Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:38:54.294Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Agriculture, American expertise, and the quest for global data: Leon Estabrook and the First World Agricultural Census of 1930*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2016

Amalia Ribi Forclaz
Amalia Ribi Forclaz*
Affiliation:
Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Case postale 136, 1211 Geneva 21, Switzerland E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article provides a history of the First World Agricultural Census of 1930, an ambitious international attempt to evaluate world agricultural resources through the compilation of global statistics on crops, livestock, and agricultural production. Based on primary archival material, it explores how the census emerged from the connections between American and international institutions at a time when food security and the need to address problems of trade and competition appeared as central economic concerns of interstate relations. The article focuses on the role played by the American agricultural expert Leon Estabrook (1869–1937) and a related network of scientists and economists in the preparation and implementation of the statistical survey. By examining how Estabrook’s vision of economic development and scientific planning was shaped by his national background and redefined by his transnational engagement, the article sheds light on the global dominance and limitations of American scientific knowledge and agricultural practices in the interwar years. It uncovers the political manoeuvrings and negotiations that were necessary to move forward with the project, and assesses the survey’s outcome against the backdrop of the global economic downturn of the 1930s.

Keywords

agricultureAmericanizationexpertsinternational organizationsstatistics
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Global History , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , March 2016 , pp. 44 - 65
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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.)

Footnotes

*

Research for this article was made possible by a grant from the Swiss National Science Foundation; I gratefully acknowledge the valuable research assistance of Dr Francesca Piana. During my research and writing, I benefited from the constructive ideas and suggestions of participants at the ‘Governing the Rural’ conference in Nijmegen in May 2014, ‘The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in a Global Context’ conference in Basel in August 2014, and the public lecture series ‘Governing the World’ held at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies during the autumn term of 2014. Last but not least, I am greatly indebted to Martin Bemmann, Cornelia Knab, Davide Rodogno, Corinna Unger, the editors of the Journal of Global History, and two anonymous referees for their detailed and thoughtful comments on various drafts of this article.

References

1 Historians have recently brought to the fore the significance and vitality of interwar international institutions and networks in the regulation and standardization of agricultural policies and practices. See Clavin, Patricia, Securing the world economy: the reinvention of the League of Nations, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Amrith, Sunil and Clavin, Patricia, ‘Feeding the world: connecting Europe and Asia, 1930–1945’, Past & Present, supplement 8, 2013, pp. 29–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jachertz, Ruth and Nützenadel, Alexander, ‘Coping with hunger? Visions of a global food system, 1930–1960’, Journal of Global History, 6, 2011, pp. 99–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Tilley, Helen, Africa as a living laboratory: empire, development, and the problem of scientific knowledge, 1870–1950, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2011CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hodge, Joseph M., Triumph of the expert: agrarian doctrines of development and the legacies of British colonialism, Athens, OH: Ohio University Press, 2007Google Scholar; van Beusekom, Monica, Negotiating development: African farmers and colonial experts at the Office du Niger, 1920–1960, Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 2002Google Scholar; Mitchell, Timothy, Rule of experts: Egypt, technopolitics, modernity, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2002Google Scholar. Arnold, David, ‘Agriculture and “improvement” in early colonial India: a pre-history of development’, Journal of Agrarian Change, 5, 4, 2005, pp. 505–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Storey, William K., ‘Plants, power and development: founding the imperial department of agriculture for the West Indies, 1880–1940’, in Sheila Jasanoff, ed., States of knowledge: the co-production of science and social order, London: Routledge, 2004, pp. 109–130Google Scholar; Rodgers, Daniel T., Atlantic crossings: social politics in a progressive age, Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1998, p. 322Google Scholar.

3 Frank Trentmann, Coping with shortage: the problem of food security and global visions of coordination, c. 1890s–1950, in Trentman, F. and Just, F., eds., Food and conflict in Europe in the age of the two world wars, New York: Palgrave, 2006, pp. 13–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Cullather, Nick, The hungry world: America’s cold war battle against poverty in Asia, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2010Google Scholar; Ekbladh, David, The great American mission: modernization and the construction of an American world order, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2010CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Rosenberg, Emily, Spreading the American dream: American economic and cultural expansion, 1890–1945, New York: Hill & Wang, 1982Google Scholar.

