Understanding the Impacts of Urbanization on Agriculture: A Conceptual Model

1
Understanding the Impacts of Urbanization on
Agriculture A Conceptual Model

• Dr. Douglas Jackson-Smith
• Dr. Jeff Sharp, Shoshonah Inwood, Jill
  Clark, Lori Porreca
• Utah State University Ohio State
  University

This project was supported by the National
Research Initiative of the Cooperative State
Research, Education and Extension Service, USDA
Grant 2005-35401-15272
2
Background to the Project Core Research
Objectives

• Characterize the diverse trajectories of
  agricultural adaptation and change in U.S.
  counties located at the rural-urban interface
• Collect detailed information in select
  communities about local responses to urbanization
  and assess how farmer adaptive strategies are
  influenced by these community initiatives as well
  as the general state of farm /nonfarm social
  relations within the community.
• Develop and test a multivariate model analyzing
  county-level aggregate patterns of agricultural
  change in relation to a range of local social,
  demographic, economic, ecological, and policy
  conditions in a national sample of U.S. counties
  at the RUI.

3
Methods Research Phases

• Phase 1 National County-Level Data
• Characterize the diverse trajectories of
  agricultural adaptation
• Phase 2 Case studies landowner surveys in
  limited s of counties selected to represent
  different trajectories
• Identify key community policies or contexts that
  explain agricultural trends
• Phase 3 Key Informant Survey in full national
  sample of counties
• Determine presence or absence of key community
  qualities that explain variability in trajectories

4
Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives

• General Models of Agricultural Change
• General Models of Urbanization
• Linking the Two Unique Challenges (and
  Opportunities) for Agriculture in Urbanizing
  Places

5
Dynamics of Agricultural Restructuring

• Economic Forces Internal To Agriculture
• Ag Highly competitive sector with declining
  real profit margins
• Tech Innovation Cochranes Treadmill of
  Production
• General tendencies
• Larger units of production concentration
  integration
• More use of labor saving technology (not
  necessarily more hired labor)
• Greater reliance on immigrant labor force

6
Sociological Perspectives

• Understanding Persistence of Family Farms
• Competitive advantages
• Unattractiveness of ag sector to capitalists
• Non-Economic motivations
• Lifestyle goals are critical (consumption model
  vs production model)
• Decision-making units are households, not
  businesses
• Leads to decisions outcomes that business
  economists might not expect

7
Implications for Ag Change

• Ag Sector Economic forces important
• but not always decisive
• Demographic / life-cycle issues key
• Quality of life issues are very important
• Decisions also tied to non-farm economic
  conditions options

8
Urbanization Models

• North American urbanization trends
• Loss of Inner Cities
• Suburbanization Sprawl (larger lots)
• Exurbanization
• Drivers
• Policies (transportation, land use, taxation)
• Housing Preferences
• Economic Conditions

9
Dynamics of Farming In Urbanizing Environments

• STRESSES
• Land Markets
• Urban pressure bids up price of land
• Social Conflicts
• Neighbors Nuisance Complaints
• Agribusiness Infrastructure
• Dropping below a critical mass of farms
• Inputs, Services, Processing, Wholesale Markets

10
Dynamics of Farming in Urbanizing Environments

• OPPORTUNITIES
• New marketing outlets
• Farmers markets, roadside stands, U-pick
• Nursery/Greenhouse operations
• Urban customer preferences (organic, local, etc.)
• Leveraging land values
• Collateral for loans investment
• Selling small parcels to raise cash
• Security that underlying assets retain value

11
Farm Adaptations in Urbanizing Contexts

• No consistent approach in literature
• Complex contradictory paths likely

12
Central Place Theory

• Sinclair Model (1967) Variant of Von Thünen
  hypothesis
• Concentric rings around urban areas
• Land rents primary determining factor in
  organization of ag.
• High value, urban ag in or nearest urban core

13
Impermanence Syndrome

• Berry (1977) Farmers will disinvest in the face
  of development due to uncertainties about the
  future
• Oft-cited little empirical work

14
Johnston and Bryant (1987)
15
Heimlich and Brooks (1989)
16
Smithers and Johnson (2004)
17
Phase I Model of Agricultural Adaptation
Change
18
Phase I Typologies of Adaptations

