Agricultural Economists - Explore the Science & Experts | ideXlab

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Agricultural Economists

The Experts below are selected from a list of 195 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Agricultural Economists – Free Register to Access Experts & Abstracts

F. D'onofrio – One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Making Variety Simple: Agricultural Economists in Southern Italy, 1906-9
    History of Political Economy, 2012
    Co-Authors: F. D'onofrio
    Abstract:

    In this contribution I examine the Italian parliamentary inquiry into the conditions of peasants in the southern provinces and Sicily, usually called the Faina inquiry (1906–9). I focus on how the task of observing the conditions of the peasant was defined, how it was entrusted to Agricultural Economists, and how they accomplished it. The peasant way of life varied greatly across southern Italy. Knowledge about local varieties and local specificities was embedded contextually and was available only to locals themselves. Observation thus coincided with translation of local features into a more general language that could be understood by a larger community of scientists and by a nationwide public opinion. Political change imposed severe time constraints on data collection. Farm types were devised to handle variety quickly and effectively. Types mobilized difference while preserving and stabilizing variety among classes

Federico D’onofrio – One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The Microfoundations of Italian Agrarianism: Italian Agricultural Economists and Fascism
    Agricultural History, 2017
    Co-Authors: Federico D’onofrio
    Abstract:

    By studying the theoretical and empirical work of Agricultural Economists in pre-World War I and interwar Italy, this article shows that agrarianism was a general paradigm shared across the Italian political spectrum by different political families. Originating in the Agricultural crisis of the late nineteenth century, agrarianism was understood differently by different political groups, so that its political meaning changed over time, while the underlying economic principles remained stable. The “democratic agrarianism” of the first two decades of the twentieth century-an effort to increase the number of owner-farmers in the name of the “social utility” of land-evolved into the “productivist agrarianism” of the fascistperiod, when the regime tried to reconcile under a technocratic leadership the contrast between social issues and land productivity. It declared peasant farmers a protected category of subjects, and put the development of Italian agriculture under the tutelage of the state and its bureaucratic structure

  • Making Variety Simple: Agricultural Economists in Southern Italy, 1906–9
    History of Political Economy, 2012
    Co-Authors: Federico D’onofrio
    Abstract:

    In this contribution I examine the Italian parliamentary inquiry into the conditions of peasants in the southern provinces and Sicily, usually called the Faina inquiry (1906–9). I focus on how the task of observing the conditions of the peasant was defined, how it was entrusted to Agricultural Economists, and how they accomplished it. The peasant way of life varied greatly across southern Italy. Knowledge about local varieties and local specificities was embedded contextually and was available only to locals themselves. Observation thus coincided with translation of local features into a more general language that could be understood by a larger community of scientists and by a nationwide public opinion. Political change imposed severe time constraints on data collection. Farm types were devised to handle variety quickly and effectively. Types mobilized difference while preserving and stabilizing variety among classes.

Jonathan S. Franklin – One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Truly Handmaidens to Policy? Evaluating Agricultural Economists’ Claim to a Distinct Tradition of Applied Economics
    History of Political Economy, 2014
    Co-Authors: Jonathan S. Franklin
    Abstract:

    By no means exclusive, the tendency of Agricultural Economists to emphasize the field’s historic commitment to applied economics is nonetheless intriguing and worthy of further exploration. If Agricultural Economists have demonstrated the ability to translate “practical” research into policy, then it should be evidenced in policy histories that can then serve as a model for influencing reform. The Agricultural crisis that followed the First World War serves as an excellent case study through which I explore the role of Agricultural Economists in the policymaking process. Rather than demonstrating a penchant for applying research, I conclude that Agricultural Economists were frustrated by the same forces that have limited the influence of Economists in general. More specifically, the field’s passive approach to reform and the tendency of interest groups to accept advice on a piecemeal basis minimized Agricultural Economists’ influence. Agricultural Economists’ role in shaping interwar farm policy was deceptively small, the implications of which should merit a reconsideration of the field’s claims of enhanced utility, as well as the connection between Agricultural Economists and federal farm policy in the early twentieth century.

Klaus Salhofer – One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • going beyond impact factors a survey based journal ranking by Agricultural Economists
    Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2011
    Co-Authors: Roland Herrmann, Ernst Berg, Stephan Dabbert, Siegfried Pöchtrager, Klaus Salhofer
    Abstract:

    A consistent and comprehensive ranking of journals relevant for Agricultural Economists cannot rely on impact factors for at least two major reasons: (i) the scientific database by Thomson Reuters, on which the standard impact factor is based, includes only a very limited number of relevant journals; (ii) the standard impact factor cannot be compared across research fields of different sizes. Survey-based journal rankings may overcome these problems. We report on such a survey-based ranking initiated by the Agricultural Economics Associations of Germany and Austria. Results of the ranking and a classification of journals, i.e. a rating, are provided for 160 selected journals. Scientific quality is assessed by an index based on the researchers’ perception of the quality standards of each journal and of the quality of its published articles. The survey-based ranking allows a much more comprehensive and consistent ranking than the impact factor, as specific Agricultural economics journals can be directly compared with neighbouring economic and interdisciplinary journals to which Agricultural Economists submit their work. The low impact factors of core Agricultural economics journals are put into perspective. The scientific quality of the top Agricultural economics journals is assessed as being rather high and above most of the relevant interdisciplinary journals from Agricultural and food sciences that are typically characterised by higher impact factors. Agricultural Economists‘ perceptions on the scientific quality of the journals vary more across journals than perceptions of their relevance.

