首页> 外文期刊>Crop and Pasture Science >Learning from the historical failure of farm management models to aid management practice. Part 1. The rise and demise of theoretical models of farm economics
【24h】

Learning from the historical failure of farm management models to aid management practice. Part 1. The rise and demise of theoretical models of farm economics

机译:从农场管理模式的历史失败中学习,以帮助管理实践。第1部分。农业经济学理论模型的兴衰

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

A potential source of lessons for agricultural modellers aspiring to influence farm decision making is the historical experience of agricultural economists in the field, variously termed ‘Farm Management Research’ or ‘Farm Management’. Although the histories of Farm Management in the USA and in Australia differ significantly, in both cases the field was originally characterised by pragmatic on-farm research by agricultural scientists and later taken over by agricultural economists committed to theory-based economic analysis to enable rational planning and decision making. But in both countries, it became painfully evident to reflective participants that model-based Farm Management was not proving relevant to practical managers of farms. An insightful few went further to conclude not just that theoretical models of practice had not been relevant but that they could not be relevant, and since the late 1970s, the field has been in crisis.nnIn this series of 2 papers, we seek insights that might explain this extraordinary ‘market’ failure of models that generate theoretical best practice as a basis for intervention. As an ‘experiment’, the history of Farm Management is enriched by the discontinuity between 2 ‘eras’ characterised by 2 contrasting intervention approaches, an ‘early’ interactive and pragmatic era and a ‘late’ academic and theoretical era. In this first paper, after a brief history of the early pragmatic era and the ‘take-over’ by economic theorists, we analyse the ‘crisis of relevance’ that led to demise, relying heavily on the remarkable intellectual journey of John Dillon, the first Professor of Farm Management in Australia who turned from being elder economic theoretician to pioneer philosopher of pragmatic Farming Systems Research.
机译:希望影响农场决策的农业建模者可能会从中获得经验教训,这是该领域农业经济学家的历史经验,被称为“农场管理研究”或“农场管理”。尽管美国和澳大利亚的农场管理历史大相径庭,但在这两种情况下,该领域最初都是由农业科学家进行务实的农场研究,后来又由致力于基于理论的经济分析以实现合理计划的农业经济学家接手。和决策。但是在这两个国家,反思参与者都痛苦地意识到基于模型的“农场管理”与实践中的农场管理者无关。有见地的少数人进一步得出结论,不仅实践的理论模型不相关,而且不相关。自1970年代末以来,该领域一直处于危机之中。在这两篇系列文章中,我们寻求的见解是也许可以解释模型的这种非同寻常的“市场”失败,这些模型产生了理论上的最佳实践作为干预的基础。作为一项“实验”,农场管理的历史因两个“时代”之间的间断而丰富,这两个时代以两种截然不同的干预方法为特征,一个“早期”互动而务实的时代以及一个“晚期”学术和理论时代。在第一篇论文中,在回顾了早期实用主义时代的简短历史和经济理论家的“接管”之后,我们分析了导致灭亡的“相关危机”,这在很大程度上取决于约翰·狄龙(John Dillon),澳大利亚的第一位农场管理教授,从资深的经济理论家转变为务实的农业系统研究的先驱哲学家。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Crop and Pasture Science》 |2006年第2期|p.143-156|共14页
  • 作者单位

    A CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Agricultural Production Systems Research Unit (APSRU), Toowoomba, Qld 4350, Australia. B CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Queensland Bioscience Precinct, St. Lucia, Qld 4067, Australia. C Faculty of Science and Agriculture, Charles Sturt University, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia. D Corresponding author. Email: Bob.McCown@csiro.au;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    theoretical; economics;

    机译:理论;经济学;

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号