• Growth
• Traditional Restructuring
• Intensification via traditional ag. enterprises
• Intensification via new ag. enterprises
• Persistence
• Diversification (on farm strategies)
• Diversification (off farm strategies)
• Traditional w/ modest change
• Decline
• Deintensification
• Decline via exits
• Sample guiding sources Lobely Goetz, Bryant
  and Johnston Lapping and Pfeffer Shucksmith and
  Hermann

19
WHAT WE HAVE DONE

• Identified the appropriate places to study Ag at
  the Rural/Urban Interface
• Developed typology of agricultural adaptation
• Analysis of aggregated county-level data
• What is unique about AI/RUI counties?
• Later linking attributes to agricultural
  adaptation
• Case study field visits in 8 counties
• Ongoing
• Key informant and landowner surveys
• Model overall patterns using insights from case
  studies and new national dataset

20
Determining the Study Population

• Focus on counties meeting two criteria
• Agricultural Importance
• CORE AI Two key criteria
• Top quartile of aggregate sales (50 million),
  or
• Second quartile of sales top quartile of sales
  per acre (using either cropland or farmland as
  denominator)
• Supplemental AI UIC1 counties that are in the
  top quartile in proportion of land base in
  cropland
• Located at the Rural-Urban Interface
• Urban Influence Codes (UIC) 1 through 4
• UIC codes 5-7 AND population growth greater than
  13.15 between 1990-2000

21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23
Intersection of Agriculturally Important and
Rural-Urban Interface Counties
24
Agriculturally Important Counties at the
Rural-Urban Interface
25
Defining Agric. Trajectories

• Growth, Stability(/- 10), Decline
• In farms, farmland, and sales (1987-1997
  1997-2002)
• Combining these factors, results in the following
  trajectories
• Decline (everything decreasing)
• Deintensifying (sales / acre decreasing)
• Persistence / Stable
• Intensifying (sales / acre increasing)
• Growing (everything growing)

26
Resulting Matrix
27
Spatial Patterns (1987-1997 data)
28
(No Transcript)
29
Regional Variation
30
Problems Aggregate Data

• Data aggregated at the county level
• Nearly impossible to identify areas that have
  conflicting or counteracting internal trends
• Examples places that are both
• Intensifying where a few operations are
  becoming larger, using their resources more
  intensively, increasing gross sales output,
  and/or consolidation land and animals from
  surrounding farms, and
• Deintensifying where a larger number of people
  are creating smaller, subcommercial farms and
  converting some farmland into hobby or
  recreational enterprises
• Forcing counties into a single typology may not
  accurately reflect the situation on many
  individual farms
• Difficult to detect dualism where you have
  simultaneous growth of large and small farms, and
  the disappearing middle

31
Another Problem Time

• Typologies can be calculated for 1987-1997 and
  1997-2002 periods
• Patterns are not always consistent
• Response
• Finding Pure examples of diverse types (within
  each time period) i.e. Pure Growth
• Theory Logic
• Size of subgroup
• Finding Same Trend and Contrarians places

32
Post-Fieldwork Typology

• Intensification
• Same commodity vs commodity shifts
• Deintensification
• Same commodity vs commodity shifts
• Emergence of Urban Ag Forms
• Nursery/GH Direct Sales, Agritainment, Value
  Added Processing
• Recreational or Lifestyle Farming

33
Complicating Factors

• Farm Demographics Succession Opportunities
• Processing Marketing Environments
• Spatial Patterns
• Role of Policy Community Factors

34
Questions? douglasj_at_hass.usu.edu
35
Bibliography

• Heimlich, Ralph E. and William D. Anderson. 2001.
  Development at the Urban Fringe and Beyond.
  USDA ERS Agricultural Economic Report Number 803
• Lapping, M.B. and M.J. Pfeffer. 1997. City and
  Country Forging New Connections through
  Agriculture. Pp. 91-104 in Visions of American
  Agriculture. Lockeretz (ed.). Ames, IA Iowa
  State University Press.
• Lobely, Matt, and Clive Potter. 2004.
  Agricultural Change and Restructuring Recent
  Evidence for a survey of agricultural households
  in England. Journal of Rural Studies. 20
  499-510.
• Shucksmith, Mark and Vera Herrmann. 2002. Future
  Changes in British Agriculture Projecting
  Divergent Farm Household Behavior. Journal of
  Agricultural Economics. 53(1)37-50.