Tools & tillage: a journal on the history of the implements of cultivation and other agricultural processes (4.1980/1983)

MECHANISATION

73

nil p. 40.3

c\j

0)

E

Netto-Ernteertrag und Eigenverbrauch an
le in Slid- und Mittelschweden in tausend

0)
CC

CB
O

same in the three provinces investigated. The
distribution o£ implements and machinery is
accounted for in figure 3,4 and 5. Through-
out the three provinces, the possession of
implements and machines was stratified ac-
cording to farm size. The large-scale farms
possessed implements and machines to the
largest extent, during the period of introduc-
tion as well as that of spread. This impres-
sion is further confirmed by the fact that
possession of several implements/machines
of the same kind displays a positive correla-
tion with farm size.It has, moreover, been a
pervading observation that the equipment of
implements and machines was dependent on
the size of the cultivation unit: the laruer the
size, the mcE

0)
CD
0

0)
5

0)
5

5. Net crop-yield and self-consumption of
n south and central Sweden, in Thousands
of tons

holders and smaller farmers could not make
rationalisation profits to the same degree.
Here the production of agricultural goods
rarely attained a higher level than that of
self-support, and a considerable number of
the smaller farmers were net consumers of
agricultural products. Even though the
larger farms made up only a minor part of
the total number of cultivation units, they
yielded an essential proportion of the total
agricultural production. It is likely that the
changed agricultural situation, having effects
of a technical, economic, and social nature,
entailed considerable difficulties of adjust-
ment for the smaller farmers.
When the government Committee on
and Treaties (Tull- och -traktatkom-
■aC® was trying to assess the effects of the
§ | Itural tariff, an investigation was made
extent to which tariff-protected grain
>roduced for sale. Both the average
1 cereal crop for the five-year period
:/ and the average annual consumption

of the period E
into two part.'E
holdings and =-
the other of A_2?
change that tl=_
went during 1 = N
advantage of < -
the agricultur;E"
ers had the grE-^
to the comiE-
place. The dif E m
operated largiE

extent. Howe=-
tion for larger-
holding areas



farm
Net
crop-yield
Self-con-
sumption
Surplus/
deficit ,
ha
10.0
44-2
- 34-2
ha
47-3
93-9
— 46.6
ha
94-8
99-4
- 4.6
ha
150.5
92.0
+ 58.5
ha
924
39-i
+ 53-i
ha
99-5
36.0
+ 63.5
p ha
79.2
3i-3
+ 47-9
ha
I 12.2
49.0
+ 63.2
685.7
484.5
+ 200.8