Johnston
WAEA: Professional Niche 143
As is evident, we have been largely con-
cerned about financing the Association’s pub-
lications, and not much more, over the past
two decades. The benefit of the annual meet-
ings has been lost for the wider (nonattendee)
membership by the sequential cancellation of,
first, the proceedings papers and, later, non-
refereed invited papers from the Journal. I as-
sume that the ratio of paper presenters to total
registrants at our annual meetings is now near-
er to unity than was true in the DeLoach era,
when many regional technical committees also
held their annual meetings in conjunction with
WAEA’s and when those meetings had a widely
accepted social content (i.e., there were com-
pelling reasons for attending even if one was
not on the formal program). In those days, the
region covered by the Association was smaller
so that meeting locales were more proximate
and possibly more attractive for a combination
of professional and vacation plans.
A View of the Current Status of the WAEA
and Its Activities
The image of this Association in the future is
likely to be influenced by our actions with re-
gard to the annual meetings and the Journal
and other publication activity. One, or both,
of the polar positions will likely argue for an
expanded agenda. I have no quarrel with trying
to expand meeting and publication activities
to increase benefits to the membership and the
larger profession. The challenge is to identify
activities that will result in increased mem-
bership (and revenues) needed to support the
augmented agenda.
Because price (membership dues) times
quantity (number of members) equals total
revenue, both increased dues and membership
numbers are crucial to the Association’s ability
to fund an expansion of WAEA activities. Let
us take a quick look at both stylistic variables.
First, the issue Ofmembership numbers. Karl
Brandt, in 1944, forecasted that the WAEA
could have a membership of 700-800 by 1946
(DeLoach, p. 19), but he was overly optimistic.
WAEA membership did rise above 500 by
1953, above 600 by 1957, above 700 by 1961,
and approached 800 (786) in 1968 (DeLoach,
p. 22). However, as shown in table 1, despite
the steady and gradual increase in membership
in the two preceding decades, membership
numbers crashed in the 1970s (to nearly 400)
as a result of an unanticipated change in the
annual application∕renewal process, namely,
the AAEA’s dropping joint memberships from
their annual dues form. With the subsequent
reestablishment of joint memberships (plus
several successful joint AAEA-WAEA meet-
ings and the emergence of a quality journal),
membership grew rapidly in the early 1980s,
increasing by 100 or more annually from 609
in 1980 to 976 in 1983. It has since plateaued.
The major increase in the membership roster
came from “Plains States” and “Other U.S.”
origins (table 1). The number of memberships
from the “13 Western States” is at levels ex-
perienced in the late 1960s, suggesting that the
traditional, founding region is not a large mar-
ket for future membership growth. (Recaptur-
ing the decline in membership since 1984, a
decline of 15%, would add 73 members to the
total.) Thus, success in the quest for additional
members appears to lie in “Other U.S.” and
“Other (non-U.S.) country” markets. How-
ever, expansion in those markets may not be
particularly compatible with Association goals
if they are construed by the membership and
officers to be the continuation (or resumption)
of a strong western regional orientation.
Second, the matter of membership dues. I
am not convinced that the price (dues) can be
further increased without evidence of clear and
tangible benefits for a wider membership. Cur-
rently, revenues support the publication of the
Journal and the annual meetings. The nature
of the 1986 debate over the increase in mem-
bership dues suggests that the demand for
WAEA membership might be relatively elas-
tic, given the current slate of Association ac-
tivities. I conclude that current conditions con-
strain our ability to expand the program unless
activities are developed that have a wider dis-
tribution of benefits to the general member-
ship.
The Journal
As an association, I believe we have success-
fully invested in and developed (with the ex-
cellent guidance of several outstanding editors)
the second most important national journal for
U.S. agricultural economists. It may just be
that the Western Journal of Agricultural Eco-
nomics is the premier applied journal in the
profession. It is not only the chosen journal
for publishing applied articles relating to the
western region, it is also a national journal of