Prior to World War II, labor's share in the U.S. manufacturing and agricultural sectors was relatively constant. Keynes called this “a bit of a miracle.” Several studies have shown that labor's share in the U.S. manufacturing sector has increased in the post-war period. The opposite appears to have been the case for U.S. agriculture. Two studies indicate that labor's relative share in the U.S. agricultural sector has declined in the post-war period.

There has been a substantial substitution of capital for labor in both the manufacturing and agricultural sectors in the post-war period. The secular increase in the wage-rental ratio has encouraged substitution of capital for labor. However, while this argument alone might explain the observed decline in labor's share in the agricultural sector, it does not explain what has occurred in the manufacturing sector. Moreover, this argument excludes another important characteristic of both sectors in the post-war period: technological change.

Since the early 1970s, the increasingly tight energy situation has introduced a new emphasis, if not a wholly new concern, into the economics of agriculture. Assuming the tight energy situation continues, or even intensifies in the future, it is likely to require economic adjustment in U.S. agriculture—an agriculture heavily dependent on fossil fuels.

Dvoskin and Heady have shown that when maximizing farm profits is the primary goal, energy price levels have a minimal impact on acres of crops produced under reduced tillage methods in the U.S.. However, when energy minimization was the primary goal, there was a substantial shift from conventional to reduced tillage. An ERS study proposes that forms of reduced tillage can be a major means of achieving fuel savings. Reduced tillage methods do reduce fuel requirements, but these are accompanied by higher chemical requirements. Eidman, Dobbins and Mapp found that with current energy prices, a form of reduced tillage for corn production was preferable to conventional tillage methods. In a recent study, Musser and Marable concluded that with respect to machinery purchases, energy cost increases are providing incentives for substitution of labor for capital.

Studies show that populations of 10-12 thousand and more are needed before maximum savings in providing fire protection services to rural areas can be achieved. Yet, many rural areas have smaller, widely scattered populations, lax building codes and inadequate water supplies. Fire damage to rural property is three to six times greater per occurrence than for city property. Also, insurance costs are about six times greater on unprotected farm property than on protected. Data published for 1974 conditions indicate that all rural Tennessee counties and 45 percent of its municipalities were assigned Class 10, the lowest possible fire protection rating, denoting little or no fire fighting capability.

Agricultural economists in the Southern region of the United States have met annually with the Southern Association of Agricultural Scientists (formerly known as Southern Agricultural Workers) for many years. In the 1960s, there was a growing awareness of the need for a reviewed professional outlet to reflect economic studies primarily applicable to the South. Through the Southern Agricultural Economics Association, the Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics (SJAE) was established.

The SJAE was established principally as an outlet for results of applied economic studies. First issues were comprised of the papers presented at annual meetings that were judged to be of journal quality. Dr. Rod Martin, ERS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Texas A & M University, served as the first editor of the SJAE. Under the editorship of Dr. Martin, Dr. Gerald Doeksen, ERS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Oklahoma State University, and Dr. John Nixon, University of Georgia, the Journal has emerged as an important professional agricultural economics publishing outlet.