Brigham Young University Brigham Young University
BYU ScholarsArchive BYU ScholarsArchive
Faculty Publications
1978-01-26
Issues Affecting the Availability and Price of Land for Agriculture Issues Affecting the Availability and Price of Land for Agriculture
B. Delworth Gardner Brigham Young University - Provo
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/facpub
Part of the Agricultural and Resource Economics Commons, and the Public Economics Commons
BYU ScholarsArchive Citation BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Gardner, B. Delworth, "Issues Affecting the Availability and Price of Land for Agriculture" (1978). Faculty Publications. 3745. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/facpub/3745
This Peer-Reviewed Article is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected].
SUES AFFECT! G THE AV LA ·ILITY PRICE OF * " D F JR ACRI.CULTURE
Thi pape
• t h V
ag icultu
t preserve. p
fi s
d
'.B Del r h ** dn r
rev ews some d t r.e a
he discus es he hug
ing a cultura
ere se in l and
n recen years and so e of he imp icatio
The in 1 S C on alu e he e d or ublic
1 nds for a r cultural us +
1 nd
ic
for
. cy
* ape p es t d a roia Cha e ting of he ican Soc · ty of
D r, G annin Found tio ·forni B rk ley and
Janu 26 , 1978 ..
of Cal · forn · . Da -
nom·c. , U1u er ty tu al Economi s
2
he croplan b s
.-I An verag of
the Un~ d Sta is app o 1.ma ly 385,000,000
acr cres nt s h · s ba nnu 11.y
a land ele r ng, rr ga d ~f1a e de elopment ~nd cro p 'n
land pre ' ou -ly held ut f ro ucti ~ On e other harul. an
o 2. 7 m llion ac s of c·ropl nd is los to 10 1.-a r ul u al u s ach
year. Thus th re is a n loss of 4
of one p re n of h a ional b.as •
ion acres or a ut ne t'h r
Even 1 S V ry s 11 gure howeve ~ ma . • a er t he se 0 n
0 his lo s of op a d on a a ·onal pe he 11 C nser a-
ion s rv h e tb hr ar 266 ( 9% 0
h p b ly t 11 bl and) in pas ur, foe an
0 r u.ses Jh ch coul added h cropland b e £ cally
sibl or , ocial y de ir o d s . One vi w heref re ha th
and b s q te adequ 0 O' Ide for h gr ural rte ds n h
Un ed es fo he s 0 tlie nt~ h entury at lea ]/
0 or~ l g.u s t t op « !he
to al nd .a a d 0 d . 0 ps 1 he un- en r ason ly
s. nt s·n e World a II Th 9 c~o l nd a reag 387 000 0 0
a f f y r gh y 96 this figure h d drop ed to 33 000. 00 act
bu ros again o 1 e
1/ Cotne p p ct
l_l i.d pa
11 3
n G. 0 L n ER -630
ly Use
ure: USD.
ause ai o o d Foo and Fib r•1
ly 1975) pp
3
Th ough u 1 e 1950 ~ and 1960 1 s , price p IIl ba ic
co d h Uni St t SW suppo ted
1 1 1 d se, a ' de olici s 'Wer in ok d to hel 1 ·tu l
suppl . f. a rodu t n ord r O Su 0 t pr c.e at peg le
F o:m 7 niill on to 65 mill ' on acre t o · produ n
he e rs 196 -1972. Th · a.c:reage s fourte n to t ty- OU
h ORS d tooth l es. By 1976 bo ver,. mos of
th s e g had be n turn d a crop produc n und r be
i pe us o far, pr cs partic ly from 972 to l 75
13y 1975 1 owever. , ha old nemes s in au a icu tural h stoey 11 d
ex sa upp y h d re urn d ut in downward pr ssure on fanu pr ces
The Car r ad.mini rat · on rul the co11gres e d, c de hat o e
pr ce sup o t co ts pol ica 1y ace pt e ev ls under h ar e ·
ann unc nth 1977 farm c upp mus b curtai ·ed by pric
land aside ograms. a 20 ercent e aside or he t and 10 er en
for he fed g ins
The vidence s abundan ly lear hat his ion nee d a
Sr OU hor a of 1 nd a lab e for agr· u tur u e To
g ven our ragrams to snppor incomes ·n he g 1.r.u , ura
t u· e
be n r..
bl sbing ric:: uppor fl.oors in n i s h
ndu e arm rs t of product on If
o di ons l.il r c-: sornel ow :re sed a , c. ur pr du tion b ame h ·
po.ft bl a1 if nt had n as de policy th e m
be a dequ e. e:r: o 'b brou t in o prod 1 'io ~
Fur h echnical advanc. is bond o ncr ] Od\ C i i
nd gr at r dos s o cap al bor
y: lds ubs ant an s r t the e of lan Is mpl
canno nd c mp lli g nc u1> o r na ion faces
a ritical problem in h ore abl u l re in hor a e 0 g ' cul
and ,.
The Pr c nd
or in tjon, conomi t: a l ast is the p ic.e
u al land. r is the pr c..e t t pr e ts he per
ac c. vealth h t l ers h v t d up n 1 d and t.h arm rs Ulll
pay if h y r o a qu re ·t or rodu, i"V" ' purp s s.
Columns 6 and 7 () Table 1 l" p r h al e r: al es 0:
r cul u 1 lan n 970 dolla s d 1 nd pus ilnpro ent
res · Ct V y fo th po lo ld 'War rr Bo h eri 1a appro~ ma e y
r p d ov r the p r
The e:mendous prof· ail t 0 h 1 land
s shmm i T ble 2. T e num e
colunrn 3 and ind te he av ra e r l ra e o re urn m bold n
d th ugh th pe iod spec.if e · n C lumn L () ................ -1-, ...... ~ • f a t , pica!
a ricul ur 1 ·nd p h s d n 9 6 h d un il 975 and
th n o d tl o r urn n he origin 1 land pric
~ uld ha ,e be n 3 2 p r y r. Un, or ~ n te y n dat
av abl (m the turM , i h
er m xc pt ' rs rn s a d to w-h _ h -w 11 r.
5
t n eds o be mp asi a tb t: he ea eal · turn orre d
in ation uh . ey ve y gh ompar d it al :re u m
hdld"n () hr ca ital s s n h erica econ my . . e rca.
cap tal the onoroy whole h a era. ed. u t un er
0 p r: nt o er h s cen ~_! ~ her s ~ o nt tha . y ds -repr. en r 1 C p tal g n u from ho ding land. The annual
r n S 0 from using d n rod ctiv pur uit h V not b en
i C th se :r urns cep s hey h been apit lized in o h
alu 0 Th s, h re s no oub e coun i g.
Bes·de the r 1 rates o r tu , o o he po nts
a:r WO of e T t i that her :al ra e , urn 0
land only r consi t tl h gh r han ose · o land plus m_prove ents
1;. ga dle s of l pe · ad co de d Thi o ob rat s h po nt made
axller h h r r.-e UI o la d ar h ghe han h r al r turns
I
capi al pr a1i·ng nth on my s a ,hol .. Th o ·her ignif·cant oint
ndou inc.r s in al es of r turn n the lat fi
y a pe "od (1971-75) co pared dth the s · of o·a pe od Rad
197 d a de 0 is er od
en mor 11 b
Tl e t ady -Wold r II
a:n l.S one o t puz ng p
pla , i ns ha b no · e ed
!!_/ ta om J h A e f re o Sc V 8
th rest.tl s . uld pr ably ha re en
r to s y about tW. period ater.
i in th r 1 V lu. of a r cul ura
en.om of o um
of h mar · nd ed pla usi le
n'' 'Jr er 1976)
.a R rve ~ 13.
nk
6
. ruos. o ous r 1 d p i s
d inc s s in ne u g l.ll
1 co ne. how r , is a unc. o of o h he r · u and .c -s so
cul u-ra od c ion nd oh ght el ed 0 and pri . ase . e us wh has en oc:c rr1n e.iv paid by
farm s~ ls r · so b e 0 nfer tha s r 1 al e.s r
a ibu ble 0 .ncr gr al rm outp p ces'Z· Th pus e
r a pric 0 all -a a "he farm gat i shown n column 2 of
Tabl 1 an onl may be f u d
in ·o umn 3 S "nee W: rld. t r l , th ea of t he fa m p o-
du nd C 0 pri 19'•7 w n Lhe ind ces s 00 t 184 and 2 6
r sp c. By 1955 ·1 er p • d X had a len
by 965 0 128. The lo C"'.lne ·n 1970 th e y
The 972. fi u e ose 0 a td by 197 had jum1>
in 1956 .. y 974 he sup ev n ur er 0
by 976 to 1 1 fa 1n hm simil r
T u 2 alt · u h fann
he a linin once a an nd a e
r
155 by 19 0 to 132 , and
wi h
151,
76 ut
n~ pf
Le
valu of 100 .
abou
ove
h sa.m a
harpl
nt but 1th
e fro 197 - 74
tn the
y o -t r d I p od Only some catast o l · ld;dde
le I h s a pl r due d food prod c on could ~nc 1 arm product
rices n futu
ic
7
Comp c and ric s
r ve 1 car ela ·on , with th exc pt ·on of t s. o t r 1 o 1
972-74 he-r fore, to · u e si g la v ues o av r~ le
agr cul. u al r es alon . 0 course f pric and
u u • Chang in output pe un ,t o "nput will e el· ted. t land
The othe com onen: n ne inc m cost he produc of
Could b · bat n have
eclin n ou pu pr'" es b cau e ei h r p o ucti it
n in t:h
ncr S · d
ti hav d lin d mor han output pr · c s! In th r cas , per tlD.1 ,cos
roba.bJ y would h -e d c ned.
C n ·d r the qu s ~on of input pric s firs . compos e o price
by onl n product n npu sin l t rms found in ol 4
0 . T bl. L Th~s erl . is ch sea e than he two OU put pi;ic s
d" Cll ed ab , al hou h mil r in di:t ct on The hig alu DCC r d
n 1951 a d h 9 0 and l 7 ~ There a ad cl·ru.ng end . hrough
950' and l 1960' d. a sharp ri f er 972 he igu e.s for
974-7 -76 21-12 - · 2ft r ·pe tiv ly . One mu ack fa a . 5'1
t gh ] 24 ~ nd he numb r so
A compa son of p
pr c r cei d by f
r ce v d. and p ices p d ev s ha the re i
a er be 'O 970 han price p d.
