The Immigrant Subsidy in US Agriculture: Farm Employment, Poverty, and Welfare
This article examines relationships between immigration, farm employment, poverty, and welfare use in 65 towns and cities with populations ranging from 1,000 to 20,000 in 1990 in the major agricultural areas of California. It tests the hypothesis that expanding labor-intensive agriculture creates a...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Population and development review 1997-12, Vol.23 (4), p.855-874 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 874 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 855 |
| container_title | Population and development review |
| container_volume | 23 |
| creator | Taylor, J. Edward Martin, Philip L. |
| description | This article examines relationships between immigration, farm employment, poverty, and welfare use in 65 towns and cities with populations ranging from 1,000 to 20,000 in 1990 in the major agricultural areas of California. It tests the hypothesis that expanding labor-intensive agriculture creates a negative externality by drawing large numbers of workers from Mexico, offering many of them poverty-level earnings, and increasing public assistance use in rural towns. Econometric findings reveal a circular relationship between farm employment and immigration. An additional 100 farm jobs are associated with 136 more immigrants, 139 more poor residents, and 79 more people receiving welfare benefits in rural towns. An additional 100 immigrants, in turn, are associated with 37 more farm jobs. Most of the impact of farm employment on poverty is indirect, through immigration. Each additional California farm job was associated with $1,103 in welfare payments in 1990. Since the average California farmworker in 1990 earned $7,320, the "welfare subsidy" associated with using immigrants to fill farm jobs was equivalent to 15 percent of farmworker earnings. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.2307/2137387 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_839122177</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A20540071</galeid><jstor_id>2137387</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>A20540071</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c670t-9fab5f6ff87c0f622839968235a49dab93c480a2c1a714c06c081891fb334a8e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqN0mFrEzEYB_BDFKxT_ApBxfmip3mS3CXxXSnbHBQnbMOXR5om55XcpUtyYr_9Mto3lc5JXgTCjwfyf_5F8RbwZ0Ix_0KAcir4s2ICnIiSsYo_LyYYS1FySeBl8SrGNcYYeF1Piu83vwy67PuuDWpI6Hpcxm61Rd2Abq_RrA2dHl0ag_mKzlXo0Vm_cX7bmyFN0Q__24S0nSI1rNBP46wK5nXxwioXzZv9fVLcnp_dzL-Vi6uLy_lsUeqa41RKq5aVra0VXGNbEyKolLUgtFJMrtRSUs0EVkSD4sA0rjUWICTYJaVMCUNPitPd3E3wd6OJqem7qI1zajB-jE2eB4QA51l-_KesoYIchfgPCJWsgD4JKy6IEOxpCIwJDoRl-O4vuPZjGHKADQEgkuZ0Mnr_GAJe4RyeqB5-Md2pVjnTdIP1KSjdmsEE5fxgbJefZwRXDGMOmZdHeD4r03f6mP904DNJ5k9q1Rhz6BeLAzo9RrV3zrSmyXWYXx3w_UZ18DEGY5tN6HoVtg3g5qHYzb7YWX7YyXVMPjzK7gHsW-37</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1750823858</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Immigrant Subsidy in US Agriculture: Farm Employment, Poverty, and Welfare</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>Taylor, J. Edward ; Martin, Philip L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Taylor, J. Edward ; Martin, Philip L.</creatorcontrib><description>This article examines relationships between immigration, farm employment, poverty, and welfare use in 65 towns and cities with populations ranging from 1,000 to 20,000 in 1990 in the major agricultural areas of California. It tests the hypothesis that expanding labor-intensive agriculture creates a negative externality by drawing large numbers of workers from Mexico, offering many of them poverty-level earnings, and increasing public assistance use in rural towns. Econometric findings reveal a circular relationship between farm employment and immigration. An additional 100 farm jobs are associated with 136 more immigrants, 139 more poor residents, and 79 more people receiving welfare benefits in rural towns. An additional 100 immigrants, in turn, are associated with 37 more farm jobs. Most of the impact of farm employment on poverty is indirect, through immigration. Each additional California farm job was associated with $1,103 in welfare payments in 1990. Since the average California farmworker in 1990 earned $7,320, the "welfare subsidy" associated with using immigrants to fill farm jobs was equivalent to 15 percent of farmworker earnings.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0098-7921</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1728-4457</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2307/2137387</identifier><identifier>CODEN: PDERDO</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: The Population Council</publisher><subject>Agricultural economics ; Agricultural employment ; Agricultural population ; Agricultural subsidies ; Agricultural Workers ; Agriculture ; California ; Community ; Crops ; Data and Perspectives ; Emigration and immigration ; Employment ; Farm workers ; Farming ; Farms ; Immigrants ; Immigration ; Intensive production ; Labor Supply ; Mexican people ; Migrant Workers ; Poverty ; Public assistance programs ; Relationship ; Rural areas ; Rural populations ; Social aspects ; Subsidies ; Towns ; U.S.A ; Unemployment ; United States ; Welfare ; Welfare Policy ; Welfare Recipients</subject><ispartof>Population and development review, 1997-12, Vol.23 (4), p.855-874</ispartof><rights>Copyright 1997 The Population Council, Inc.