Economic and Marketing Information
FOR INDIANA  FARMERS
August  27,   1958
jprepared by the Agricultural Staff of Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana        FORy^f       I N DIA N A    FARMERS
Problems Ahead in Agricultural Marketing
by LOWELL S.  HARDIN, Agricultural Economics
Technical and social changes
can be handled more easily by
the human mind if they come
one at a time. But this seldom
happens. More often, many occur simultaneously. To cope with
them, we must be as versatile as
the "electronic brain"—/'/ we are
to think, plan and act intelligently in the future. This article
is an attempt to set forth some
of the problems which will face
agricultural marketing. No attempt will be made to answer
the specific questions. They will
be dealt with in future issues of
this publication.
wmri&yfr&&t&^
Agricultural marketing is no exception to the general rule that
increasing problems grow out of
technological and social changes.
Marketing people have problems
because:
• the marketing system is large
and growing.
• so much is expected of the
marketing system.
• the marketing system is making changes so fast that our
mental calculators are being
pushed to keep up with management challenges.
large and growing system
About 16 million workers are
now employed in agricultural
marketing—twice as many as in
agricultural production. Of these,
six million are in farm supply, and
10 million are in food and fiber
processing and distributing. Nearly 30 percent of Indiana's labor
force is engaged in marketing. In
capital investment, the ratio is
about one dollar in marketing
firms to $2.30 in farm production
units for the United States (farm
supply $14 billion, processing and
distribution $57 billion and farming $163 billion).
much expected
Maybe it has always been so,
but is seems that marketing people are now being called upon to
produce a modern miracle. Some
say that the fate of agriculture
rests in their care. But what are
they supposed to do?
"Costs in agriculture are high
relative to prices received." Marketing people are expected to see
to it that farm costs are lowered
substantially through efficiency,
economy, and possibly by having
fewer middlemen in the farm supply business.
"Prices received by farmers are
low." Marketing people must
make  the middleman   more   ef
ficient. This would not only raise
prices to farmers but at the same
time lower prices to consumers.
"Supplies of farm products are
excessive." If marketing people
are the merchandising marvels
they are billed to be, this should
be simple. Merely market the surpluses at a good price by opening
new markets at home and abroad.
While the above is obviously
exaggerated, it does reflect the
thinking of some. In a sense, it
was in this manner that Congress
passed the Research and Marketing Act. If atomic research could
build a bomb, then marketing research should provide a solution
to surpluses.
We've been riding this horse,
with interruptions, for about 10
years, but surpluses haven't disappeared. Unbounding faith still
abides in the ability of marketing
men. The only trouble is, production technology continues to move
rapidly. So now it is suggested—
perhaps too seriously—that we
declare a moratorium on production research and technology and
allow the marketing people to
catch up.
system making changes
The above is not to suggest that
marketing   has   not   progressed.
Marketing is well on its way to
(Continued on Page 3, Column 3)