Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T05:48:41.892Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessing The Research Framework And Institutional Context For Rural Development Policy: Discussion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 September 2016

David B. Schweikhardt
David B. Schweikhardt*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Mississippi State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Invited Papers and Discussions
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , July 1992 , pp. 117 - 119
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bonnen, James T. The Political Economy of U.S. Rural Policy: An Exploration of the Past with Strategies for the Future. Staff paper number 90-54, Department of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State University, July 1990.Google Scholar
Conlan, Timothy J. “Conflicting Trends, Competing Futures.” Journal of State Governance, 62 (1989): 50–55.Google Scholar
Freshwater, David. “The Historical Context of Federal Rural Development Policy.” Western Wire, Spring 1992, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
Fulton, William. “Getting the Wire to the Sticks.” Governing the States and Localities, 2 (1989): 34–43.Google Scholar
Haughwont, Andrew F. and Richardson, Charles J.. “Federal Grants to State and Local Governments.” Public Budgeting and Finance, 7 (1987): 12–22.Google Scholar
Johnson, Glenn L., Bonnen, James T., Fienup, Darrell, Quance, C. Leroy, and Schaller, Neill. Social Science Agricultural Agendas and Strategies. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
Lemov, Penelope. “Europe and the States: Free Trade, But No Free Lunch.” Governing The States and Localities, 4 (1991): 49–52.Google Scholar
Moore, W. John. “Stopping the States.” National Journal, 22 (1990): 1758–1762.Google Scholar
Office of Management and Budget. Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 1992. Washington, D.C., 1991a.Google Scholar
Office of Management and Budget. Historical Tables—Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 1992. Washington, D.C., 1991b.Google Scholar
Rasmussen, Wayne D. “90 Years of Rural Development Programs.” Rural Development Perspectives, 2 (1985): 2–9.Google Scholar
Schuh, G. Edward. “The Future of Land Grant Universities: Implications for Departments of Agricultural Economics.” Departmental Management and Leadership: Proceedings of the First National Workshop for Agricultural Economics Department Chairs, Nielson, James ed., pp. 3–12.Google Scholar
Schuh, G. Edward. “Rural Revitalization: A Call for State Action.” Northwest Report. March 1989, pp. 22–29.Google Scholar
Stanfield, Rochelle L. “Forced Federalism.” National Journal. 23 (1991): 3020–3023.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Commerce. 1987 Census of Governments — Compendium of Public Employment. Washington, D. C. Volume 3, Number 2. 1991.Google Scholar