D r:ing t e r y 1 70 ' p C d r s fas er but y 19 7 5 p ·
p · had caugh up Thi t 1d v lu s
y lOt s mp o farm ou put pri s ri i re farm
n d f tra e h v ens ad·ly or en · g fo in u . pri es.
tr ul · u e ou.gh ut ntos of h po - orld J II p r od eJ ce for a
coupl o ear a ·er 972 .
8
I th . on l': rl ing l nd lu s can t b ou in p s of
u pu and input p rhap can b · found n be pro u
V g i d ... of er roduc ion per . er o d , o e a ur o
5n c lumn f Tab1 • Th in rod c v ty chan e app
the inde f m th mid-- 940 o the m· d- 950's . F om he -1950 onward
ther s a up ad trend n 1972 when an a ng off
It s oo arly to ell wh th r be e ont
wo ec de up d cl b- ucb de nds on h quant y of pr a a.
hi tor.
ubl c
inv s m nt in r cultur r ear hand . en on, ther
nd · h a i1 b li y and pr ces o u
so imp s d on a.gr"' ultur · ~ n h form. -of 1 bo
gy to ag cul ur ..
· ealth ands f ty
n 1v.1.,ronmen 1 iipo t n de rm:inan of inp t p oduc i · y In
ny a , · le ind of ro uct y n the s r s of al laud tt
n to ve .ge he h ough
L '· s now consi r n f . inc me dir ct y ~ be wen
land pric
t he s ul
1et f nn incollle as udied by c.11 fi ld in 196 _/ Ue a . cula. d
r 1 d . e farm incom and he. at ac. e values o
w s de i e as
am
rel sat to er acre ne· ncome . et farm in
r · ve u · s minus r a -r no s , land incl d d he alu of cap al
.1. p o em n s The rat o was ~ ely ix for he l
bee u e ne f rm n ome w 1'h r o dropp d o proxitn ely r
or 94 --l~7 a r'od whet ar. inco e e bu land pr s d dn t respo
p ·o tionately .. rom 9 .8 to e r y 1960 ' th ris in t e
r · 0 froln ao foor on r y ·n. ade a og 1 ulat .on f r 975
and h a o -was 14.5 . I amp edlc fog 1 h a io w 11 e en
~j p .. cs and arm l c R i nsh ps" ol 25 u s 964 .
9
gh r w n h d ta final in_, ince ne fapn ncome a
fro-m 197c bu land p C. continued pt a d.
The hap r e in his ,:- o imp i th if r fa r x e ting
con inuin ses in ne i om ha w 11 eap1t ··zed in and
alu s o al em t ely otker var· b. a e e p la:u · ng · he s n
'fhe lat r is impU. d ildly by ·tl er Schof d r sult.s .. Re
mat S a C OS equa ·o ·h t reg e s the og of p r ac n
fa"ttn nco or h a e" · h independ n ·· v r· hle on h 1 g of pe a re
f rm es a v lue fo ,ea h s: , th dep n nt ble .. Schofi ld.'s s mates
r p r ods: a e a 0 1936-1940, 95 -53 n for 19 1- 3
( ee: T 1 3). e s me s or the p rod 972-75. aeb. o
h slo oaf nts (the b 's) is st ti tic lly gni ~ nt at 11 o 1e
pe.:r.cent prob le ha change n and v · u ed
i h ch · . nn t f in ome fo1- 1 p ·od .. Al 0 e dat show o e
en enc for he xp natory po er o fa in o:m a ef c ed in h
R2' 0 1951 53 . A -ren·l-y o her var1abl no s e if din
he o var d l a-re impo nt con 1u <L is
implied b he 11· gb ( l elas·t: ty nd ns rent han e
j and v associat d ith l on percent cit g in e . ann income)
a r 951-- 3. The i n ic nt conclos on · m h se dat is t a
t m incom c.count for n rly 80 per n of h nal ar a on
among sta es n p r ac land a e an s er fo i ·cal a · or
i accoun ing f h ecula n a and valu l ob\1i us h ·
1 e pro abil y agrl ul · u 1 on . n C pl a C UC ol in
ag cultur 's b y 0 C mp or 1 nd.
0
, s h gbly ins true · e o s e wher he lar_g ·n and alu
from ov mbe 1975 to ov mber 1976 e1-e occu~ ing~ Tbe map (Chart 1) ells
tu ·h o th
over hi.
· ory.. I i th gr n s s where h 1 !t"
e id~ noi low; , Ohi Ind .. n - .eb sk
'in , s cc.ur d
n o a,
a.od li.ss-ou ._ s are o r- mo s pot t crops . Tb·i _s ,
c as i land alu our t: , n h orl maYk t o wh ~ ch l wi 1 r t · ~
la· r..
T imp1ic ion . a s ggeste b h se d
l) L· nd conve 10n d d ma not be 1ttpo ant in r ·s g 1 nd pr ·ces
.as s a11, ed. The hi hly urbaniz d s s are no hos w r h h
1 d pr c incre se
sho ld b s a ,, ho e\r r ·. One block of h lowc-incr- ase gro
ew Yor ew J y Engl nd tc - a.
hose st ts hr
on ee a-rk t ran e of gr · lt.ural nd t otb uses .. I' and
a e an~ rd its va ue as ecula ~
V asse will
b d. l e Ol tak he 0 ultu al
zon g and ious o·h d vice to be d SC.USS d 1 r.
