Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
better schools, make the streets broader, etc.” 9 Simply put, communities with high levels of
civic spirit manifested higher levels of well-being and welfare.
Second, and more importantly, Mills and Ulmer identified the economically independent
middle class as the driving force behind civic engagement. Not only was the economically
independent middle class more prevalent in communities not dominated by big business, but
it was this group of economic actors that “usually took the lead in voluntary management of
civic enterprises.” 10
Mills and Ulmer offered several reasons why the economically independent middle class
has “traditionally been the chief participant in the management of civic enterprises. For one
thing, he [ sic ] usually has some time and money available with which to interest himself in
these matters. He is, on average, fairly well educated. His work in conducting a small busi-
ness trains him for initiative and responsibility. He is thrown into constant contact with the
administrative and political figures of the city…. Furthermore, the small businessman often
stands to benefit personally as a result of civic improvement…. ” 11
Walter Goldschmidt's Landmark Study
In the second empirical study commissioned by the U.S. Senate, Small Business and the
Community, the anthropologist Walter Goldschmidt contrasted “communities of large and
small farms” in the Central Valley of California. 12 Arvin, the large farm community, is located
in Kern County, south of Bakersfield. It was dominated by farms that were considerably
bigger than those found in Dinuba, the smaller-farm community. Dinuba is located north of
Arvin in Tulare County, near Fresno. According to Goldschmidt, “… the differences between
average farm size are great—in the neighborhood of 9 to 1 when taken on an acreage basis, 5
to 1 in value of products, and 3 to 1 if adjusted for intensity of operations. Nine-tenths of all
farm land is operated in units of 160 acres of more in Arvin as against one-fourth in Dinuba.”
However, both Arvin and Dinuba were similar in population size, shared value systems, and
social customs and were “part of a common system of agricultural production, best under-
stood as industrialized.” 13
Goldschmidt sought to relate “the scale of farm operations” to a set of “social and econom-
ic factors [that would reflect] the qualities of society in the two communities.” 14 He found
that residents in the community dominated by large-scale, corporately controlled farming had
a lower standard of living and quality of life than residents in the community where produc-
tion was dispersed among a large number of smaller farms. In particular he found:
1.
Arvin had more wage laborers than Dinuba, while Dinuba had more entrepreneurs.
2.
Arvin had lower living conditions.
3.
Arvin had a more unstable population.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search