Linear programming (LP) models have been developed for a wide range of normative purposes in agricultural production economics. Despite their widespread application, a pervading concern among users is reliability — how well does a particular model actually describe and/or predict real world phenomena when it is so designed.

Much attention has been devoted in recent years to methods for making programming models produce results more in line with those actually observed. These efforts have included development of more detail in production activities and restrictions, incorporation of flexibility constraints into recursive programming systems, specification of more realistic behavioral properties, and development of guidelines for reducing aggregation error.

Agriculture has been among the most productive sectors of the U.S. economy. The agricultural sector uses only four percent of the labor force to produce food needed for both domestic use and export demand. Consumers in the U.S. spend only about 17 percent of their disposable income on food, the smallest percentage of any country in the world.

That energy has been recognized as the propelling force for current and continuing agricultural productivity, along with the prospect of much higher costs, have given rise to a growing interest in technologies or systems of agriculture that are less energy intensive. Possible future adjustments in agriculture may affect output levels, costs and conservation of land and water qualities.

Increased use of marketing contracts by agricultural firms has stimulated a modest amount of literature in which the principles of decision theory are applied to the contracting problem. Much of this literature has focused on farmers' choices between cash and futures market positions. Others have modeled the influence of annual open market and fixed forward price options on farm growth objectives. Little or no attention has been paid to expressed interest, especially among processors, for suitable long-term (multi-annual) contract price formulae and for a theoretical framework through which to evaluate them. This paper attempts to provide this service in special regard to the tomato and tomato paste contracting problems of a U.S. fruit and vegetable processing cooperative.

In recent years, many communities have used regional planning in their quest for economic and social development. Several factors have prompted them to do so. First, community leaders have recognized that a larger geographic area gives a community a larger economic base for planning purposes and offers access to services and institutions that would be impossible in each and every town, thus enhancing potential for development. Second, a greater emphasis is now placed upon identification and use of regions for planning and development purposes under state and federal laws. Third, importance of regional planning has grown because of such factors as growing urbanization, increased demands for community services, pressure to reduce disparities among urban-rural areas, growing environmental concerns, and “spillover” effects of unplanned growth.

Rapid increases in energy prices, federal policies of energy independence and further projections of energy shortages are encouraging development of sources of energy such as strip mining for coal. A key issue faced by the owner of surface and sub-surface (mineral) rights to land is determination of the price or fee (royalty) that should be extracted from a miner who wants access to the subsurface resource. This is a crucial problem because productivity and income potential of the surface resource may be altered during the mining process. Although extracting coal through strip mining is an obvious example of this phenomenon, the same issue is confronted in surface extraction of other minerals or in placement of easements or restrictions on land use options available to surface property-right owners.

A public school student is a product of combined influences of the home and his peers, as well as the school. Similarly, the school system within a community represents the combined impact of influence of taxpayers, teachers and administrators. Local elementary and secondary schools cannot operate independently of desires and wishes of residents in the community. This study presents an analysis of linkages between community characteristics and educational service provided by the public school.

The major premise of this paper is rather simple, but hopefully provocative to those economists concerned with real world problems and willing to enter controversial situations. Economic development, as typically encountered, is often controversial. Seldom in the modern economy do we find a Pareto optimum development that makes some people better off while leaving no one worse off. Even when this ideal is realized in the long-run, lack of instantaneous adjustment to new parameters of development means that new investment or organizational change is threatening to someone. Furthermore, both those threatened by development and those who stand to gain may have recognized relative merits of a particular development long before it comes to an economist's attention. This speaks well of the free enterprise system, but may be disconcerting to the ivory tower economist whose hope is that “my results” will be used by other economists or decision-makers who will, in turn, produce development efforts. Although the domino theory may be valid, all too frequently the dominoes fail to fall because of the scarcity of practicing economists in active development efforts.