2) Th was n u b t in e pe at on for big ne incomes n
agri ul ure n h ea ly 970 1 s h s on b al'Jl transla ed 1
h · ghe r 1 nd p rlc s • It s no · d f cult to s hy a ne ., r for
ag xpe ted. E ·ch of the fo lowing a tor ould
el bor .t d a g a 1 n h;
a) ·The d llar de . ua ns 971 an F b1:u 1972
'01 d Ame xports m r rac nd .•
pa t u1 r C n a
tn ·d OU g an m r com t V i orld .m.ar.k s. Thee
ha e be n se n sue ess e ea s no~ a a i . a ri . .cu ur
l
por s .
gone
0 our Y'-'
0
20 bil . on dol .
t 'l no 1 pend
stim t_ed ar me f
ar ult 1 e~~po t · h~
heh i ov r half
ort d oiL
g icul u tha
h d o
ha be n
ul y
ent a ric.ul ur l acrea e is bei d d
tr xpor
b)
t - er rps which ar
s·ng per ca t
t h incom ela
in omes n oun a und h world and
ci or ood cau ed t d m.and cu ve
o o r p d ct o s hi t t t e r h .
c ad monsoon ·the:r in South nd E t ia during he pe od
197 and 1973 hoe ar s .
d ) T' brat d
dour
o - ail an imp
gain pric s n .
) Th ancho· is f oa l? u sh ft:e th
)
and 1 had n f on WO. d U, p ces.
f ·11zer .
Th
d Ill.()
ny
grea ave o es im
phe .s biola s s
nc ud·n mer1ca 1
t c for cas of old u
and gr ul ralis s, p
farme that h
a ng r a , ·v foo pr c s a
i y · agr. t 1 · u uct n
on
on
by
d
sed
g) 1 r spon oh ld · ees nd ow r serv.e s oc s
of gra n, er
U S far.me s
ose 1 ·ng o · l> odu ion 011 :rols n
rin
Ho
land p
a sess
12
h) 1 po:t·e sin m 0 t i , ·ha · ho n , l
urop· Econ .. c C unnu 11 the . loc a
p ed h in X 1 fo rt. s rom rs
tha · ·, nsum. s d d no cur ··1 heir d mand . d p
no i e se woul ha 0 cu ed l d pi s b
pennitted ·o s . The eff c was sh, f h main hurd ll of
upply and pr ce ns abil ty 0 he nt a ·t a g am
nd the e ort rs f r n ..
i) ·na y th nco e t d in 1 tio . oU.cie t we ,
pu ued. u thi . oun y over 11 s ears rov d d ncenti s for
imr st ent n · cul u . and specu a · land .
tan a l o · actors he :r cen iu , s in
as et o b de m·ne. · ia , d a r s T"Ch pro j ee
uant t· e Y l effec. ~ o · h tor and., in y r o. \,;t e
hope to be able 0 s y som h·ng def in I ti than can oday w alr dy
k ow howev -r t p di Ql\S hi ·h l,: h a · 1970 have
n t been. 1
In thei world hunger d 7 / C l ' f u y-· my , a om o leagu s sugg . it y the
xpe ta· on stab Rhe in 9·7 and 1974 v g ri o 1 rg n 1 nd
ave e oo op·
1) The , g ne. a bu
food balanc · snot
chronic food ha a
1, . r . Har ld o .. Contem n,. 197
st e s ol1o .. ..
no comp e ans nau·
und 0 nnd llllent
s. SU: p u
lll tll wor d and part .
T . d "'
b e o 1d
l rans "Orm t · on
il t cu h
cu a ly i 0 th
A Cuu n l' oblema . :r en En erp i
opu at on
d
ri
0
3
2) Rap'"dly nding w.o T z plant cap.ac t h sign ' fican ·l
th ce and suppl p obl ms t ha peaked ahou
0 s go ( 1972).
3) Th lcultural producti C p ci y he United Sat sis ba icall)
stro g an the · f r an ~
iC)ll nth resourc b se an
or CO, ued produ i it · rowth .
4) Th :real rice gr dn vill remain ougbly constai1't for a e · year
· nd en likely w 1 beg n to decline
In the cs of oin lt,) my C lleagu·es -Jee
g ·ai prk d d not las a . lo g nt ·pated
· an p o-wn very sub st ·tiaJ ly
ga ~n
00 pessimi . i
pt far s
in
,.. The
e os, · bose
a-r y 10's
an surp us s f whea .l feed grains 1 . e,. and o· on are; bu ld·n u .
The Cal forn a an ys. s med a cot ta1 t re orld p ·ic for o an
no us ained chan e u weath pa t na V ryo e knows th pri
0 a 1 ha r s ·p ec p ously .. Th ·- fe t Otl a cu tu ·1 uction a e
not be-en per ep ibl howe j as h productiJ n o ood in orl as been
at record 1 vel n 1975 197 an tap 977. Also h C l 1 fo ia stu y
a t med b inves ent in a cul tu al res arch an d eloptn nt in th ni :
Sat s ould cceler This i beginning o occur a th illlpac on na ional
food pro UC: ion ·11 e p sit+ "' e in he years o co e.
