Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T16:44:31.831Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A More Objective Procedure for Determining Economic Subregions: Cluster Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

P. Thomas Cox ,
Bernard Siskin  and
Allan Miller
P. Thomas Cox
Affiliation:
Northeastern Resource Group, Natural Resource Economics Division, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Upper Darby, Pennsylvania
Bernard Siskin
Affiliation:
Statistics Department, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Allan Miller
Affiliation:
Milprint, Incorporated, San Francisco, California
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In his 1967 presidential address to the AAEA, Charles E. Bishop raises the question: “Why have agricultural economists not devoted more resources to the study of structural changes in rural communities and to public policies relating to the location of economic activity and of population?”. Later in the address, he partially provides the answer through the comment that “We must reorient our thinking in terms of location and scale of organizations and interrelations among firms and among communities … it will be necessary for us to make basic changes in our philosophical approaches to problems, our analytical tools,…”.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , December 1969 , pp. 37 - 44
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1969

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

1.Bishop, C.E., “The Urbanization of Rural America: Implications for Agricultural Economics,” Journal of Farm Economics, Vol. 49, No. 5, December 1967, pp. 999–1007.Google Scholar
2.Cox, P. Thomas, “Factor Analysis of Upstream Watershed Development Projects,” Proceedings of the Western Farm Economics Association, August 1966.Google Scholar
3.Cox, P. Thomas and Badger, Dainei D., “Factors Contributing to the success of Upstream Watershed Development in Oklahoma,” Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Process Series 578, November 1967.Google Scholar
4.Cox, P. Thomas, “Toward Including Ethnological Parameters in River Basin Models,” Water Resources and Economic Development of the West, Report No. 15 of the Western Agricultural Economics Research Council, December 1966, pp. 37–39.Google Scholar
5.Cox, P. Thomas, “Land Use Projections by Towns, Charles River Basin, Massachusetts,” Unpublished Mimeograph Paper, 1968.Google Scholar
6.Cox, P. Thomas, “Urban Encroachment on Agricultural Lands, North Atlantic Region,” Unpublished Mimeograph Paper, 1968.Google Scholar
7.Cox, P. Thomas, “Analysis and Projections of Industrial and Institutional Lawn Irrigation for the North Atlantic Region,” Unpublished Mimeograph Paper, 1968.Google Scholar
8.Green, Paul, Frank, Ronald, and Robinson, Patrick, “Cluster Analysis In Test Market Selection,” Management Science, Series B;, Vol. 13, April 1967, pp. 387–399.Google Scholar
9.Howard, Nigil and Carmone, Frank Jr., “Howard Type Clustering Program,” Marketing Science Institute, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1967.Google Scholar
10.Isard, Walter, Methods of Regional Analysis: An Introduction to Regional Science, The M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1960.Google Scholar
11.Kelso, M.M., “The Author's Last Word - For Now!” Journal of Farm Economics, Vol. 47, No. 3, August 1965, pp. 856–857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.King, Benjamin, “Step-Wise Clustering Procedures,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 62, 1967, pp. 86–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar