268 Communities and Social Capital
Farming dependency was employed as a control variable in all these studies.
Four of the OTA studies controlled for this contextually by examining counties at
different levels of farming dependency (Buttel et al, 1988; Flora and Flora, 1988;
MacCannell, 1988; van Es et al, 1988). Lobao (1990) and Skees and Swanson
(1988) insert control variables for farming dependency as well as for urban influ-
ences.
The studies were premised upon broadening the generalizability of earlier
work, geographically and over time. The OTA studies examined the major US
agricultural regions while Lobao’s (1990) analysis focused on the continental US,
major agricultural regions, and select subregions. Cross-sectional and longitudinal
relationships were examined, the latter enabling the effects of farm change to be
ascertained. Further, the studies recognized the reverse causal relationship – that
community changes influence farming.
Finally, the studies go beyond simple empirical replication of the Goldschmidt
hypothesis. Their conceptual frameworks build upon political economy and other
perspectives in the sociology of agriculture and community development. Lobao’s
study (1990) addressed theoretically the reasons for inequality across different spa-
tial settings, incorporating structural perspectives from industrial sociology, eco-
nomic geography and regional science.
With regard to large-scale farming, the OTA studies found negative effects for
the California, Arizona, Texas and Florida regions. Effects were mixed for the
Great Plains, West and South, where there was some indication that moderate size
farms were related to higher well-being. Farm changes had little relationship to
well-being in the North-east and Midwest. Lobao’s (1990) national findings were
that larger, family-labour-dependent units are related to higher well-being over
time and cross-sectionally. Smaller family farming was related to poorer condi-
tions, although not necessarily over time. These effects generally held across
regions. Nationally, industrialized farming had little effect on well-being cross-
sectionally. This varied over time and by region.
In addition to these volumes, other recent studies addressed aspects of the farm
well-being relationship. These studies adopted current methodologies, including
the use of longitudinal analyses and controls for important non-farm variables
(Albrecht, 1992; Gilles and Dalecki, 1988; Lobao and Schulman, 1991). They
shared two major foci. Empirically, they were concerned with the context, particu-
larly region, within which relationships occur. From a conceptual-theoretical
standpoint, these studies attempted to develop frameworks to understand why
farm structure and its effects might vary by geographic context.
The Barnes and Blevins study
This review is not meant to deny that modification and replication of the previous
research are not needed. Rather, it is to show that the unique contributions that
Barnes and Blevins (1992, p334) purport to make were made years earlier: