Formal Training Requirements for Future Managers of Commercial Agriculture

The title of this article restricts our discussion to our colleges of agriculture and their agricultural training for commercial farm management. As most economics departments is not, in and of itself, adeare aware, however, the structure of the entire agriquate to this purpose" [2, p. 449]. He claims that the cultural business complex has changed greatly in "...typical undergraduate curriculum taken by most recent years. We have seen a sharp growth in the agricultural economists leaves a good deal to be number and size of commercial farms with resource desired." "Too much of the course work." he says, capabilities far beyond those of traditional family "is narrowly vocational, there is too much orientation farms, the transition in some agricultural industries toward the physical sciences, and correspondingly too (as in broiler production and cattle feeding) to faclittle in the direction of such basic disciplines as the tory types of operation, and vertical integration of humanities, the social sciences, psychology, commufood and feed companies toward agriculture and even nication, mathematics .. ." and similar subjects [2, p. into farm production. We are also observing the de450]. At the same time, we are criticized for graduavelopment of agricultural corporations. Some of these ting students who know too little about agriculture are integrating into agribusiness operations and in and are charged both with too little and too much conglomerate patterns. For example, some of our emphasis on economic theory and on statistical Texas cattle feeding corporations have now merged research methods and techniques. It seems that we with chemical companies or oil firms, and one has are "between a rock and the hard place." acquired a large scale broiler enterprise. A number own and operate ranches or meat packing plants. One Hoffman's major point is that "Agribusiness or two have established subsidiary credit corporaeconomists will need something very different in the tions. This emphasizes the difficulty we have today in way of theoretical and empirical economics than distinguishing between the managerial requirements most departments of agricultural economics have of commercial agriculture and the managerial requiretraditionally offered" [2, p. 448]. I do not entirely ments of agribusiness. Today, many farm enterprise agree as I am convinced that there is and can be no decisions are made by agribusiness management, substitute for good training in economics, econometoften on the advice of an agribusiness economist. On rics, and statistics. At the same time, some changes the basis of these arguments, we can expand our apparently do need to be made (primarily in underthinking to include formal training requirements of graduate curricula). The departments in several agribusiness industries. schools apparently have already initiated action. Most notably, these include Purdue, the University of Without a doubt, the managerial requirements and California at Davis, the University of Minnesota, entrepreneurial functions of commercial agriculture Oregon State University, and the University of and of agribusiness firms are changing. The question Missouri. Many other institutions are planning is whether or not the training received in agricultural changes. economics is appropriate? Among others, some agribusiness economists claim that it is not. A. C. In an article replying to Hoffman's comments, Hoffman, Vice President, Kraft Foods Company, for Charles French [1] made the following points: example, has said that ". .. the agribusiness economist should be trained not only in economics but also "We may be better at method than at subject for general business management. A corollary to this matter.... We can be criticized for how we do the job is that the type of training traditionally offered by but our basic objectives and concepts are fundamen-