ScholarLens Back to search
2015•Unpublished venueRequires access

INSTITUTIONS AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT

Robin Flowerdew

Open publisher page 3 citations

Abstract

ObjectivesofGovernmentInstitutions Ifthecurrentinterestinthedecision-makingof individualsweretransferredtoinstitutions,then onewouldbeconcernedtoelucidatetheirobjectives andmotives.However,severalwritershavebeen atpainstopointoutthedifficultyacademicshave inthisregard.Aftermanyyearsteachingand researchingintoBritishsocialpolicy,BrianAbelSmithenteredtheCivilServiceatDeputySecretary levelasapoliticaladvisor(Abel-Smith,1980). Sevenyearsinthispostforcedhimtorevisemany ofhisideasonpolicyformulationandhowgovernmentworked.Anotherformeracademic,Richard Crossman,spentmanyyearsasaMemberofParliament beforehebecameaMinisterandthenaSecretaryof State(Crossman,1975;1976).Despitehislong Parliamentarytraining,therealitiesofministerial officeandCabinetdecision-mak{ngdiffered Itisunlikelythattheactionsofademocratic governmentwillbesolelytheproductofoneperson andtraditionallygovernmentobjectiveshavebeen expressedincollectiveform.Theworkof agriculturaleconomistssuchasWhetham(1960,pp. 2-7)hastendedtoanalysegovernmentpolicyin purelyeconomicterms.Sheidentifiedfourobjectivesforagriculturalpolicy:maximisingthe nationaloutputoffood,securingfoodsupplies, stabilisingagriculturalincomesandequalising farmers&s;incomes.Toherlistshouldbeadded improvementofthebalanceofpayments,reducing inflationandpoliticaladvantage.Oneisstruck bytheprominenceofnationalandfinancialobjectivesinthislist.Theseareoftenpursuedeven totheextentofsacrificingprogressmadein achievingmoreimmediatelyagriculturalobjectives, particularlyattheleveloftheindividualfarmer. ThusintheUnitedKingdom(UK)thesystemofprice supportusedbytheEuropeanEconomicCommunity (EEC)toraisefarmers&s;incomeswaseffectively reversedbetween1973and1979bymeansofthe greencurrencymechanism.Thisloweredfarmers&s; incomesinordertoreducefoodpricesandhence lowertherateofinflationandwagesettlements. Thusapolicyintroducedtohelpruralareaswas subsequentlyusedfortheoppositeeffectwithno changeinlawsorinstitutions.Theimplementation ofapolicyisasimportantastheformofthe policy.Similarly,aschemefortheenlargementof farmsiscommontoallthememberstatesoftheEEC, butsincethefinancialinducementshavenotbeen raisedinlinewithinflationthepolicyis effectivelyunder-usedbythosestatessuchasthe UKwhichgiveonlythestatutoryminimumgrant,in contrasttootherstates,Eireforexample,which givehighergrants.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

ObjectivesofGovernmentInstitutions Ifthecurrentinterestinthedecision-makingof individualsweretransferredtoinstitutions,then onewouldbeconcernedtoelucidatetheirobjectives andmotives.However,severalwritershavebeen atpainstopointoutthedifficultyacademicshave inthisregard.Aftermanyyearsteachingand researchingintoBritishsocialpolicy,BrianAbelSmithenteredtheCivilServiceatDeputySecretary levelasapoliticaladvisor(Abel-Smith,1980). Sevenyearsinthispostforcedhimtorevisemany ofhisideasonpolicyformulationandhowgovernmentworked.Anotherformeracademic,Richard Crossman,spentmanyyearsasaMemberofParliament beforehebecameaMinisterandthenaSecretaryof State(Crossman,1975;1976).Despitehislong Parliamentarytraining,therealitiesofministerial officeandCabinetdecision-mak{ngdiffered Itisunlikelythattheactionsofademocratic governmentwillbesolelytheproductofoneperson andtraditionallygovernmentobjectiveshavebeen expressedincollectiveform.Theworkof agriculturaleconomistssuchasWhetham(1960,pp. 2-7)hastendedtoanalysegovernmentpolicyin purelyeconomicterms.Sheidentifiedfourobjectivesforagriculturalpolicy:maximisingthe nationaloutputoffood,securingfoodsupplies, stabilisingagriculturalincomesandequalising farmers&s;incomes.Toherlistshouldbeadded improvementofthebalanceofpayments,reducing inflationandpoliticaladvantage.Oneisstruck bytheprominenceofnationalandfinancialobjectivesinthislist.Theseareoftenpursuedeven totheextentofsacrificingprogressmadein achievingmoreimmediatelyagriculturalobjectives, particularlyattheleveloftheindividualfarmer. ThusintheUnitedKingdom(UK)thesystemofprice supportusedbytheEuropeanEconomicCommunity (EEC)toraisefarmers&s;incomeswaseffectively reversedbetween1973and1979bymeansofthe greencurrencymechanism.Thisloweredfarmers&s; incomesinordertoreducefoodpricesandhence lowertherateofinflationandwagesettlements. Thusapolicyintroducedtohelpruralareaswas subsequentlyusedfortheoppositeeffectwithno changeinlawsorinstitutions.Theimplementation ofapolicyisasimportantastheformofthe policy.Similarly,aschemefortheenlargementof farmsiscommontoallthememberstatesoftheEEC, butsincethefinancialinducementshavenotbeen raisedinlinewithinflationthepolicyis effectivelyunder-usedbythosestatessuchasthe UKwhichgiveonlythestatutoryminimumgrant,in contrasttootherstates,Eireforexample,which givehighergrants.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

ObjectivesofGovernmentInstitutions Ifthecurrentinterestinthedecision-makingof individualsweretransferredtoinstitutions,then onewouldbeconcernedtoelucidatetheirobjectives andmotives.However,severalwritershavebeen atpainstopointoutthedifficultyacademicshave inthisregard.Aftermanyyearsteachingand researchingintoBritishsocialpolicy,BrianAbelSmithenteredtheCivilServiceatDeputySecretary levelasapoliticaladvisor(Abel-Smith,1980). Sevenyearsinthispostforcedhimtorevisemany ofhisideasonpolicyformulationandhowgovernmentworked.Anotherformeracademic,Richard Crossman,spentmanyyearsasaMemberofParliament beforehebecameaMinisterandthenaSecretaryof State(Crossman,1975;1976).Despitehislong Parliamentarytraining,therealitiesofministerial officeandCabinetdecision-mak{ngdiffered Itisunlikelythattheactionsofademocratic governmentwillbesolelytheproductofoneperson andtraditionallygovernmentobjectiveshavebeen expressedincollectiveform.Theworkof agriculturaleconomistssuchasWhetham(1960,pp. 2-7)hastendedtoanalysegovernmentpolicyin purelyeconomicterms.Sheidentifiedfourobjectivesforagriculturalpolicy:maximisingthe nationaloutputoffood,securingfoodsupplies, stabilisingagriculturalincomesandequalising farmers&s;incomes.Toherlistshouldbeadded improvementofthebalanceofpayments,reducing inflationandpoliticaladvantage.Oneisstruck bytheprominenceofnationalandfinancialobjectivesinthislist.Theseareoftenpursuedeven totheextentofsacrificingprogressmadein achievingmoreimmediatelyagriculturalobjectives, particularlyattheleveloftheindividualfarmer. ThusintheUnitedKingdom(UK)thesystemofprice supportusedbytheEuropeanEconomicCommunity (EEC)toraisefarmers&s;incomeswaseffectively reversedbetween1973and1979bymeansofthe greencurrencymechanism.Thisloweredfarmers&s; incomesinordertoreducefoodpricesandhence lowertherateofinflationandwagesettlements. Thusapolicyintroducedtohelpruralareaswas subsequentlyusedfortheoppositeeffectwithno changeinlawsorinstitutions.Theimplementation ofapolicyisasimportantastheformofthe policy.Similarly,aschemefortheenlargementof farmsiscommontoallthememberstatesoftheEEC, butsincethefinancialinducementshavenotbeen raisedinlinewithinflationthepolicyis effectivelyunder-usedbythosestatessuchasthe UKwhichgiveonlythestatutoryminimumgrant,in contrasttootherstates,Eireforexample,which givehighergrants.

Key concepts: Political science, Geography

Related papers

Related paper 1Related paper 2Related paper 3
Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
INSTITUTIONS AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT — Research Paper | ScholarLens