5 For an excellent overview of the large scholarly reflection on the international role of American philanthropic foundations, see Tournes, Ludovic, ‘La Fondation Rockefeller et la naissance de l’universalisme philanthropique Américain’, Critique Internationale, 35, 2007, pp. 173–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Krige, John and Rausch, Helke, eds., American foundations and the coproduction of world order in the twentieth century, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 2012Google Scholar; Parmar, Inderjeet, Foundations of the American century: the Ford, Carnegie, and Rockefeller foundations in the rise of American power, New York: Columbia University Press, 2012CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Estabrook’s unpublished memoirs, ‘Memoirs of an American’, are held at the National Agricultural Library, Washington, DC, Estabrook MSS (henceforth NAL, Estabrook MSS), box 1, 6. Note that the page numbers of the manuscript have been subsequently edited; for the purposes of this article the original numbering is retained.

7 For varying interpretations of ‘Americanization’, see Rietzler, Katharina, ‘Of highways, turntables, and mirror mazes: metaphors of Americanisation in the history of American philanthropy’, Diplomacy & Statecraft, 24,1, 2013, pp. 117–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 On the role and agency of individual development experts, see for example, Sluga, Glenda, ‘The human story of development: Alva Myrdal at the UN, 1949–1955’, in Marc Frey, Sönke Kunkel, and Corinna R. Unger, eds., International organizations and development, 1945–1990, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014Google Scholar. See also Amrith, Sunil, Decolonizing international health: India and Southeast Asia, 1930–1965, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Staples, Amy, The birth of development: how the World Bank, Food and Agriculture Organization, and World Health Organization changed the world, 1945–1965, Kent, OH: Kent State University Press, 2006CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Zanasi, Margherita, ‘Exporting development: the League of Nations and Republican China’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 49, January 2009, pp. 143–169Google Scholar.

9 Kévonian, Dzovinar, ‘La légitimation par l’expertise: le Bureau international du travail et la statistique internationale’, Les cahiers Irice, 2, 2008, pp. 81–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Klein, Judy L. and Morgan, Mary, eds., The age of economic measurement, Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2001Google Scholar; Desrosières, Alain, The politics of large numbers: a history of statistical reasoning, 2nd edn, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000, p. 178Google Scholar; Randeraad, Nico, States and statistics in the nineteenth century: Europe by numbers, Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press, 2010Google Scholar.

11 On the International Institute of Agriculture (which is often seen as the predecessor of the Food and Agricultural Organization), see Hobson, Asher, The International Institute of Agriculture: an historical and critical analysis of its organization, activities and policies of administration, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1931Google Scholar. On early internationalist efforts, see Staples, Birth of development, pp. 64–71. See also Marchisio, Sergio and Blase, Antonietta di, The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Dordrecht: M. Nijhoff, 1991Google Scholar; Tosi, Luciano, Alle orgini della FAO. Le relazioni tra l’Istituto Internazionale di Agricoltura e la Società delle Nazioni, Milan: Angeli, 1989Google Scholar.

12 Nützenadel, Alexander, ‘A green international? Food markets and transnational politics, 1850–1914’, in Alexander Nützenadel and Frank Trentmann, eds., Food and globalization: consumption, markets and politics in the modern world, Oxford: Berg, 2008 pp. 153–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 Hobson, , International Institute of Agriculture, p. 113Google Scholar.

14 Luzzatti, L., ‘The International Institute of Agriculture’, North American Review, May 1906, pp. 651–659Google Scholar.

15 Other interwar organizations, notably the International Labour Organization, also struggled with this problem. See Forclaz, Amalia Ribi, ‘A new target for international social reform: the International Labour Organization and working and living conditions in agriculture in the interwar years’, Journal of Contemporary European History, 20, 3, 2011, pp. 307–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 See d’Onofrio, Federico, ‘Knowing to transform: three ways for agricultural economists to observe Italy, 1900–1940’, PhD thesis, University of Utrecht, 2013, pp. 110–111Google Scholar.