Solid waste disposal is a significant problem. It has been estimated that almost a ton of solid waste is collected per year per capita in the United States. Solid waste disposal, especially in rural areas, is frequently done in an unsanitary, potentially dangerous and often unslightly manner. To cope with these solid waste problems, both state legislatures and the Environmental Protection Agency are now in the process of requiring communities which presently utilize unsanitary disposal practices to upgrade their facilities and management practices. A sanitary landfill operation1 is usually the least-cost method of accomplishing these requirements, especially in rural areas.2 Quality facilities and management practices are not costless, however. It is estimated that the U.S. spends more than $4.5 billion each year on solid waste management, and more than 80 percent of this amount is for collection.

Traditionally man has used water for domestic needs, livestock, crop production and navigation; now he is also concerned with anesthetics, recreation, industrial production, waste disposal, power generation and aquatic ecological systems. He finds many of these uses incompatible and in conflict.

Florida is encountering similar conflicts and in many ways is typical of other humid eastern states. The situation is especially dramatic because of extreme oscillations in rainfall — torrential tropical storms to droughts lasting many months. Water management in Florida has been primarily for flood protection. More recently, the need for multi-purpose water management to increase usage benefits while decreasing potential damage from quantity extremes, has been recognized. Legislation, the Florida Water Resources Act of 1972 being foremost, has been enacted to create a governmental framework in which water problems can be addressed.

A basis of concern for rural development has been lagging economic growth in rural communities. Many rural areas have long been faced with the dilemma of low income, inadequate or expensive community services, net out-migration and high dependency rates. Numerous programs have been enacted over the years to alleviate these problems. A recent program, the Rural Development Act of 1972, interprets the main objective of rural development as encouraging and speeding economic growth in rural areas providing for jobs, improving quality of rural life, and doing so on a self-earned, self-sustaining basis. One chief component of all these programs has been promoting industry location in rural communities.

The Federal Food Stamp Program is consistently under fire for failure to perform according to stated goals. This paper presents a brief overview of the program, and constructs a partial profile of the 1975 federal outlay for bonus stamp coupons. The analysis surveys food stamp benefits across states with the intent of determining whether or not these benefits appear to be reaching states with the greatest numbers of poor people. A cursory review of rural-urban allocations indicates a basic inequity which needs further consideration.

The first food stamp program came about in May of 1939 and lasted for some four years until the war sharply increased demand for food supplies.

The food stamp program as we know it today has its roots in an experimental plan set up by President John F. Kennedy in 1961. This plan was implemented in several pilot areas and was designed to clear the market of surplus food supplies and to raise nutritional food purchasing power of participating low-income families.

During fiscal year 1974 the National Food Stamp Program disbursed $2.7 billion in bonus stamps. Of this amount, Texas received about $208 million. These money injections will increase each economy's final demand, ceteris paribus.

However, an increase in the final demand of low income households will result in a discernibly different pattern of resource allocation than would occur if it came from high income households: the larger the increase in final demand, the greater the impact on patterns of resource use. The amount of bonus stamps distributed has reached a point where impacts may be identifiable.

The source of funds likewise affects such expenditure patterns and resulting resource use. For example, when funds for bonus stamps are raised by increasing taxes of the higher income households, their expenditure patterns will reflect their increased tax payments. In contrast, when funds are raised by sale of government securities, the immediate impact will be different, in part because individuals account for only about 16 percent of the ownership of all federal securities.

One objective of the Food Stamp Program (FSP) is to supplement food expenditures of low income households to enhance the household's ability to provide nutritionally adequate diets. A household may consist of any person, or group of persons, who purchase, store and prepare food. Program eligibility is based on net household income, total assets and household size. Eligible households purchase coupons which are used in retail food outlets. Households of equal size receive coupon allotments of equal purchasing value, but the cash purchase requirement varies with net income. Bonus stamps represent the difference between the purchase requirement and the coupon allotment value.

