4 ms·
The discussion of risk is interesting. It is not uncommon for small farms with one or a few crops or animal species to have an annual net income which varies co
by Merrill 6y ago
The discussion of risk is interesting. It is not uncommon for small farms with one or a few crops or animal species to have an annual net income which varies considerably from year to year depending on weather, disease, pests, market prices, and the cost of inputs such as fuel, fertilizer, etc. Small farmers have to tolerate variations in income greater than most salaried city dwellers.
The risks and consequent variations can be reduced by increasing scale, diversifying crops and animal husbandry, and by using financial tools, such as futures.
The history of economic development follows this trend even more so over the centuries. Business units become larger, technological processes more diverse and complex, and financial tools are created to smooth out variations in growth.
Thus, short term risks are reduced and mild adversities are avoided, but this comes at the cost of increasing long term risks and great catastrophes. Ultimately, global warming may put an end to this strategy.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y agoI'm not sure it's right to see this as a cost. Natural famines were themselves long-term risks and great catastrophes - every premodern state lived with the knowledge that, if the weather turned bad, they might suddenly run out of food and lose a tenth or more of their population. As far as I know, none of modern farming's tail risks approach that scale of disaster.