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Population Council Dec 1997</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c670t-9fab5f6ff87c0f622839968235a49dab93c480a2c1a714c06c081891fb334a8e3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2137387$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/2137387$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,800,27850,27905,27906,30980,30981,33755,33756,57998,58231</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Taylor, J. Edward</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin, Philip L.</creatorcontrib><title>The Immigrant Subsidy in US Agriculture: Farm Employment, Poverty, and Welfare</title><title>Population and development review</title><addtitle>Population and Development Review</addtitle><description>This article examines relationships between immigration, farm employment, poverty, and welfare use in 65 towns and cities with populations ranging from 1,000 to 20,000 in 1990 in the major agricultural areas of California. It tests the hypothesis that expanding labor-intensive agriculture creates a negative externality by drawing large numbers of workers from Mexico, offering many of them poverty-level earnings, and increasing public assistance use in rural towns. Econometric findings reveal a circular relationship between farm employment and immigration. An additional 100 farm jobs are associated with 136 more immigrants, 139 more poor residents, and 79 more people receiving welfare benefits in rural towns. An additional 100 immigrants, in turn, are associated with 37 more farm jobs. Most of the impact of farm employment on poverty is indirect, through immigration. Each additional California farm job was associated with $1,103 in welfare payments in 1990. Since the average California farmworker in 1990 earned $7,320, the "welfare subsidy" associated with using immigrants to fill farm jobs was equivalent to 15 percent of farmworker earnings.</description><subject>Agricultural economics</subject><subject>Agricultural employment</subject><subject>Agricultural population</subject><subject>Agricultural subsidies</subject><subject>Agricultural Workers</subject><subject>Agriculture</subject><subject>California</subject><subject>Community</subject><subject>Crops</subject><subject>Data and Perspectives</subject><subject>Emigration and immigration</subject><subject>Employment</subject><subject>Farm workers</subject><subject>Farming</subject><subject>Farms</subject><subject>Immigrants</subject><subject>Immigration</subject><subject>Intensive production</subject><subject>Labor Supply</subject><subject>Mexican people</subject><subject>Migrant Workers</subject><subject>Poverty</subject><subject>Public assistance programs</subject><subject>Relationship</subject><subject>Rural areas</subject><subject>Rural populations</subject><subject>Social aspects</subject><subject>Subsidies</subject><subject>Towns</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><subject>Unemployment</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>Welfare</subject><subject>Welfare Policy</subject><subject>Welfare Recipients</subject><issn>0098-7921</issn><issn>1728-4457</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1997</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>K30</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNqN0mFrEzEYB_BDFKxT_ApBxfmip3mS3CXxXSnbHBQnbMOXR5om55XcpUtyYr_9Mto3lc5JXgTCjwfyf_5F8RbwZ0Ix_0KAcir4s2ICnIiSsYo_LyYYS1FySeBl8SrGNcYYeF1Piu83vwy67PuuDWpI6Hpcxm61Rd2Abq_RrA2dHl0ag_mKzlXo0Vm_cX7bmyFN0Q__24S0nSI1rNBP46wK5nXxwioXzZv9fVLcnp_dzL-Vi6uLy_lsUeqa41RKq5aVra0VXGNbEyKolLUgtFJMrtRSUs0EVkSD4sA0rjUWICTYJaVMCUNPitPd3E3wd6OJqem7qI1zajB-jE2eB4QA51l-_KesoYIchfgPCJWsgD4JKy6IEOxpCIwJDoRl-O4vuPZjGHKADQEgkuZ0Mnr_GAJe4RyeqB5-Md2pVjnTdIP1KSjdmsEE5fxgbJefZwRXDGMOmZdHeD4r03f6mP904DNJ5k9q1Rhz6BeLAzo9RrV3zrSmyXWYXx3w_UZ18DEGY5tN6HoVtg3g5qHYzb7YWX7YyXVMPjzK7gHsW-37</recordid><startdate>19971201</startdate><enddate>19971201</enddate><creator>Taylor, J. Edward</creator><creator>Martin, Philip L.