Rapid technological change has been a dominating factor in American agriculture in the last quarter of a century. Impact of this factor on the farm real estate market is well documented in agricultural economics literature. As Heady and Fuller and Van Vuuren have noted, technological change has been both land-substituting and land-embodying. This characteristic has resulted in positive pressure on land prices as farmers bid up prices of land for farm enlargement so they can more fully employ their fixed labor and capital resources. As adjustments in farm numbers and sizes have slowed in recent years, the dominating influence of farm consolidation is expected to be moderated. Fuller and Van Vuuren noted this possibility as: “… given the combination of numbers, ages, and alternatives, intensive efforts to salvage underemployment of operator and family labor by farm enlargement or by substantial employment on other farms have to be approaching an ultimate plateau”. The objective of this paper is to examine impact on farm real estate prices of changing economic conditions in rural areas. Particular attention is given to factors other than farm consolidation. The effect of these structural changes on the land market is empirically tested by reestimating Tweeten and Nelson's model with Georgia data for 1960-1974.

Decision makers, comparing production alternatives and faced with risk, normally utilize a large amount of information from many sources. To compare alternatives, information must be organized and net returns calculated. Techniques producing single value estimates, such as partial budgeting, do not adequately utilize available information, produce enough information to facilitate an adequate comparison of alternatives, or account for risk and uncertainty. Furthermore, single value techniques fail to take into account skewed probability distributions of various alternative outcomes. Decision makers need methods to analyze data when making specific recurring short-run decisions in a risky and uncertain environment.

As noted in a recent article by Harris, many agricultural economics departments in recent years have expanded their commitments to providing market outlook information. Continuing volatile commodity prices will provide an ongoing demand for such information.

This paper presents results of a study designed to provide short term predictions of the number of cattle and calves on farms, January 1, in each of twelve southern states.1 Such estimates can help outlook personnel in several ways, including providing indications as to how producers are reacting to recent market conditions in each of these states and the region. The models do not require demand estimates for beef, nor are results likely to prove as self-defeating as price predictions might if publicized. Form of the models was suggested by work on an earlier national cattle marketing model.

Production of broilers requires very large quantities of heating energy. Optimum growth of broilers requires that the broiler house temperature be maintained within a narrow range. In Arkansas, chicks are normally started at a house temperature of 75°F with a 3°F per week reduction until a temperature of no less than 60° F is reached and maintained. Feed represents about sixty percent of total production cost, and most studies indicate that feed consumption increases rapidly as the temperature around the birds drops below 65° F. Most grower contracts contain an efficiency clause in which part of their payment depends on how efficient they are in converting feed to meat. They must maintain a certain minimum degree of efficiency to continue growing for their contractor. House temperatures can thus be lowered somewhat, but must be maintained within rather narrow limits for growers to continue to produce. This is mentioned to point out just how vulnerable growers are to rising fuel prices. Approximately 80 percent of Arkansas broiler growers use propane. The retail price of propane ranged from $0.18 to $0.41 per gallon in Arkansas from January 1973, to September 1977.

The ability of a farmer or group of farmers in a region to produce a specific product profitably depends on the structure of costs of production and marketing and demands of all competing crops. The final decision to grow a particular product is made on the basis of its profitability relative to profitabilities of other alternatives. Relative profitability of a product changes as technological innovations affect yields, resource requirements and production efficiency. Factors affecting demand for resource inputs and products cause changes in profitabilities. Institutional factors can also necessitate adjustments in farm plans by influencing price and/or production of specific products and thereby affecting the profitability of one product relative to other product alternatives.

Georgia's General Assembly considered differential assessment legislation in 1976, but rejected the final proposals on the last day of the session. Last minute efforts to develop an acceptable legislative proposal concerned the issue of what farmland should be eligible for differential assessment. One proposal considered a single criterion—the proportion of income derived from farming. This proposal stated that operators who derive more than 50 percent of their income from farming should be considered bona fide farmers and their land eligible for differential assessment. While all landowners qualifying as bona fide farm operators would benefit from a reduction in their tax bills, others would probably pay higher taxes than without differential assessment legislation. Consequently, it is important to evaluate criteria used to designate bona fide farm operators.