17 Martin Bemmann, ‘The Comité international du bois, the Food and Agriculture Organization and the development of international timber statistics, 1932–1948’, unpublished paper for ‘Revisiting the historical connections between agriculture, nutrition, and development: the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in a global context’ conference, Basel, 29–30 August 2014.

18 International Institute of Agriculture (henceforth IIA), The First World Agricultural Census (1930): a methodological study of the questions contained in the forms adopted for the purposes of the census in the various countries, Rome: Ditta C. Colombo, 1937, p. 178.

19 ‘Les matières de la statistique’, in IIA, Procès verbaux du comitée permanent, Rome: Institut International d’Agriculture, 1920, pp. 612–37.

20 Marchildon, Gregory P., ‘War, revolution, and the Great Depression in the global wheat trade, 1917–1939’, in Lucia Coppolaro and Francine McKenzi, eds., A global history of trade and conflict since 1500, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013, pp. 142–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Offer, Avner, The First World War: an agrarian interpretation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989Google Scholar.

21 Fitzgerald, Deborah, Every farm a factory: the industrial ideal in American agriculture, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003, pp. 17–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

22 League of Nations Archives, Geneva, box R447, Statement of Agriculture in the United States submitted to the Committee on Agriculture of the International Economic Conference of the League of Nations, 1927, p. 3. See also Federico, Giovanni, Feeding the world: an economic history of agriculture, 1800–2000, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005, p. 191Google Scholar.

23 Tracy, Michael, Government and agriculture in western Europe, 1880–1988, New York: New York University Press, 1988, pp. 119–211Google Scholar.

24 Birn, Anne Emanuelle, Marriage of convenience: Rockefeller international health and revolutionary Mexico, Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press, 2006, pp. 17–19Google Scholar. See also Fitzgerald, Deborah, ‘Exporting American agriculture: the Rockefeller Foundation in Mexico, 1943–1953’, Social Studies of Science, 16, 3, 1986, pp. 459–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25 McCook, Stuart, ‘“The world was my garden”: tropical botany and cosmopolitanism in American science, 1898–1935’, in A. McCoy and F. A. Scarano, eds., A colonial crucible: empire in the making of the modern American state, Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 2009, pp. 499–507Google Scholar.

26 Fitzgerald, Every farm a factory; Larson, Olaf F. and Zimmerman, Julie N., Sociology in government: the Galpin-Taylor years in the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1919–1953, Pennsylvania, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2003Google Scholar.

27 Hobson, International Institute of Agriculture, p. 117.

28 Fitzgerald, ‘Exporting American agriculture’, pp. 459–60.

29 Birn, Marriage of convenience, pp. 17–19.

30 Rockefeller Archives, International Education Board, International Institute of Agriculture, Rome 1923–1933 (henceforth Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA), box 20, 1019-292, Wickliffe Rose to President of Massachusetts Agricultural College, Butterfield, 23 November 1923.

31 Fitzgerald, Every farm a factory, pp. 35–6.

32 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-292, Louis G. Michael to Whitney H. Sheperdson (International Education Board), 11 January 1924.

33 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-292, Michael to Sheperdson, 3 January 1924. See also United States Bureau of Agricultural Economics, The International Institute of Agriculture at Rome: crop reporting service, organization, management, adherent nations and delegates, Washington, DC: United States Bureau of Agricultural Economics, 1924Google Scholar.

34 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-292, list of delegates.

35 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1, E 962–4.

36 Cattell, Jacques, ed., American men of science; a biographical directory, volume III, New York: R. R. Bowker, 1956, p. 309Google Scholar.

37 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-294, memorandum by Asher Hobson, 8 September 1924.

38 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-294, note by Dr H. C. Taylor, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, USDA, 16 October 1924.

39 Food and Agriculture Organization Archives, Rome (henceforth FAO), 1 IIA 66 (J 5), 144–5, International Education Board (Brierley) to the President of the International Institute of Agriculture, 19 September 1924.

40 Cullather, Hungry world, pp. 29–30.

41 See Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-293, note on letter from International Education Board to Arthur Woods, 19 March 1924.