.a d con lu about th r , 1 sign ic nee of d ng l p ks? I
don b li th.a byn e..:;S ril . 1 ct a al sh r ag, of 1
land .n any p odUC ' ·• y . ·hr h 0 the • ·ing y
, xpecta :ums _,.
0 :ro i a 1 od pr,oduc ~ o - hat "1er bLi d :in lle ·ar
197Q l + Th e ·pee io 1 .e no 11.k ly o b bone o · a on 1 roug ·
he 1970 1 s and th 80' . I I ru co rect the. rate of ncrea 0 and
rlc s ur l:Y fal nd p 1.e · m gh ell f 11 solu l
lre y her of declining and p s he • • d est: w 1 r
r cent incr s ve n .r. at t •
0 h ass d s s . hes cycl am 1 · ud an
h basic economic force T stock mar, a god a ple.
S ecula. f , rvo caus·
of ro flo sand vie er on e do ide:- I
he up rd rod · in land pri es d ~scus · d bo e hav
ar n d by 1 v ls
s go.i£1cant that
sin h 19 O's)
long s cy · s go~ This my h te to pecu ato ha
, her e~ f w rj s n and apecu , tion. Thi is the s uff f hi h specula ive
ade. Th ffect '1'NOul b o i cr~ase h siz o tl bub 1
ly in ns · f y t e. s r of he
eds on s
uat o and 1 n 1, bu t . ..
ic
r pe
h in, a pi a
.i c ase n wo crea e borro ng c ab
h
d as fa
for land ad raise 1 d p ic Th cy 1
nlar,gelll nt o · ors h
Hi :be.
Th s
hen
SD
sugg s th one-th rd of Amer~can fa e loans i h 1e go m ~nt
and · th th comm r al ban
·hos lo n !ucb f ·on m st rihu bl to ry gh 1 nn
r C hi.ch a me s b n y ng for . 1 1 s , · , y -rs,.
One are h s or l p · Rll 1 a tb phe man
s r . in X. .l 1 oc.c.u ~ n 1900 ' ( e bl 4).
V t' rap"d escal ion ·~ n rm pr due - C d r ng or d c=\ s
1915 19~ oll d ad~ r e ter 1920 T e ndex o - p r ac and
bui ding pt' c, s .,nd a hy lag ed ehi d p odu 'I'. a es-
15
Tne , ~ s a ry :rap i er e in lan p in 19'19-1920 and he the bubble
bu. t . B 193 , h i de · b d f 11 n o 55.3 1 s n h lf d : .e level n 1920 .
Cl a ly he 1970 1 s a no the 920' • Th der 1 go YU ~n t is inno i e y
mo. o er·ul - che ~ and mo B' g Bo h rly bani· was len .. vate
fin.an l f titu o s r much s • r.o g r a d b tter pro·t ct d. by f der
·usu a.nc . .. S 11 the u nt cash flow situ tion in ag c. m: could ·b
ser us ml y be mo e o .1. sp ula . on gets furth r out o ban
Prime
oh Ont 1 curr n inter at 1.s p "· land pr rvat on .
Seve a stat: g. s a ur , l.Dcluding Cal · o nia' ar onsid ring ctment
0 gl z ng 1 s to, p:re r e high product· ty 1 nd for agr cul u use.
Th " pr, f en al polic e and other pla ni:n device si :n d t,o p ,ot ct
ag -· cul tu~ 1 lands f om co r i n to o 1 e uses h v . ot b n v ry ef , c ·
Som . f our b a r cultu a nd cont es to b conv r ed to e. q> n g
urb 1 z:at1..on 1 tr sport. ut · 1 y ease.men or arie of publl p1~poses .
Soi s gued by b z n ·n for agri ul .·u 1 1 d ha or
d a t· ,c me u a. no ded t top · his aval n ha be ore e ou gr cultu al
land short gs e \l.l'.' .
Of cou e f C act on s eel d o r ain p-r!lme 1 nd and a rlcu tur
us h ·mph. t:ian s tha the 1· nd l lei C nn ef ici ntly a loca eland
r sourc~s among ompe n u es Unde· he schemes use changes
cul s ill occ r 1:te m k t 1. lue d s e e g t nougb
too s, 't the p oduc i n co ad an age . r t d by the a,., pref nc• Th C,I111(
0 h roposed ·nd n egisla on s qui e d. f ren ~tr mov s
!_, Se Hans,en n vid E .. nd Seymour .. Sch at t1p me Land Pr er Cal foruia L 'I C er.v ton ct" Journal a s ..
& at C nse v { 976,): 180-208 ..
6
h l ion d C on rm h mar en r ly by u. ng prod y
C to land or p e at on d by i g th po er f r ans.
nd u e ch d sign d boa ds
t soci. y appe r ·o ge n. he ction o pr 8 in icnltural art
ar ,•ourjon p due (benefits) ·
od ad fiber to e the nu "r ' tianal
a g owing a on and. orld p pul ti.o
2) Loe e ono c bene 1., s that de ~·ve fr a 'ble an: c
1-ndustry
3) Op n an oh nviro tal amen ace u c ly
o ur n r s d n t and
4) ore ff cien orderly and fisc-a.lly s.ound urban d· lopm n _.
