimony to Mike Pick's interests and industry. He is and will be greatly missed. Professor J. S. Marsh, Head of Department. April, 1990. SUMARY Objectives This report presents the results from the third year of a four-year study of Very Small Farms which has had as its objectives to provide information about: - the farming activities practised, - the profitability of those activities, - the nature and content of non-farming employment and incomes, - attitudes regarding past, present and future intentions. Methodology The study has been conducted for all three years (1986, 1987 and 1988) by departments responsible for agricultural economics in nine universities and colleges in England awl Wales,1 and has embraced those farms which, because of their smallness are not included in the annual Farm Business Survey. Data have been collected from these farms, by interview, for each of the three calendar years. An identical sample of just over 500 holdings was involved in 1966 and 1987. In this third year the study has been based on a freshly drawn and enlarged sample of over 1,200 holdings. The results for 1988 are presented here, as they have been in the two previous reports, in three different ways: for seven main farming types, for the nine investigating centres, and for four European Community regions. Main Conclusions 1. It has been a feature of this survey, over its three years, that whilst it has drawn attention to the variability of individual circumstances and motives for farming on this scale, it has reflected a distinct lack of variability in the general financial outcome for most of those involved. The new and enlarged sample has served to confirm that, even within the changing fortunes of different sectors of farming, the picture remains virtually unchanged on these 'very small farms' with low agricultural investment levels, low intensity farming and low (almost non-existent) farming incomes. 1Northern Ireland was included in this study for 1986 and 1987, and in Scotland a separate but similar study has been conducted for 1987 and 1968. 2The farms are below 4 British Size Units and, therefore, do not warrant the full-time employment of one person. 1 2. In England, average Net Farm Income on these farms in 1988 averaged a mere £300; in Wales, by the same token, there were losses. Off-farm income averaged £12,600 in England and £7,600 in Wales. With the labour of farmer and spouse being fairly evenly divided between on- farm and off-farm work, the disproportionate reward to on-farm work is self-evident. 3. It is tempting to draw attention to the substantial percentage changes in average farming incomes reflected in this survey from year to year, e.g. nationally speaking, just over £300 in 1986, over £800 in 1987 and back to around £100 in 1988. But such changes are, of course, small in absolute terms; and (as pointed out in the concluding remarks of Section A) are likely to occur where the figure is a residual between two other figures (output and costs) often changing independently and similar in magnitude to each other. To emphasise such changes would be inconsistent with our already stated general conclusions. 4. Even the gradually improving - and, in percentage terms, the dramatically improving - circumstances of very small dairy farms (with occupier's farming income of around £1,200 in 1986, £2,000 in 1987 and £4,500 in 1988) do not represent a move from anything but dire income levels - coupled, as they inevitably are on dairy farms, with less opportunity to work and earn off the farm. All other farm types, with a much more even distribution of labour effort on and off the farm (except in the case of horticulture), were able to generate substantially more non-farming income than were dairy farmers. But this was needed to compensate, in many cases, for a substantially lower farm income as well. 5. It is not intended to draw conclusions here about the differences reflected by the various data-collecting centres, with the often artificial farming divisions represented by their boundaries. Again, however, the differences are small in absolute terms although the influence of dairying in the more western areas is evident. The same influence is evident in the results from the four EC regions with the highest average 'occupier's income' (£1,706) occurring in the West Region, with the dairying figure (£4,929) the highest component of that regional average. The Future There remains one more year of results to emerge from this four-year study: those for the 1989 calendar year. At the time of writing this report (i.e. the Spring of 1990) the field work is well underway. The data will again be analysed at Reading - during the second half of 1990 - and our final report, including a renewed socio-economic emphasis - will be written in time to appear in the early summer of 1991. 2 SOME EXTRACTS FROM THE PROVINCIAL REPORTS IN SECTION B - 1988 Financial Year, Surveyed in 1989 - 'Anecdotes of investment successes were frequently encountered (in 1988) from those with significant off-farm incomes, which were absent from the present study (in 1969). One may postulate that the reversal of fortunes resulting from Black Monday and higher interest rates has created difficulties in this sector, and that the 'smallholder' rather than the commuting resident has emerged in relatively robust shape in the South East.' M. 3. M. Bent, Wye College. 'In addition to differences in soil type and climate, the main reason for the wide spectrum of results (from farm financial surveys) is due to the variation of technical efficiency with which farmers produce agricultural and horticultural products. An added variable that could be ascribed to the participants in this particular study was the purpose for which the farm was being occupied.' J. Wright, University of Reading. 'It would appear that, in most cases, the very small farm is better regarded as being on the residential fringe of agriculture rather than as a first step on the farming ladder.' M. M. Turner, University of Exeter. 'It would be wrong to assume that all of these farms have serious problems. Clearly some do, where, for example, the level of output is low and the holding provides the sole occupation for the farmer. For others, where the main source of income came from an off-farm occupation, the farming activity is much less important and the holding mainly residential.' J. G. Davidson, University of Cambridge. 'By their very nature these holdings are not dynamic in their management .... in general (they) tend to be extensively farmed and the level of off- farm activity is more significant than time spent on the holding, both in terms of hours spent and income generated.' S. J. Mellors, University of Nottingham. 3 'What is remarkable in many cases, is the ability of farm families to survive on very low incomes. It is significant also, that so many of these holdings were owner-occupied; on the one hand, it is simply because the farm is owned that many of these holdings remain solvent, whilst it is also true that owning one's own land seems to be an important concept in itself.' C. Maddison, University of Manchester. 'There are those (in this survey) who are clearly improving their lifestyle by purchasing a smallholding and can only be considered to be farming for a hobby and not for monetary gain. In many cases these farmers would be financially better off letting their land. Equally, there are those who are working very long hours for very small monetary rewards. Some of these will make a financial success of their farming but for many, financial dependency on farming will not be possible.' Susan Holley, Askham Bryan College. 'There were virtually no holdings where farm income was greater than non- farm income with the average from the farm being less than £800 ... (but) ... the labour input in many cases is substantial so (presumably) many farmers are motivated by non-financial considerations ..• agricultural activities are carried out for pleasure and enjoyment ... (and) non-farm incomes may be considerable.' D. Barnes, University of Newcastle upon Tyne. 'The farms visited in the course of the survey range from traditional family small holdings, yielding a modest living for their occupiers, to units purchased with outside resources and run for the purpose of indulging a vision or a philosophy. In the middle, and probably not typical, are farms which are merely sidelines or convenient bases for their occupiers whose main livelihood is non-agricultural.' T. N. Jenkins, University College of Wales, Aberystwyth.

Description:
The Economics of. VERY SMALL FARMS. — A Further Look. D. J. Ansell, A. K. Giles and J. Rendell. Special Studies in Agricultural Economics . Scotland a separate but similar study has been conducted for 1987 and 1968. terms of changes in the economic environment in which these farms.
See more

The list of books you might like

Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.