IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaa111/52850.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The persistence of small dairy farms in Austria from an economic perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Kirner, Leopold
  • Hambrusch, Josef
  • Ortner, Karl M.

Abstract

In the international comparison the structure of milk production in Austria is small scale. The present study presents two theoretical approaches to explain the persistence of small dairy farms in Austria: the opportunity cost principle and the theory of the agricultural household. With regard to the first one it is debatable whether the flat rates really can represent the costs of own production factors in their alternative uses in small enterprises. An illustration on the basis of production cost accounts shows that small dairy farms with no possibilities for the utilization of their own production factors (especially for labour) can cover the production costs by revenues only. Secondly it is argued that agricultural production is likely to continue in small dairy farms as long as the enterprise contributes persistently to the household income of the family. Indicators from the Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN) of voluntarily participating farms in Austria support the notion that labour is allocated efficiently between the enterprise and the household in small operations in order to achieve maximum total income. The study proposes arguments according to which it can be expected that rather small dairy farms are going to be a prominent presence in Austrian agriculture also in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Kirner, Leopold & Hambrusch, Josef & Ortner, Karl M., 2009. "The persistence of small dairy farms in Austria from an economic perspective," 111th Seminar, June 26-27, 2009, Canterbury, UK 52850, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaa111:52850
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/52850
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Binswanger, Hans P. & Elgin, Miranda, 1988. "What are the Prospects for Land Reform?," 1988 Conference, August 24-31, 1988, Buenos Aires, Argentina 183168, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Verma, B N & Bromley, Daniel W, 1987. "The Political Economy of Farm Size in India: The Elusive Quest," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(4), pages 791-808, July.
    3. Louis Putterman & Xiao-Yuan Dong, 1997. "Pre-Reform Industry and The State Monopsony in China," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 94, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    4. Deininger, Klaus & Feder, Gershon, 2001. "Land institutions and land markets," Handbook of Agricultural Economics,in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 6, pages 288-331 Elsevier.
    5. Vranken, Liesbet & Swinnen, Johan, 2006. "Land rental markets in transition: Theory and evidence from Hungary," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 481-500, March.
    6. Binswanger, Hans P. & Deininger, Klaus & Feder, Gershon, 1995. "Power, distortions, revolt and reform in agricultural land relations," Handbook of Development Economics,in: Hollis Chenery & T.N. Srinivasan (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 42, pages 2659-2772 Elsevier.
    7. Titman, Sheridan, 1985. "Urban Land Prices under Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 505-514, June.
    8. Feder, Gershon, et al, 1992. "The Determinants of Farm Investment and Residential Construction in Post-Reform China," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(1), pages 1-26, October.
    9. Edward B. Barbier & Joanne C. Burgess, 1997. "The Economics of Tropical Forest Land Use Options," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 73(2), pages 174-195.
    10. Carter, Michael R, 1984. "Identification of the Inverse Relationship between Farm Size and Productivity: An Empirical Analysis of Peasant Agricultural Production," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(1), pages 131-145, March.
    11. Newell, Andrew & Pandya, Kiran & Symons, James, 1997. "Farm Size and the Intensity of Land Use in Gujarat," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(2), pages 307-315, April.
    12. Williams, Joseph T, 1991. "Real Estate Development as an Option," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 191-208, June.
    13. Guang Wan & Enjiang Cheng, 2001. "Effects of land fragmentation and returns to scale in the Chinese farming sector," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(2), pages 183-194.
    14. Dong, Xiao-Yuan & Putterman, Louis, 2000. "Prereform Industry and State Monopsony in China," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 32-60, March.
    15. Benjamin, Dwayne, 1995. "Can unobserved land quality explain the inverse productivity relationship?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 51-84, February.
    16. Feder, Gershon, 1985. "The relation between farm size and farm productivity : The role of family labor, supervision and credit constraints," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2-3), pages 297-313, August.
    17. Cornia, Giovanni Andrea, 1985. "Farm size, land yields and the agricultural production function: An analysis for fifteen developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 513-534, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zimmermann, Andrea & Heckelei, Thomas, 2012. "Differences of farm structural change across European regions," Discussion Papers 162879, University of Bonn, Institute for Food and Resource Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Small dairy farms; production costs; farm household; opportunity costs; FADN; Consumer/Household Economics; Q12; R20;

    JEL classification:

    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • R20 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Household Analysis - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:eaa111:52850. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.