SMALL BUSINESS AND THE COMMUNITY 107 social services than are tenants and absentee owners. While nothing in the present study either corroborates or refutes this, it may generally be accepted as a working hypothesis. It is therefore accepted that in some measure the relative social poverty rests upon tenure pattern. Tais difference in tenure pattern is partially the result of historic timing and outside social forces. It is also in considerable measure a function of scale of farm operations and social poverty. Table 12 (ch. III) shows that tenancy is more frequent on large farms, over 160 acres, than on small farms. It has also been shown that the general social conditions in Arvin have caused some owner-operators and other natural leaders to leave the community. How influential these forces are in creating the tenure pattern of Arvin cannot be assessed, but certainly they are not wholly negligible. The second aspect of farm organization is the labor requirements of operation. This has been touched upon in the discussion of occupation structure. At that point, we saw that occupation structure is a very important aspect of the difference between the two communities. The question therefore arises as to whether differences in labor requirements on farms in the two communities create that differential in occupation structure. The answer is an unqualified no. For the production of commodities in Arvin requires just under 3 million man-hours of labor while the Dinuba production, reaching the same gross value, requires 3 million man-hours of work. That the labor structure is a function of scale of operations becomes clear when we examine item (b) under this heading in the list appearing earlier in this chapter. Only a small fraction of Arvin labor is absorbed by farm operators while in Dinuba three-fifths of the work can be performed by farm operators. It is generally accepted that seasonality of employment creates poor social conditions. Both Arvin and Dinuba have such an uneven demand for labor that severe hardships can be expected in normal times. Dinuba employment opportunities, because of the intensive devotion to grape production, fluctuate more than those of Arvin. An examination of figure 6 shows that Arvin regular workers can be fully employed locally for 6 months in the year, whereas Dinuba regular workers can be so employed only 4 months. The labor picture appears to be better in Arvin than in Dinuba. It might be assumed, however, that Dinuba labor tends to be performed by outsiders to a greater extent than Arvin labor does. Under such an assumption the poverty and poor social conditions which surround wage workers would not appear in Dinuba but would merely show up in other towns where these workers are resident. Such a factor would not affect the availability of social institutions and facilities, but merely the level of living, existence of slum conditions, etc. The sharp peak in the labor demand does, in fact, necessitate over a third more outside workers during a single month than are required in Arvin during its busiest month. This is a function of the sharply peaked demand, and therefore nullifies the effect of Dinuba's disadvantage in this respect. Though Dinuba requires more imported manpower during the single peak month of employment, the total amount of imported work required is very nearly the same. (See appendix C.) The proportion of imported labor requirements to the total is less. 108 SMALL BUSINESS AND THE COMMUNITY Size of farm operations is the third characteristic of farm organization, and the one that the present study was designed to test. We find that the differences between average size of farm are great-in the neighborhood of 9 to 1 when taken on an acreage basis, 5 to 1 in value of products, and 3 to 1 if adjusted for intensity of operations. Ninetenths of all farm land is operated in units of 160 acres or more in Arvin as against one-fourth in Dinuba. Repeated allusions have been made to this factor. We have seen that water resources, historic timing, and type of farming were each to some measure responsible for the large farms in Arvin and the small ones in Dinuba. We have also seen that scale of farming operations had an effect upon the demography of the population, farm tenancy, and, above all, on the requirements for hired labor in each area and the occupation structure of the two communities. It is also true that throughout the intensively cultivated areas of the State, those communities with large-scale farming generally offer fewer economic and social services than those with moderate-sized farms. There remains no question that size of operations is therefore an important factor in establishing the kind of social environments found in Arvin and Dinuba. The place of this factor in the causal forces will be presented in detail in the succeeding section of this chapter. AN EXPLANATORY HYPOTHESIS It is now possible to formulate a hypothesis of the chain of causative forces which were responsible for the divergence of social conditions between the two communities whose fundamental cultural beritage and economic circumstances are similar. In formulating such an hypothesis all the pertinent known facts should be explained and their forces understood in terms of recognizable social process. Naturally such a formulation cannot be complete and final but can approach that only insofar as social processes are presently recognized and understood. The physical landscape and the geographic position of Arvin and Dinuba are sufficiently similar to produce an agricultural base to support communities equivalent in facilities offered, except that the water supply in Arvin created special circumstances. The necessary depth of the water level and the attendant need for larger capital investments delayed the intensive development of Arvin soils until adequate pumps were produced, and inhibited somewhat the growth of small farms. The delay in development made the land available to big operators at a time when industrialized fruit production in California was at its inception. Therefore, the water situation was doubly responsible for the fact that Arvin was a large farming community. It should be noted, however, that the water supply did not prevent small farms, and