Gi n hat the are h Joint ben fi s hat hopefully be achie d re ain g
h'g p uc · ·ty 1 n n agr ul ur hat is h a onale for x a mark
E'a lur d Pr"ll LRnd R tent· on
s long as prod · ct nd fac a s a,e per y compet:i . e,, goo
ar pJ:i a on as d h 0 ec ive,. a d no · nali . st•
g nerally con eded b C omits a h ee rk alloc t
h 5 C lly op # mal quan .. y of 1 .nd o va • "ous US· 1.'hus i .b
i l:' mov d from oca ion and s r ssen ly on-
et allo i p ed by h p 1 nd pr on 1 gis ion
sho d b f
fie qui y
s C i1n a 1 no
9/
n add tion~
OU db ar ·u1
rovid a f l d
rom Gardner l'ape pr se
ion . n ie
he onseq int nns of
y ev lu t d /
vel.o m n of C ass 0
r~ an
17
't ailu ha lll.a: j y publi n rv n ion w h h land mar ' ·t ..
h pro ch t l:tz 111 b o dis"'u s h fou j in b fi
11 g d ob s land e n ther ar el ment
of ke · f il ha us y h r :r,n V' 0 t 1 m k m oca on
d . s · on . t i d ffi ul o see by the are ill no alloc uffid land
food an fib r pr due on. The fo d and f be or o onom.y s as
co p ti i ,e a ny a he , d fo d and ra dl to chan ing
conditions in upply nd d man.d. Th enormous ncrea e in agr cul ur land
r e 1n the 1 t fie y r hav
r pr c a
th re 1.s
een due p
he a ga
thin
p y to xp eta ion fo
d scus d abo
the l nd ma ke
If ur e higher oo
inc · ase
pr ven h -ct ons -r m yi ing n oh :r land pric . Th r
h nd he more
us .. ·Toe a er he V
h · ent 0 r e 01:'. d
ult r 11and r ce
i be or lad i
advanta of can a
r-ad nag ul ur 1
ectecl o
othe 1 nd
ri ultur he
o-mm
g er ~u b · d ac ·ng o r pr.educ s r h pr · ty o pro
d g ood a d h s
who c mpet o-r 1l ~1.m
The ol iv
wh n appli d to 00
va.te goos and
Th r to y rn l dis
us o chem c ls) bu
00 1· 1.
·on.g the omp t V po o.r ag
lan.d ..
y ar UD\J don t tn vry 1 va
d product me h requir n s
g "fie n f ct n t o vi.ous . n consomp io ..
conomi sin n of o d and b r ( a · 1 e
hi ould ugg t oo m ch f ·or n pro uct on - not
1
D c s on m e ac o
-processor_s farm au 1 er
tlie sp c r o f a ;· cul u:r .s- ·h s A op
ve 1ypo
rs
sos
n . ultu elds> a :ov rrunen agency per nne -~ h V ob . ous stakes
in ble an s b1e ndus Lan ,o s a , d" I ct y c· d in U_ ql.l
VI ,y by , h.e pi:j t land e t on issu If and i mrnobil · zed in a --r eu.ltu us
h for t h ,di ect v th in in p i ap_pr ia on ha ould hav - oc u
i ·tb the ·po ib ty of e.hang ·ng use na f mr et Theo h rs 1 s d abo
ax affec d :mo e indir - tly. Thew alth mpa ts howe er, ould b t al
or the al o - pos e r neg Conce tual y, nd ar
iden ~
C 1 0 cond cy bene i and cos in al be nalys s
d
addit on heae e - ar .r t:il cun ary a con r- t · molo ical
and bus h y re 'l.L ly 't' 1 ct d n h m rk t p . ~e of d -
As uch they qu a.s collective · ood nor el an ,e •e .1a s
in jus_· y ·ng .10 · :rf ·ren ·e 'Wi -h
Som mi b a gu t at ·ncome
pr :me and t: t n n n o de-r
1 nd m k,et'"'
ealt't di enc s among g on y us i
p- up he domin nt oca ndustry - a
Tl e argrnnent s t n , ho ver a el d o the s . ond ry benef · c s f' t
ab e b ca s · h t , d no o be
ob · e. f w ke who trnlJ be
Many f sues .r
ord r Y a d i .all ound u b
l od cannot be d ·v lop.e for ll b"
r no s .zon d tbus co
Wh th r h su1 s- a 1 ore o le
c a ho ,1ev r. d peuds o
a p ·odu ng b n a1neni · · wli:
low inc peo e may appl y () om
f l c 1 lan s 1 f in agri ultur
p i ble to rodu in ·mo e
V o;pm 11 by agr C J. U al "Ol"dn f pr ·xn.e
pu: ose if to pa C s ich
ealth g on be lder 0 els.
ffic n urb 11. d velo fO ent
h y r · h se
he cos s e o b · ~ ng g ubl • c ut i s
19
a d tr nspo t o thes parcels et ·• It i no ~01s in p inciple b
rb 0 1eapf ro in ' 11 be r c.e ov ha f e market w .ld ha
p due d uch ould de nd 0 ri u zc. o ,z n r · cul u 1
d the numbe 0 zon ng v r an es gr nt d and · he a 1 b. y 0 es
and o her and class •. :i.cat on data .
