tions, agencies, firms and others will be af-
fected by the apparent shortages of highly
skilled and trained agricultural economists,
the black land-grant institutions will be par-
ticularly affected in several ways. Certainly,
increased competition during a period of
shortage is going to increase prices for new
Ph.D.’s, especially, and to some extent at the
masters level. These prices (higher salaries)
will adversely affect the black land-grant in-
stitutions even more. While there already
appears to be substantial differences in fac-
ulty salaries of the 1862 and the black land-
grant institutions, the gap is likely to widen.
Strauss and Tarr analyzed labor market con-
ditions for agricultural economists from a list
of 2,295 agricultural economists listed in the
Illinois Department of Labor and the AAEA
Registry composed by both AAEA members
and job seekers. Educational institutions were
the major source of employment for the ag-
ricultural economists on both lists. With re-
gard to the extent of educational attainment
achieved by respondents, a majority held
Ph.D.’s (61.9 percent). The preponderance
of agricultural economists at educational in-
stitutions and the unusually high level of
education have been characteristic of the
profession for a considerable period of time
(Strauss and Tarr, Table 3). Strauss and Tarr’s
study showed that in 1966, 58 percent of
the agricultural economists were at educa-
tional institutions as compared to 54 percent
in 1976, and 57 percent in 1981-82. The
educational attainment level of agricultural
economists was generally stable, with 58.9
percent holding Ph.D.’s in 1966, 63∙2 per-
cent in 1976, and 62.5 percent in 1981-82.
EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT OF BLACK
AGRICULTURAL ECONOMISTS
The educational attainment and opportun-
ities of black agricultural economists stand
in striking contrast to that of the profession
in general (Davis and Allen, 1983). Davis and
Alien analyzed black agricultural economists
listed among those on the Illinois Department
of Labor and American Agricultural Econom-
ics Association Registry. They identified 41
black agricultural economists representing
1.8 percent of the registrants. Of those hold-
ing Ph.D.’s, 18 (1.3 percent) were black,
while 4(1.9 percent) of the Ph.D. candidates
were black. Generally speaking, black sci-
entists in the United States are far below
parity with the non-black scientist popula-
tion. The National Science Foundation re-
ports that 1.6 percent of nearly two million
scientists are black. Other studies also point
out that few blacks are agricultural econo-
mists. The National Research Council’s sur-
vey of earned doctorates from 1973-76 shows
that only 5 American blacks, compared to
353 whites, earned doctoral degrees in Ag-
ricultural Economics (Robbins and Evans).
Thus, blacks represented only 1.4 percent of
the total degree recipients from 1973-76.
Other estimates of black agricultural econ-
omists have shown similar results. Davis and
Allen (1983), in analyzing estimates devel-
oped from a 1982 list of black economists
prepared by the AAEA committee on the Status
and Opportunities OfBlackAgricultural Econ-
omists in collaboration with the AEA, iden-
tified 232 black economists. They identified
59 (25 percent) as holders of Ph.D. degrees.
They also indicated that 28 (47 percent) of
the Ph.D. holders were agricultural econo-
mists, and 20 (71 percent) were employed
at predominately black land-grant institu-
tions. Davis and Allen (1983) suggested that
the educational characteristics of black ag-
ricultural economists have some bearing on
their employment distribution. They go on
to say that within a competitive market struc-
ture one would expect that employment
groups would have different derived demands
for the stocks of human capital.
THEORETICAL ISSUES
Despite the number of studies that have
focused on the demand, supply, and market
for economists and agricultural economists,
very little attention has been given to how
sex and/or race may differentiate the “prod-
uct” (Jones et al.). That is, the majority of
studies have tended to treat economists and
agricultural economists as homogenous prod-
ucts and the market as perfectly competitive.
Recent studies on the role and status of women
in the two professions report findings which
suggests that, at least in the view of em-
ployers, male and female members of the two
professions are viewed as differentiated prod-
ucts (Reagan, Lee, Redman, Lane).
Many theories have been developed to ex-
plain black-white occupational and earnings
differentials (Davis and Allen, 1985). The
most widely accepted economic theory of
black-white earnings, as suggested by Davis
65