IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/erevae/v4y1977i3p271-298..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Inhibitors to change in agriculture: Is a pluridisciplinary approach needed?

Author

Listed:
  • S. L. LOUWES

Abstract

Summary The application of technological development to the agricultural sector requires considerable structural change: increases in the size of farms, substitutions of capital for labour and a consequent outflow of labour. Such changes ought to be brought about by the market mechanism, but in most western countries are impeded by the price policies of Governments. This political opposition originates in the well-integrated farmers organisations which press for a strong emphasis on price policy at the expense of structural or social policies. In this article a systems approach is used to explain this opposition in the context of the actions within and the interactions between the various social systems in which agriculture participates as a subsystem. A tentative descriptive model of this interaction pattern is developed to indicate the interfaces of the different social subsystems, and a pluridisciplinary approach is advocated to incorporate psychological sociological and politicological material into the economic analysis. In a certain sense it is an institutional approach by means of pluridisciplinary research. The last two sections of the article deal with the possibilities and difficulties of such an approach and pluridisciplinary research based on open decision models is advocated. An important subject for research seems to be the socio-economic class-structure of agriculture since the different classes have different views on their position in relation to technological advance and react differently to it.

Suggested Citation

  • S. L. Louwes, 1977. "Inhibitors to change in agriculture: Is a pluridisciplinary approach needed?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 4(3), pages 271-298.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:erevae:v:4:y:1977:i:3:p:271-298.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/erae/4.3.271
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:erevae:v:4:y:1977:i:3:p:271-298.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.