F nally · here he as wl1ere rke a.ilu .~ s n - the
er op n pc an en: ·-ro n 1 a emit s .. ben 1y
me
there is li
In any case
for ca lee ive oods d s ce ther a . e no mark ts · nal
e evidence availa le as -o am n
n prin i 1 the m rk ll n t
quant ·
tio
of h e am niti and er may b some ju.st," i
s are •rth .
he o titna
for soclal
0 med his mare ailur •
nd qu ·• y I plica ons
g i ant ha oh th 1 <l pa iF cl.a s cation s of
0 C ns V t n Service n h tor n Dl s tats b
i-- d to de.s "gnat pa C l , are tr t 'y 0 - en·ed d al
pod cti ity . Lo no rol us 0 the o n ad
ag_r ultu a1 r due· ~vity may not b he only ptu:·po for land
ntion in agr cu ur or .en th .jor on c teri t tat do o includ
lac t·on factor may e qui' in· ici n n producin des· ed sults ..
nh ne ng vi.-ronm n e r nov g c tn eti on for urban nd parce s,,
d urbat spr 1 r all · e.d up n h loc- ion of he la pa .eels
aff ted . Urban eo who wan h jo ~ t p ducts of land r tnay
11 b u r ~ed and di~appoi din b ~ sult of th ·a .100
t r ains land in
produ iv y riter ·
~. ul t1 us · b s d nl n agr · :u1 1 a
he
ti -
20
mus a b r a b no 8 d u e · or he
e in r V d'ng gn s n th o m o ce la iv
SC re ly o ela ve v e 0 th er sou c. in a tern ve
u s . s 0 p Op r igh s 1$ th i t · tu. · :an h p
ark , fu:n on ff i tly. Wl n P oper y ri
uch u .d be he c s land d pos . ~ on 1 d -- h e
m t: d e no w --k ic ' n ly . · oci. ty r
s ar i ic\lltur lan ·!l food d fiber pric s not ·r
cont 1 tl equ I·br um V s the land ark w fect1y
11 0 ty. f his tL is rumen
sea y i epl c d by le pr me n n s h me
c.ono C r polit l j 1 d ta sour a loca · on, 11 be
o r ab e ay of whe b r gricul u lad be o . ng sea· et:' r or
pl u1
,o he · · mnmon all at on is b t in n ,.s :ment deed. · on
-orop· . d h 0 t C p oc In f C > do th ratin
in h b V a a w d ·he pr s n h · o ·Uy in ffici The
lan 1 s . e tor 1 1,.s h ad guy who ks h. g h uture mar
C U · 1 an he res us He has an inc 1 and
ma ·ke pr C r f ,ct h an . . cipa ions of futur c re y .. at ons n
b ad .anc d fo b 1 · · ~ ng ·hat a part ric utu lbad ie ib or V
career plann r o sa no h ng of le · sla or d or 0 ea c n do
a be t job be utur . us h an on wh r be rely pr d1
al hough he p efe enc s · ned by 1 ou pur' h h re
lw ys som uncer assa a h mark a ion. Th y
or unc rtain (! el":: wi h gove nt al o a .n ho eve and
21
'V n a.gen y bur -u r s no o- 0\1 or an · ng h houg he
un tainty es ion s f . ro clear th 1 almost s ely e tn r fr dom
C choi e i h ma 1t t and b tt r in or on of r ·gon 1t tiv
It i ru a s gg sted a o e th he :mar may not rovide h 0 ti 1
th 0 le tiv ood -- op p bu neither will prim 1 nd
en on sch s. They pr s rve l · n on he b is 0 agr cul u a.1 aduc
and h r 0 be good et e n high duct · ty o · cu ural
lads nd p f ban ~ C c·v n hat op n sp ·e lly
1 jo ·n pod C lv h agri ultra use i is n empir cal qu sin ,i1h her
nd mark orz mgbsdona cu u 1 productiv·ty r er a wi pro
ore so a ly opti
0
sac el on ri a
of he ~equ s te lands i
~e o o n sp . e~ Jf t ·ere re cri · 1 hot e
· le and f i - n s 'l u · on ould e m t c 11 or o e
de th zon g on h a· o public cq i iti n
1 · m rke •
I i i gi; n d . on r y o n y be ht hr ar publi res .
o be etv d i _u p. ying o . pac f din
land r_ . ....... ~ ........ on, h n the qu · y s ue boils do
by mpas1 aw h lo. nth owne so p~ ·
he land n t us an b s pr vent ·n
T u unl S C01Up a ,on i given, e 1 nd o
b wold ' s peopl
-o c a ing h s
pr ..
ts
agr cul u 1 and by · Dl! ob 1 z
rs bs rb los es n orde:r o
rovide o le. od n·oy d by oc ty ·s ~h l .
no hr qu hat i of n ov o, d is that h urchasers of
- gTicu u a u es
land ar 1 h n hey would b
on poi y p of
1 be fQr h s
d o pay n ab enc of a and pres rva-
upp y s rm ved by gov rn n al ac in from
rk t con qu n e s pr ri e or th p c ls ich
:m n a a~ !able to · he m ket . I is a bit odd h r ore , tbFJ.t 'W' do not s e
22
urban consumers bby± aga n prime a.gr cu al and tention _
n ugt her do seem o, be devi es uclt zoni g b-y n ne do
d rans r ,o de
ha been no temp
o_ want ;gh. s at , n tig te
o nco ·orate t em n the props d e
y p b tu 1 er
a on and he
n
i.. ev n C n c 1ous absenc of ny discu s ,on f hem Wb. t is pe· h . s even
·mo ig ion h -an qu
probl mens sat 1.