42 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-293, proposal for the promotion of a worldwide agricultural census in 1930 by Asher Hobson to Rose, International Education Board, 15 February 1924.

43 See the obituary of Ricci in American Economic Review, 3, 4, September 1946, pp. 666–8. Ricci, Umberto, Les Bases théoriques de la statistique agricole internationale, Rome: IIA, 1914Google Scholar.

44 FAO 1 IIA 66 (J 5), ‘Rapport sur la séance de la commission pour l’examen des candidatures …’, 19 November 1924.

45 Ibid.

46 FAO 1 IIA 66, Louis Dop to Wickliffe Rose, International Education Board, 23 March 1925.

47 Parmar, Foundations, pp. 91–2.

48 FAO 1 IIA 66, ‘Rapport de la commission pour les candidatures aux places crées du chef de la contribution de “l’international education board”’, undated.

49 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, E 1506.

50 Introductory notes to NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1.

51 Ibid.

52 On the USDA’s global outreach, see McCook, ‘The world’. See also Pauly, Philip J., ‘The beauty and the menace of the Japanese cherry tree: conflicting visions of American ecological independence’, Isis, 87, 1, 1996, pp. 51–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

53 On Fairchild, see NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1, E 663.

54 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1, E 544–7.

55 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1, E 677. On the bureau’s activities and crop reports, see E 774.

56 For a recent and innovative interpretation of the Populist movement in America, see Charles Postel, The Populist vision, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007, pp. 3–22.

57 See his own reflections on his abilities in NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 4, E 1810.

58 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1, E 522; McCook, ‘The world’.

59 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, 1582d, Estabrook to his mother.

60 Cullather, Hungry world, p. 20.

61 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1, E 783.

62 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1, E 782–3.

63 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1, E 1101–1300; Rosenberg, Emily, Financial missionaries to the world: the politics and culture of dollar diplomacy 1900–1930, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999, pp. 155–161Google Scholar.

64 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, E 1499.

65 Ferleger, Louis, ‘Arming American agriculture for the twentieth century: how the USDA’s top managers promoted agricultural development’, Agricultural History, 74, 2, 2000, p. 212Google Scholar.

66 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 4, E 1822–3.

67 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1, E 889.

68 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, E 1494.

69 Ibid.

70 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, E 1524.

71 Ibid.

72 Hobson, International Institute of Agriculture, p. 87.

73 Ibid., p. 92.

74 Tracy, Government and agriculture, p. 122. See also NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, 1546a–c, Estabrook to H. C. Taylor, Rome, 10 July 1925.

75 Saraiva, Tiago and Wise, M. Norton, ‘Autarky/autarchy: genetics, food production, and the building of fascism’, Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences, 40, 4, 2010, pp. 419–428CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; Saraiva, Tiago, ‘Fascist labscapes: geneticists, wheat, and the landscapes of fascism in Italy and Portugal’, Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences, 40, 4, 2010, pp. 457–498CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

76 On fascism’s new role in the International Institute of Agriculture, see Tosi, Alle origini della FAO, ch. 2.

77 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, E 1547.

78 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-295, Dean Mann to Wickliffe Rose, 4 November 1925. On Dragoni, see Zanasi, ‘Exporting development’, p. 145.

79 FAO 1 IIA 66, ‘Compte rendu du travail préliminaire exécuté par le bureau de la statistique générale en vue du recensement général agricole de 1930’.

80 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, 1544a–b, Estabrook to Hobson, 2 July 1925.

81 Estabrook, Leon, ‘Proposed world agricultural census of 1930–31’, Bulletin de l’Institut international de statistique, 22, 1926, p. 74Google Scholar.

82 IIA, First World Agricultural Census, pp. 209–31.

83 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, E 1673.

84 Ricci, Bases théoriques, 1914, pp. 47–57.

85 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 4, 2238a–d, Estabrook to De Michelis, 29 October 1926.

86 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, E 1663.

87 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 4, 2250a–b, Estabrook to Dragoni, 5 November 1926.

