No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

An integrated public‐private approach to mechanical harvesting of tomatoes for canning has sharply reduced producers ' labor requirements. Gross social returns to aggregate research and development expenditures are in the vicinity of 1,000 percent. Even if displaced labor had been compensated for wage loss, net social returns are still highly favorable. Since tomato pickers were unorganized, no compensation was demanded or paid. The analysis indicates a need for policies designed to distribute the benefits and costs of technological change more equitably. Social scientists could properly be concerned with developing institutional means of achieving this goal.

Pesticides enhance agricultural productivity, but the environmental and health side effects of their use justify government regulation, a subject of continuing societal debate. Bans on pesticide use are the principal regulatory device used in the United States. The economic impacts of such bans depend on the availability of substitutes, supply and trade conditions, and research and development. Without substitutes, pesticide bans result in reduced production levels and higher prices, a substantial loss of discretionary income to consumers, and a redistribution of income among agricultural producers. Most food safety concerns can be addressed by establishing standards and markets for pesticide-differentiated products, but worker safety and clean water concerns will require direct controls. Pesticide-use fees are shown to be more efficient than outright pesticide bans as a mechanism to obtain environmental goals.