Sn ri and _c·anclusions
n h y of suwn.ary·
1) I 1. .cle r that hy cal/ o ogiieal poss b 1i ie f r ncre ing
·ood oduc ion aro nd h - or d a normous~ ecially in ·OU'l:
,own count 'Y·
2) 1 ood w e ob· coin i C ing y C 't' e ood s oul r se
th a e fr 0 .o o. n p odu ·ng ood w uld
r m d food ou - ncr a
3) So. i ty ca e e'¼P ·ed o in r r ourc s · o esa.e c d
e i.cn if :food. b · c :m s la i~ 1 ·e ce ad uld have
a u t n al O g Wl OU . put lC e ng ec
Civ·en h ab e am v, y p'timistic • c pt for -hre .o s \ hi h w·u now
Su.mm• ze .. 1e ·· and pr has some omin fu.a
w mi t do a ou hem s fa· f cl to rn ·eco dly serio
prob em n my o in '•on i th un 1 ing es o · le· fre
s t prices s s gnal fo r sourc a 1 cat on . e mos V u
rk
s th th at o fu t r ov - nme , • 1 h land ·ma.I:"k I . a. d. t n
2
h Un ted a s o ernrnent h •S pr· es fa b sic agr ul ura
commod· th · t m st gu .rant
In ery · ho per:tod o im
surplus p oduet on in h g a ·ns and o ton.
could be back 1n th situa · i n of he 9 0 S and
1960 T. dl xog nou rest ons
on ricu u.:r
urplus di po al pro a
produc i-On are be omi.ng e e~ on ous. Th se
vir n n n.d o
h al hand safety of ann. opera rs and rk r ~O/ r
compe11 ·ng
saf t} o
sons for go~ ment policy to p ·
arm t rke s but i i not often r
i onm n t and t:he
zed t poli · a.r
co ting agricul u ea :tms of eff':ic ency w 1 out he atne
m
h n .· i - ost: as e srnent to tennin
ro c
I(.)
ar j ti · d
dis fecting he annua. mee
F br -:y 977 ~
prob ms
f thes
I s iln fo a augh
es r c ions on 8
ohn Zivnusk For sts'
c .emy of
ded
CHART I
FA · LAND VALUE HO · STRO GE RISE IN Ml.OW · ST
LV '-£ .AV. ~Gt 1NC/f A D ·_ AA RAG
• I .. 1 f..J
lH
Oo
l 3
191 138
197,S
1 7 1.16
!..'
!::.l
OU C:.
174
167 6
155
~
103 00
lOl
lO s
11
TAJ!t.f;
4
l l
l3
12 l2 lll
117 U7
u U7
u ll
.ll3
3
103
102
111
121
·l
12
12
€17
6
7
7
3
62
9J
102
10
10
ll.l
111
.9
108
10
l 80
as 9
g
90
0
u
2 l
l50
19
t9 00
213
l
4
_2«;
eet• I'
0
l
riod
l
19 6-1975
1951-197'5
1956-1975
1.961-1975
1966-1975
1971-1975
T LE 2
vera ·e a a s of R turn Yi ded by oldin0 ri ul u 1 nd _ 946-1975
Years nd o 1
2 3
percent
30 3, 25
25 73
~o ,4 .• 01
15 3.8
10 3 52
5 6.13
ud ad . ro -
ments
4
2.84
09
.3 42
3.37
.3.
6 0
TA LE 3
e res ion sults e at ·· OCP l.. n a.lu s and et Fa Incom erag s or 1936- 9 O, 1 51-19 3. 196 -1963, d 1972 1975
Co ffici nt
Sa dard
a2 r or of
. eats a b b
1936-19· 0 833 899 838 (.059)
195 -1953 . 890 .952 952 (.045)
196 1963 .865 262 750 ( .. 046)
1972- 975* .790 l 283 .730 (.058)
ote: e o so 197 f rm r es a alues p,er acre re re0 ressed on he log f th l 72-1975 £ mi income . r c~e~
TABLt:: 4
F I exes - 1911-1922
Ind 0 - era e od C per act' Q
d - nd and build P. r 00 (J ~2l•~ 00)
9 6 8 74~9
1912 72 6: 76.9
1913 7L,5 7 ,.6
l.914 71.2 80 .. 2 C
19.15 7L5 19.6
1916 - 84 4 4.2
1917 129 .. 0 89.9
19·18 148.0 97.9
1919 157 6 106.0
1920 150~7 127.
1921, 88.4 119 4
1922 93 .. 8 105 .. 6
193 5 3
ourc_; -)