88 Hobson, International Institute of Agriculture, p. 112.

89 FAO 1 IIA 66, report by De Michelis to Permanent Committee, 19 November 1926.

90 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-296, Mann to Rose, 20 April 1926.

91 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-295, Mann to Jardine, 5 November 1925.

92 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-296, Mann to Rose, 24 November 1926.

93 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-296, Mann to Rose, 20 April 1926.

94 For a detailed account of these meetings, see NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, E 1669–79. For an official account, see Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-296, report prepared by Estabrook and submitted by De Michelis to the International Education Board, undated, c. spring 1927.

95 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, E 1677.

96 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, E 1674.

97 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, 1681a–c, Estabrook to George K. Holmes, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, USDA, 12 February 1925.

98 FAO 1 IIA 22, circular letter from De Michelis regarding the composition of the international commission of statisticians for the World Agriculture Census, 10 April 1926. The countries that participated were Belgium, Brazil, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Egypt, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United States.

99 On the meetings that took place between 12 and 15 April 1926, see NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, E 1737–41.

100 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, E 1739–40.

101 See NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, E 1738, opening remarks made at the meetings by Estabrook, Louis Dop and Dore.

102 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, E 1739–40.

103 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-296, Report on the World Agricultural Census, 22 February 1927. Definition quoted in IIA, First World Agricultural Census, p. 7, my emphasis.

104 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, E 1763.

105 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-296, Report prepared by Estabrook and submitted by De Michelis to the International Education Board, undated, c. spring 1927.

106 As cited in Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-298, ‘Progress report of World Agricultural Census Project for the year 1927’, undated, unsigned (probably Estabrook).

107 IIA, First World Agricultural Census, pp. 178–9.

108 Speech by Estabrook to Permanent Committee on the progress of the census, 22 May 1925, in IIA, Procès verbaux du comité permanent, Rome: IIA, 1925, p. 609.

109 The preparation of the itinerary and the logistics of Estabrook’s trip are detailed in NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 3, E 1789, 1794, 1801.

110 FAO 1 IIA 122, report by Estabrook on the progress of the First World Agricultural Census of 1930, 27 September 1928. See also NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1, hand-written index of stopovers.

111 Rodgers, Atlantic crossings, pp. 318–43, esp. p. 337; Fitzgerald, Every farm a factory, pp. 157–83.

112 Birn, Marriage of convenience; Cullather, Hungry world.

113 IIA, First World Agricultural Census, p. 173.

114 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-297, ‘Progress report of World Agricultural Census Project for the year 1927’, undated, unsigned (probably Estabrook).

115 Ibid., pp. 4–5.

116 On his travels to Moscow, see NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 4, 2055a–k, confidential report to Dragoni, 22 August 1926. On the changes in American foreign policy in the 1930s, see Ekbladh, Great American mission, p. 25.

117 Castonguay, Stéphane, ‘Creating an agricultural world order: regional plant protection problems and international phytopathology, 1878–1939’, Agricultural History, 84, 1, 2010, pp. 46–73CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

118 McCook, ‘The world’, p. 500.

119 Tilley, Africa as a living laboratory, p. 20.

120 Herren, Madeleine, ‘Between territoriality, performance and transcultural engagement (1920–1939): a typology of transboundary lives’, Comparativ, special issue, 23, 6, 2014, pp. 100–124Google Scholar.

121 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1, hand-written index of stopovers.

122 NAL, Estabrook MSS, boxes 4 and 5.

123 Ibid. See also McCracken, Donald P., Gardens of empire: botanical institutions of the Victorian British empire, London: Continuum International Publishing Group, 1997Google Scholar; Hodge, Triumph of the expert, p. 153.

124 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 4, E 1811.

125 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 4, 1891a–b.

126 Fitzgerald, Every farm a factory; McWilliams, James E., ‘“The horizon opened up very greatly”: Leland O. Howard and the transition to chemical insecticides in the United States, 1894–1927’, Agricultural History, 82, 4, 2008, pp. 468–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Olmstead, A. L. and Rhode, P. W., ‘The agricultural mechanization controversy over the interwar years’, Agricultural History, 68, 3, 1994, pp. 35–53Google Scholar.

127 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1, E 699 and box 5, E 3246.