  • Going Beyond Impact Factors: A Survey‐based Journal Ranking by Agricultural Economists
    Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2011
    Co-Authors: Roland Herrmann, Ernst Berg, Stephan Dabbert, Siegfried Pöchtrager, Klaus Salhofer
    Abstract:

    A consistent and comprehensive ranking of journals relevant for Agricultural Economists cannot rely on impact factors for at least two major reasons: (i) the scientific database by Thomson Reuters, on which the standard impact factor is based, includes only a very limited number of relevant journals; (ii) the standard impact factor cannot be compared across research fields of different sizes. Survey-based journal rankings may overcome these problems. We report on such a survey-based ranking initiated by the Agricultural Economics Associations of Germany and Austria. Results of the ranking and a classification of journals, i.e. a rating, are provided for 160 selected journals. Scientific quality is assessed by an index based on the researchers’ perception of the quality standards of each journal and of the quality of its published articles. The survey-based ranking allows a much more comprehensive and consistent ranking than the impact factor, as specific Agricultural economics journals can be directly compared with neighbouring economic and interdisciplinary journals to which Agricultural Economists submit their work. The low impact factors of core Agricultural economics journals are put into perspective. The scientific quality of the top Agricultural economics journals is assessed as being rather high and above most of the relevant interdisciplinary journals from Agricultural and food sciences that are typically characterised by higher impact factors. Agricultural Economists‘ perceptions on the scientific quality of the journals vary more across journals than perceptions of their relevance.

Roland Herrmann – One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • going beyond impact factors a survey based journal ranking by Agricultural Economists
    Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2011
    Co-Authors: Roland Herrmann, Ernst Berg, Stephan Dabbert, Siegfried Pöchtrager, Klaus Salhofer
    Abstract:

    A consistent and comprehensive ranking of journals relevant for Agricultural Economists cannot rely on impact factors for at least two major reasons: (i) the scientific database by Thomson Reuters, on which the standard impact factor is based, includes only a very limited number of relevant journals; (ii) the standard impact factor cannot be compared across research fields of different sizes. Survey-based journal rankings may overcome these problems. We report on such a survey-based ranking initiated by the Agricultural Economics Associations of Germany and Austria. Results of the ranking and a classification of journals, i.e. a rating, are provided for 160 selected journals. Scientific quality is assessed by an index based on the researchers’ perception of the quality standards of each journal and of the quality of its published articles. The survey-based ranking allows a much more comprehensive and consistent ranking than the impact factor, as specific Agricultural economics journals can be directly compared with neighbouring economic and interdisciplinary journals to which Agricultural Economists submit their work. The low impact factors of core Agricultural economics journals are put into perspective. The scientific quality of the top Agricultural economics journals is assessed as being rather high and above most of the relevant interdisciplinary journals from Agricultural and food sciences that are typically characterised by higher impact factors. Agricultural Economists‘ perceptions on the scientific quality of the journals vary more across journals than perceptions of their relevance.

  • Going Beyond Impact Factors: A Survey‐based Journal Ranking by Agricultural Economists
    Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2011
    Co-Authors: Roland Herrmann, Ernst Berg, Stephan Dabbert, Siegfried Pöchtrager, Klaus Salhofer
    Abstract:

    A consistent and comprehensive ranking of journals relevant for Agricultural Economists cannot rely on impact factors for at least two major reasons: (i) the scientific database by Thomson Reuters, on which the standard impact factor is based, includes only a very limited number of relevant journals; (ii) the standard impact factor cannot be compared across research fields of different sizes. Survey-based journal rankings may overcome these problems. We report on such a survey-based ranking initiated by the Agricultural Economics Associations of Germany and Austria. Results of the ranking and a classification of journals, i.e. a rating, are provided for 160 selected journals. Scientific quality is assessed by an index based on the researchers’ perception of the quality standards of each journal and of the quality of its published articles. The survey-based ranking allows a much more comprehensive and consistent ranking than the impact factor, as specific Agricultural economics journals can be directly compared with neighbouring economic and interdisciplinary journals to which Agricultural Economists submit their work. The low impact factors of core Agricultural economics journals are put into perspective. The scientific quality of the top Agricultural economics journals is assessed as being rather high and above most of the relevant interdisciplinary journals from Agricultural and food sciences that are typically characterised by higher impact factors. Agricultural Economists‘ perceptions on the scientific quality of the journals vary more across journals than perceptions of their relevance.