Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T14:16:42.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Value of Household Labor in Antebellum Northern Agriculture

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2009

Lee A. Craig
Lee A. Craig
Affiliation:
The author is Assistant Professor of Economics and Business, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article estimates the contribution of farm household members to agricultural output in the antebellum northern United States. I reject the hypothesis that children contributed more in the least settled regions. The contribution of young children and teenage females was greatest in the Old Northwest; teenage boys made their largest contribution in the Northeast. In the Midwest young males and females performed the same tasks, namely market production and land clearing, but in the Northeast males were more likely to specialize in market production and females in household production.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Economic History , Volume 51 , Issue 1 , March 1991 , pp. 67 - 81
Copyright
Copyright © The Economic History Association 1991

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

REFERENCES

Atack, Jeremy, and Bateman, Fred, To Their Own Soil: Agriculture in Ante-Bellum North (Ames, 1987).Google Scholar
Bateman, Fred, “The ‘Marketable Surplus’ in Northern Dairy Farming: New Evidence by Size fo Farm,” Agricultural History, 52 (07, 1978), pp. 345–63.Google Scholar
Bateman, Fred, and Foust, James D., “Agricultural and Demographic Records of 21, 118 Rural Households Selected from the 1860 Manuscript Censues,” (Magnetic Tape, financed by the National Science Foundation under Grant AS-27143, 1974).Google Scholar
Berndt, Ernst R., and Christensen, Laurits R., “Testing for the Existence of a Consistent Aggregate Index of Labor Inputs,” American Economic Review, 64 (09, 1974), pp. 391–404.Google Scholar
Bidwell, Percy, and Falconer, John, History of Agriculture in the Northern United States, 1620–1860 (Washington, DC, 1925).Google Scholar
Cain, Mead T., “The Economic Activities of Children in a Village in Bagladesh,” Population Development Review, 3 (09, 1977), pp. 201–27.Google Scholar
Christensen, Laurits R., Jorgenson, Dale, and Lau, Lawrence J., “Transcendental Logarithmic Production Frontiers,” Review of Economic and Statistics, 55 (02, 1973), pp. 28–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craig, Lee A., “Farm Output, Productivity, and Fertility Decline in the Antebellum Northern United States” (Ph.D. diss., Indiana University, 1989).Google Scholar
Paul, David and Sundstrom, William, “Bargins, Bequests and Births”, (Stanfortd Project on the History of Fertility Contorl Working Paper, 1984).Google Scholar
Easterlin, Richard, “Does Human Fertility Adjuest to Enviornment?,” American Economic Review, 61 (05, 1971), pp. 399–407.Google Scholar
Easterlin, Richard, “Population Change and Farm Settlement in the Northern United States,” this JOURNAL, 36 (03, 1976), pp. 45–75.Google Scholar
Easterlin, Richard, “Factors in the Decline of Farm Family Fertility in the United States: Some Preliminary Results,” Journal of American History, 63 (12, 1976), pp. 600–14.Google Scholar
Easterlin, Richard, Alter, George and Condran, Gretchen, “Farms and Farm Families in Old and New Areas: The Northern United States in 1860,” inHareven, Tamara and Vinovskis, Maris, eds., Family and Population in Nineteenth Century American (Princeton, 1978).Google Scholar
Economic Report of the President, 1987 (Washington, DC, 1987).Google Scholar
Field, Elizabeth, “The Relative Efficiency of Slavery Revisted: A Translog Prodcution Function Approach,” American Economic Reivew, 78 (06, 1988), pp. 543–89.Google Scholar
Fogel, Robert, and Engerman, Stanely, Time on the Cross: The Economics of American Negro Slavery (Boston, 1974).Google Scholar
Goldin, Claudia, and Sokoloff, Kenneth, “Women, Children, and Industrialization in the Early Republic: Evidence from the Manufacturing Censues,” this JOURNAL, 42 (12, 1982), pp. 741–74.Google Scholar
Goldin, Claudia, and Sokolff, Keneeth, “The Relative Productivity Hypothesis of Industrialization,” Quaterly Journal of Economics, 99 (08, 1984), pp. 461–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judge, George G. et al. , Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Econometrics (New York, 1982).Google Scholar
Lebergott, Stanley, Manpower and Economic Growth (New York, 1964).Google Scholar
Lebergoott, Stanley, “The Demand for Land: The United States, 1820–1860,” this JOURNAL, 45 (06, 1985), pp. 181–212.Google Scholar
McInnis, Marvin, “Childbearing and Land Availability: Some Evidence from Individual Household Data,” in Lee, Ronald D. ed., Population Patterns in the Past (New York, 1977).Google Scholar
Ransom, Roger, and Sutch, Richard, “Did Rising Out-Migration Cause Fertility to Decline in Ante-Bellum New England?,” (Cal-Tech Social Science Working Paper No. 610, 1986).Google Scholar
Schob, David, Hired Hands and Plowboys (Urbana, 1975).Google Scholar
Strauss, F., and Bean, L. H., “Gross Farm Income and Indices of Farm Production and Prices in the United States 1869–1937,” (USDA Technical Bulletin 703, Washington, DC, 1940).Google Scholar
Sundstrorm, William, and David, Paul, “Old-Age Security Motives, Labor Markets, and Farm Family Fertility in Antebellum America,” Explorations in Economic History, 25 (04, 1988), pp. 164–97.Google Scholar
U.S. Census Office, Tenth Census, Report Upon the Statistics of Agriculture (Washington, DC, 1983).Google Scholar