Table 4: Distribution of farms among sales categories
a
|
Census |
Agricultural Revenue from Milk |
Farm Size of Incumbents |
New Entrants | ||
|
Medium (Cohorts 5-9) |
Large (Cohort 10) |
1997 |
2002 | ||
|
90-100% |
35.7 |
448 | |||
|
75-89.9% |
40.0 |
34.2 | |||
|
1992 |
50-74.9% |
24.3 |
21.0 | ||
|
<50% |
0 |
0 | |||
|
90-100% |
38.8 |
475 |
46.0 | ||
|
75-89.9% |
26.8 |
25.3 |
30.8 | ||
|
1997 |
50-74.9% |
16.8 |
14.1 |
23.2 | |
|
<50% |
17.6 |
13.1 |
0 | ||
|
90-100% |
28.1 |
420 |
325 |
44.7 | |
|
75-89.9% |
26.0 |
23.1 |
26.4 |
36.3 | |
|
2002 |
50-74.9% |
12.0 |
10.6 |
11.1 |
19.1 |
|
<50% |
33.9 |
24.3 |
30.0 |
0 | |
a Data source: Agricultural Census (USDA, 1992, 1997, 2002)
28
More intriguing information
1. Neighborhood Effects, Public Housing and Unemployment in France2. Antidote Stocking at Hospitals in North Palestine
3. THE INTERNATIONAL OUTLOOK FOR U.S. TOBACCO
4. The name is absent
5. Towards a framework for critical citizenship education
6. Economic Evaluation of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) in Non Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC), CHERE Working Paper 2007/6
7. The name is absent
8. Testing the Information Matrix Equality with Robust Estimators
9. ASSESSMENT OF MARKET RISK IN HOG PRODUCTION USING VALUE-AT-RISK AND EXTREME VALUE THEORY
10. The name is absent