128 FAO 1 IIA 122, Report on progress of the World Agricultural Census by Estabrook, undated, probably September 1928.

129 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1, E 3909. See also FAO 1 IIA 122, Estabrook’s annual report for 1929.

130 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-298, Annual Report of the director of the World Agricultural Census to the International Institute of Agriculture, 4 December 1929.

131 Hobson, International Institute of Agriculture, pp. 112–13.

132 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-298, Hobson to International Education Board, 19 December 1928.

133 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 5, 3121a, Estabrook to Lloyd C. Tenny, Chief of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics, USDA, 14 January 1928.

134 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1, E 3987–8.

135 FAO 1 IIA 122 (R16), Confidential memo by Arthur Sweetser to the Secretary General of the League of Nations, 11 August 1930.

136 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-298, Lauder W. Jones (Rockefeller Foundation) to De Michelis, 4 December 1929.

137 Clavin, Patricia, The Great Depression in Europe, 1929–1939, Basingstoke: Macmillan, 2000, pp. 100–105Google Scholar. The vulnerability of the agricultural sector to price-downturn has been widely acknowledged by economic historians, but the role of agriculture’s structural weakness in bringing about the economic crisis in the first place has been a matter of controversy. See Federico, Giovanni, ‘Not guilty? Agriculture in the 1920s and the Great Depression’, Journal of Economic History, 65, 4, 2005, pp. 949–976CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

138 Saloutos, Theodore, The American farmer and the New Deal, Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press, 1982Google Scholar.

139 For a good summary of the consequences of the Great Slump on agrarian markets, see Marchildon, , ‘War’, pp. 142–162Google Scholar.

140 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-298, IIA, ‘Note on the results of the world agricultural census’. See also IIA, The First World Agricultural Census, vols. 2, 3, 4, 5: Country results, Rome: Ditta C. Colombo, 1939Google Scholar.

141 IIA, ‘Note on the results’p. 3.

142 For India’s results, see IIA, First World Agricultural Census, vol. 5.

143 On Czechoslovakia, see IIA, First World Agricultural Census, vol. 2; on Egypt and Mozambique, ibid., vol. 5.

144 FAO 1 IIA 66, De Michelis to the International Education Board, 7 November 1929.

145 IIA, First World Agricultural Census, vols. 2, 3, 4, 5: Country results.

146 Hobson, International Institute of Agriculture, pp. 117–19.

147 FAO 1 IIA 122 (R15), circular letter, A. Brizi, Secretary-General of the IIA, to adhering governments, 19 November 1935.

148 Hobson, International Institute of Agriculture, p. 114.

149 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1, E 3939.

150 Sheingate, Adam, The rise of the agricultural welfare state: institutions and interest groups in the US, France and Japan, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001, 104–113Google Scholar.

151 NAL, Estabrook MSS, box 1, 4872a–e, memo on health, 20 April 1934.

152 Ibid. See also FAO 1 IIA 122, Mrs Estabrook to IIA, 10 September 1937.

153 McCook, ‘The world’.

154 Rockefeller Archives, IEB, IIA, box 20, 1019-298, Edmund D. Day (Rockefeller Foundation) to Valentino Dore, 9 November 1933.

155 On this, see Barona, Josep L., From hunger to malnutrition: the political economy of scientific knowledge in Europe, 1918–1960, Bern: Peter Lang, 2012CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Borowy, Iris and Gruner, Wolf D., Facing illness in troubled times: health in Europe in the interwar years, 1918–1939, Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2005Google Scholar; Weindling, Paul, ed., International health organisations and movements, 1918–1939, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

156 Staples, Birth of development, pp. 71–2.

157 Scott, James C., Seeing like a state: how certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1998, pp. 4Google Scholar and 13.

158 Staples, Amy, ‘Norris E. Dodd and the connections between domestic and international agricultural policy’, Agricultural History, 74, 2, 2000, pp. 393–403Google Scholar.

159 FAO 0 54 0 K 3, ‘Preliminary program for the 1950 World Censuses of Agriculture’.

160 Cullather, Hungry world; Ekbladh, Great American mission.