Interfamily economic exchange: A function of culture or economics?

This study explores differences in inter-household exchange of goods and services in Anglo- and Mexican-American families controlling for income level and for ethnicity. The extent of such exchange, its perceived importance to the family's quality of life, satisfaction with the exchange, and the relation of persons in the exchange process are examined. Significant differences are found more often between higher income Anglo- and Mexican-Americans than between low-income families, both in the family providing goods and services for others and in the receipt of them. Higher income Mexican-American families are more likely than their Anglo- counterparts to exchange with relatives. Ethnic effects are more prevalent in higher income households than in low-income households. Economic effects are more predominant than ethnic effects.This study contributes to interregional Agricultural Experiment Station Research Project NC-128, Quality of Life as Influenced by Area of Residence. Cooperating states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Texas.Flora L. Williams' current research interests include income adequacy, financial problems, and indicators of change in economic well-being. She is an Associate Professor, Consumer Sciences and Retailing, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907.     

Time use satisfaction of wives: Home,farm, and labor force workload

Factors related to time spent in work roles are investigated for a sample of 685 wives living on family farms in seven southern and midwestern states. Data were collected in a comprehensive mail survey. Results show that variables reflecting management are the most important predictors of wife's time use satisfaction. Wife's satisfaction is also significantly related to her education and nonfarm employment. Conclusions indicate that, although wives on family farms experience work-role overload relative to their husbands, they are satisfied with their time contributions to the home/farm situation.Jeanne L. Hafstrom is Associate Professor, Consumer Sciences Division, University of Illinois, 161 Bevier Hall, 905 So. Goodwin, Urbana, IL 61801. She received her Ph.D. from the University of Illinois. Her current research interests include economic well-being and the quality of life.MaryAnn Paynter is Assistant Professor and Family Economics Extension Specialist, Consumer Sciences Division, University of Illinois, 547 Bevier Hall, 905 So. Goodwin, Urbana, IL 61801. She received her Ph.D. from Pennsylvania State University. Her current research interests include family resource management strategies.This study was part of S-191 Regional Research Project Farm Wife's External Employment, Family Economic Productivity and Family Functioning, and Project No. 60-0366 supported by the Agricultural Experiment Station, College of Agriculture, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.     

Population growth,farmland, and the long-run standard of living

This paper studies the natural-resources element in the theory of population growth over the very long run. In the context of the stock of land and Malthusian crises in earlier times, the model shows how resources have become more available rather than more scarce, even as population and income have increased.The paper sketches a mechanism which, added to the Malthusian system, leads to entirely different conclusions than does the Malthusian system. Using the illustration of food and land, change in knowledge and hence in the stock of resources is made a function of the stock of knowledge and the price of resources. The speed of adjustment depends on the economic and social climate for the development of new knowledge. Population growth first raises food and land prices, which then stimulate the creation of new resources, eventually leading to less scarcity of resources and lower prices than originally prevailed.That is, population growth creates new problems which in the short run constitute additional burdens which, in the longer run, lead to new developments that leave people better off than if the problems had never arisen.This paper benefitted from being presented in earlier draft at a Population Association of America meeting, to the Economic History workshop at the University of Illinois, and to a seminar of the International Union for the Scientific Study of Population in New Delhi. We appreciate valuable comments on earlier drafts from Stanley Engerman, E. L. Jones, William McNeill, and two anonymous referees. Gunter Steinmann acknowledges financial support from the Volkswagen Foundation and a travel grant from Fulbright Commission.