DISCUSSION: PROTECTION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND: AN INSTITUTIONALIST PERSPECTIVE

Hite and Dillman have addressed an issue imcerns to various interest groups in society. It portant to this country in their paper. This issue, would seem also that these issues are related to our changing prime farmland resource base, has the central issue and represent its important received much attention recently and is likely to parts. For example, the issue that land retention receive more in the future. Although the views protects agriculture as an important industry is expressed in the Hite and Dillman article are related as it represents a part of our aggregate both original and stimulating, they deserve food production capability. further discussion. Following are comments on The failure to recognize the relationship of the the basic premise of their paper, the role of posicentral issue and its important parts leads to tive economics in this issue, and potential impliother logic not entirely consistent with the incations for agricultural land retention in the stitutional approach. This concern largely cenSouth. ters on the role of myths in explaining current The basic premise of the Hite and Dillman ideology. The logic is that the yeoman farmer is paper is that idealogy and not economics underan important mythical symbol in our heritage, lies the agricultural lands protection movement. and that our obligation to preserve him by preAfter noting problems in analyzing both positive serving his habitat lies beneath the current policy and normative questions associated with agriculof protecting agricultural land. Although this may tural lands retention policy, the authors chose to be important, it does not necessarily represent use the institutional approach to examine this isthe predominant concern underlying the issue. sue. The institutional approach presumes that an This logic fails to recognize a distinction between economy is a complex organism and, to explain rural and urban-industrial sectors of society and the behavior of the system as a whole, its indithe fact that some of the goals and values of these vidual parts must be studied in terms of how they two sectors may differ. Farm policy research influence the whole. Within the institutional suggests that although differences in goals and framework, one general classification of these values between rural and urban sectors are small, parts implies that current idealogy is not only they are important (Tweeten). Another observainfluenced by cultural, social, political, and relition is that values in society are becoming ingious phenomena, but also by economic phecreasingly urban dominated. These value differnomena. Moreover, this leads to the conclusion ences lead to an alternative conclusion that urban that their basic premise is not entirely consistent society's concern for the yeoman farmer is with the general approach used. primarily limited to the extent of his ability to Other logic that does not appear to be entirely produce adequate food and fiber for society at a consistent with the institutional approach inreasonable cost. In addition, the uncertainties cludes arguments for agricultural land retention associated with future world events, which could programs. Specifically, these include the central have important impacts on our ability to produce issue and several other arguments, which are adequate food and fiber, provide a common basis said to be somewhat unrelated to this issue. The for concern among rural and urban sectors of socentral issue (the concern of adequate food ciety. Important uncertainties include the supply supplies for the United States and her trading of farmland, future increases in agricultural propartners) is acknowledged to have an empirical ductivity, impacts of energy scarcity on agriculanswer, but is put aside in the remaining discusture, uncertain long-run climatic changes, and fusion of the paper. The discussion is then directed ture soil erosion problems. toward several unrelated issues, which range These uncertainties, along with the general from agricultural land retention protects agriculperspective of the Hite and Dillman paper, raise ture as an important local industry to land retenseveral important questions concerning the role tion promotes orderly growth of urban areas. that positive economics should play in examining Within an institutional framework, it would seem this issue. One basic positive question concerns that these lesser issues represent important conefficiency of land use. At one extreme, a propo-