IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agrhuv/v9y1992i1p22-30.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A history of black farm operators in Maryland

Author

Listed:
  • E. Demissie

Abstract

Since the turn of the century, the number of small-scale farmers in the U.S. and farmlands they owned have declined very sharply (structural change). Although the decrease in number is generally true for both white and Black farm operators, it has been more significant for Blackfarm operators than whites. The declining trend in the number of Blackfarm operators in the country is derived from individual state experiences that resulted from a combination of various political and economic factors. Using the census of agriculture data from 1900 to 1987, this paper gives a brief historical overview of Black farm operators in Maryland. The census data for the study period shows that at their peak number in 1910, there were 6,382 Blackfarmers in the state of Maryland. However, by 1987, only 371 of that number remained, representing a loss of 94 percent since 1910. According to the 1987 census data almost all Black operated farms in Maryland were not only small-scale but also in the lower sales class, less than $20,000 a year. Their household net family income is below that of non-metropolitan median household income. This concentration of Blacks in the lower economic class of farm operators in the state, for the most part, is closely related to their resource endowments, patterns of tenure, type of farm enterprises, and government farm programs and policies. On the average, Blackfarmers in Maryland have less land, capital and management skills than their white counterparts. Government policies and programs had, and continue to have, a devastating effect on Maryland Black farmers because they were tied to productive resources rather than farm income needs. Under conditions of low income, years of neglect by federal and state programs and policies, and limited resources Blackfarmers were unable to adopt capital intensive production practices and expand their farm operations. This resulted in most of them leaving agriculture, in the past and today, at a faster rate than whites. To avert or at least lessen the unfortunate situation of Black farm operators, projections and possible solutions are offered. This includes how the 1890 Land-Grant institutions because of their tradition, expertise and experience of research, teaching and outreach can take the leadership role in shaping the future direction of these farmers and their operations. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1992

Suggested Citation

  • E. Demissie, 1992. "A history of black farm operators in Maryland," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 9(1), pages 22-30, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:9:y:1992:i:1:p:22-30
    DOI: 10.1007/BF02226500
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF02226500
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF02226500?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Huffman, Wallace E, 1981. "Black-White Human Capital Differences: Impact on Agricultural Productivity in the U.S. South," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(1), pages 94-107, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jin, Yu & Huffman, Wallace E., 2013. "Reduced U.S. Funding of Public Agricultural Research and Extension Risks Lowering Future Agricultural Productivity Growth Prospects," Staff General Research Papers Archive 36796, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Yu Jin & Wallace E. Huffman, 2016. "Measuring public agricultural research and extension and estimating their impacts on agricultural productivity: new insights from U.S. evidence," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(1), pages 15-31, January.
    3. Tegene, Abebayehu & Effland, Anne & Ballenger, Nicole & Norton, George W. & Essel, Albert E. & Larson, Gerald & Clarke, Winfrey, 2002. "Investing in People: Assessing the Economic Benefits of 1890 Institutions," Miscellaneous Publications 33548, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    4. Gunter, Lewell F., 1986. "Wage Determination For Regular Hired Farm Workers: An Empirical Analysis For Georgia," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 18(2), pages 1-10, December.
    5. Hildreth, R.J. & Armbruster, Walter J., 1981. "Extension Program Delivery-Past, Present And Future : An Overview," 1981 Annual Meeting, July 26-29, Clemson, South Carolina 279260, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. Ghebremedhin, Tesfa G., 1988. "Assessing The Impacts Of Technology On Southern Agriculture And Rural Communities," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 20(1), pages 1-8, July.
    7. Ariel Dinar & Giannis Karagiannis & Vangelis Tzouvelekas, 2002. "Evaluating the Impact of Public and Private Agricultural Extension on Farms Performance: A Non-Neutral Stochastic Frontier Approach," Working Papers 0205, University of Crete, Department of Economics.
    8. Adell Brown & Ralph Christy & Tesfa Gebremedhin, 1994. "Structural changes in U.S. agriculture: Implications for African American farmers," The Review of Black Political Economy, Springer;National Economic Association, vol. 22(4), pages 51-71, June.

    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:spr:agrhuv:v:9:y:1992:i:1:p:22-30. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.