</creator><general>The Population Council</general><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><general>Population Council</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8GL</scope><scope>HFIND</scope><scope>IBDFT</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>WZK</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7UB</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19971201</creationdate><title>The Immigrant Subsidy in US Agriculture: Farm Employment, Poverty, and Welfare</title><author>Taylor, J. Edward ; Martin, Philip L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c670t-9fab5f6ff87c0f622839968235a49dab93c480a2c1a714c06c081891fb334a8e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1997</creationdate><topic>Agricultural economics</topic><topic>Agricultural employment</topic><topic>Agricultural population</topic><topic>Agricultural subsidies</topic><topic>Agricultural Workers</topic><topic>Agriculture</topic><topic>California</topic><topic>Community</topic><topic>Crops</topic><topic>Data and Perspectives</topic><topic>Emigration and immigration</topic><topic>Employment</topic><topic>Farm workers</topic><topic>Farming</topic><topic>Farms</topic><topic>Immigrants</topic><topic>Immigration</topic><topic>Intensive production</topic><topic>Labor Supply</topic><topic>Mexican people</topic><topic>Migrant Workers</topic><topic>Poverty</topic><topic>Public assistance programs</topic><topic>Relationship</topic><topic>Rural areas</topic><topic>Rural populations</topic><topic>Social aspects</topic><topic>Subsidies</topic><topic>Towns</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><topic>Unemployment</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>Welfare</topic><topic>Welfare Policy</topic><topic>Welfare Recipients</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Taylor, J. Edward</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin, Philip L.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: High School</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 16</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 27</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Population and development review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Taylor, J. Edward</au><au>Martin, Philip L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Immigrant Subsidy in US Agriculture: Farm Employment, Poverty, and Welfare</atitle><jtitle>Population and development review</jtitle><addtitle>Population and Development Review</addtitle><date>1997-12-01</date><risdate>1997</risdate><volume>23</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>855</spage><epage>874</epage><pages>855-874</pages><issn>0098-7921</issn><eissn>1728-4457</eissn><coden>PDERDO</coden><abstract>This article examines relationships between immigration, farm employment, poverty, and welfare use in 65 towns and cities with populations ranging from 1,000 to 20,000 in 1990 in the major agricultural areas of California. It tests the hypothesis that expanding labor-intensive agriculture creates a negative externality by drawing large numbers of workers from Mexico, offering many of them poverty-level earnings, and increasing public assistance use in rural towns. Econometric findings reveal a circular relationship between farm employment and immigration. An additional 100 farm jobs are associated with 136 more immigrants, 139 more poor residents, and 79 more people receiving welfare benefits in rural towns. An additional 100 immigrants, in turn, are associated with 37 more farm jobs. Most of the impact of farm employment on poverty is indirect, through immigration. Each additional California farm job was associated with $1,103 in welfare payments in 1990. Since the average California farmworker in 1990 earned $7,320, the "welfare subsidy" associated with using immigrants to fill farm jobs was equivalent to 15 percent of farmworker earnings.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>The Population Council</pub><doi>10.2307/2137387</doi><tpages>20</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0098-7921 |
| ispartof | Population and development review, 1997-12, Vol.23 (4), p.855-874 |
| issn | 0098-7921 1728-4457 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_839122177 |
| source | Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Sociological Abstracts; Periodicals Index Online; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); Jstor Complete Legacy |
| subjects | Agricultural economics Agricultural employment Agricultural population Agricultural subsidies Agricultural Workers Agriculture California Community Crops Data and Perspectives Emigration and immigration Employment Farm workers Farming Farms Immigrants Immigration Intensive production Labor Supply Mexican people Migrant Workers Poverty Public assistance programs Relationship Rural areas Rural populations Social aspects Subsidies Towns U.S.A Unemployment United States Welfare Welfare Policy Welfare Recipients |
| title | The Immigrant Subsidy in US Agriculture: Farm Employment, Poverty, and Welfare |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T03%3A17%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Immigrant%20Subsidy%20in%20US%20Agriculture:%20Farm%20Employment,%20Poverty,%20and%20Welfare&rft.jtitle=Population%20and%20development%20review&rft.au=Taylor,%20J.%20Edward&rft.date=1997-12-01&rft.volume=23&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=855&rft.epage=874&rft.pages=855-874&rft.issn=0098-7921&rft.eissn=1728-4457&rft.coden=PDERDO&rft_id=info:doi/10.2307/2137387&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA20540071%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1750823858&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A20540071&rft_jstor_id=2137387&rfr_iscdi=true |