IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v83y2001i1p77-88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are Farm Size Distributions Bimodal? Evidence from Kernel Density Estimates of Dairy Farm Size Distributions

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher A. Wolf
  • Daniel A. Sumner

Abstract

One often hears and sees reference to bimodal distributions of farm size. This notion seems to have become one of the stylized facts about American agriculture. Dairy farm size distributions are prime candidates to exhibit a bimodal size distribution. Older dairy farms tend to be significantly smaller than new dairy farms and there are well known regional size differences. Nonetheless, our analysis of 1989 and 1993 U.S. dairy farm size distributions, using nonparametric density estimation techniques, reveals that U.S. dairy farm size distributions are not bimodal. This result holds across years for herd size, total farm sales, and acres operated. Copyright 2001, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher A. Wolf & Daniel A. Sumner, 2001. "Are Farm Size Distributions Bimodal? Evidence from Kernel Density Estimates of Dairy Farm Size Distributions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(1), pages 77-88.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:83:y:2001:i:1:p:77-88
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/0002-9092.00138
    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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Zoltan Bakucs & Stefan Bojnec & Imre Fertő & Laure Latruffe, 2013. "Farm size and growth in field crop and dairy farms in France, Hungary and Slovenia," Post-Print hal-01208897, HAL.
    2. Tauer, Loren W. & Mishra, Ashok K., 2006. "Can the small dairy farm remain competitive in US agriculture?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 458-468, October.
    3. Ayal Kimhi & Nitzan Tzur-Ilan, 2021. "Structural Changes in Israeli Family Farms: Long-Run Trends in the Farm Size Distribution and the Role of Part-Time Farming," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-15, June.
    4. Goodwin, Roger L, 2015. "Random Variables, Their Properties, and Deviational Ellipses: In Map Point and Excel, v 4.3," MPRA Paper 64863, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 07 Jun 2015.
    5. Fertő, Imre, 2002. "A mezőgazdasági termelés szerkezetének változásai a fejlett országokban, I. Miért a családi gazdaság a meghatározó üzemforma a fejlett országok mezőgazdaságában? [Changes in the structure of agricu," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(7), pages 574-596.
    6. James, Harvey S., Jr. & Hendrickson, Mary K., 2009. "Are Farmers of the Middle Distinctively “Good Stewards?” Evidence from the Missouri Farm Poll, 2006," Working Papers 92623, University of Missouri Columbia, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    7. Kimhi, Ayal & Tzur, Nitzan, 2011. "Long-Run Trends in the Farm Size Distribution in Israel: The Role of Part-Time Farming," Discussion Papers 99217, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Department of Agricultural Economics and Management.
    8. Kersting, Stefan & Hüttel, Silke & Odening, Martin, 2016. "Industry dynamics under production constraints — The case of the EU dairy sector," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 135-151.
    9. Goodwin, Roger L, 2014. "Random Variables, Their Properties, and Deviational Ellipses: In Map Point and Excel, v 4.0," MPRA Paper 64101, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 17 Apr 2015.
    10. Stokes, Jeffrey R., 2006. "Entry, Exit, and Structural Change in Pennsylvania's Dairy Sector," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 35(2), pages 1-17, October.
    11. Fertő, Imre & Bakucs, Lajos Zoltán, 2008. "Érvényes-e a Gibrat-törvény a magyar mezőgazdaságban? [Is Gibrat s law valid for Hungarian agriculture?]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 25-38.
    12. Azadeh Falsafian & Mohammad Ghahremanzadeh & Taravat Aref Eshghi & Vali Rasooli Sharabiani & Mariusz Szymanek & Agata Dziwulska-Hunek, 2024. "Producer Welfare Benefits of Rating Area Yield Crop Insurance," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-21, September.
    13. Senga Kiessé, Tristan & Corson, Michael S. & Eugène, Maguy, 2022. "The potential of kernel density estimation for modelling relations among dairy farm characteristics," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    14. Bert, Federico E. & Podestá, Guillermo P. & Rovere, Santiago L. & Menéndez, Ángel N. & North, Michael & Tatara, Eric & Laciana, Carlos E. & Weber, Elke & Toranzo, Fernando Ruiz, 2011. "An agent based model to simulate structural and land use changes in agricultural systems of the argentine pampas," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(19), pages 3486-3499.
    15. Kersting, Stefan & Hüttel, Silke & Odening, Martin, 2015. "Structural change in agriculture under capacity constraints: An equilibrium approach," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 140, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    16. Dries, Liesbeth & Swinnen, Johan F. M., 2004. "Foreign Direct Investment, Vertical Integration, and Local Suppliers: Evidence from the Polish Dairy Sector," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1525-1544, September.
    17. Lajos Zoltán Bakucs & Imre Fertő, 2009. "The growth of family farms in Hungary," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(s1), pages 789-795, November.
    18. Daniel A. Sumner, 2014. "American Farms Keep Growing: Size, Productivity, and Policy," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 28(1), pages 147-166, Winter.

    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:ajagec:v:83:y:2001:i:1:p:77-88. 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/aaeaaea.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.