a few such units came into the conmunity early and have been farmed continuously ever since. It is doubtful if the water supply had any other direct effects, though its cost may have created specific hardships in an earlier era. probable that other causes were contributory to the development of large-scale operations and the belated development of the area, but such causes are not readily apparent and were not the subject of specific analysis. High investment for farm development because of the water situation may also have been a contributory cause to the SMALL BUSINESS AND THE COMMUNITY 109 high tenancy in Arvin, since owners could rent to operators who irrigated several pieces of land from a single well. The scale of operations that developed in Arvin inevitably had one clear and direct effect upon the community: It skewed the occupation structure so that the majority of the population could only subsist by working as wage labor for others. It probably had some effect upon the development of row crops. The relatively late development of Arvin placed it in a period of growing demand for vegetables and other row crops as contrasted with fruit. These two forces combined to give Arvin a large proportion of row crops, though fruits were also developed to a considerable extent. The large need for labor, and the period of major growth resulted in the aggregation of a large proportion of destitute white migrant labor with poor social and economic background. There is evidence that the quality of persons attracted by the kirds and conditions of work opportunities is somewhat poorer than was attracted to the situation in Dinuba. The occupation structure of the community, with a great majority of wage workers and very few persons independently employed and the latter generally persons of considerable means, has had a series of direct effects upon the social conditions in the community. These effects are applicable only given the total cultural situation that exists in America and particularly in California agriculture. The large labor population means inevitably large groups with poor economic circumstances, for the conditions of wage work in agriculture have permitted of nothing else. This in turn means poor housing, low level of living, existence of slum conditions and little money for community improvement. It means that a large portion of the population has little vested interest-economic or social-in the community itself. Such lack of ties, together with the seasonal nature of wage work in agriculture, results in a high turn-over of population (or instability of residence). The laboring population does not take leadership in general civic action and rarely supports organizations that exist, out of a usually well substantiated feeling of ostracism that results from the large differences in economic status. Thus general social facilities do not come into being for lack of leadership and support. This tendency is furthered by their own lack of funds and by their instability as residents in the community. The occupation structure leaves few who are in an economic and psychological position of leadership. These few consist largely of people who can afford to engage in the social activities of urban centers and who regularly do so. This mobility tends to drain their social interests away from local activities and renders them a less valuable asset to local community welfare then are less well-to-do farmers, though their value to the broader area of activity may be equally great. This social mobility engendered by their well-being was made possible by the fact that the automobile gave them physical mobility as well. That this mobility was available to them from the outset made it unnecessary to develop local satisfactions, whereas if they had once been developed they would likely have continued. Thus the period of development of Arvin was a contributory cause to its social poverty. The fact that the large farming community is of necessity made up of large groups of laborers with low incomes on one hand, and a small group of well-to-do persons on the other tends to impoverish its social Institutions of the leadership they require. It also impoverishes 31-717 - 79 - 34 110 SMALL BUSINESS AND THE COMMUNITY retail trade. For the farm laborer is generally unable to make a `normal complement of purchases for family living because of his poverty, while the farm operator tends to make his purchases, as he does his social contacts, in the city. Thus the merchant group docs not grow proportionate to the population, but lags behind it. This again reduces the proportion of independently employed. The lack of economic and social facilities in the community has a continuative effect. The poor conditions tend to repel those very people who are most needed to enrich it. It was pointed out by fariners, merchants, and laborers alike that persons did not plan to make Arvin their home because of this very lack of facilities. It is very probably one cause for the high tenancy ratio in Arvin, since landowners will often prefer to live elsewhere and live off their rentals. It is possibly a cause for the fact that the average educational attainments of farm workers are below those in the same occupations in Dinuba. The occupational structure has some influence upon political life in the community. The failure to develop real local interest in community affairs is a prime factor in this causal relationship. The mutual exclusiveness of the two major strata of society also inhibits the development of the community solidarity that would be expected in a more homogeneous group and thus prevents the development of a civic organization. The fact that the group from which natural leadership arises represents but a small minority, while those whose position is relatively insecure forms an overwhelming majority is a further reason for the failure of Arvin to incorporate. The existence of a strong and rich county government contributes to the fact that such political institutions were not developed. The high rate of tenancy and absentee ownership may reduce further the proportion of persons who are willing to assume leadership. No information on participation by tenure, other than the operatorlaborer dichotomy, was obtained. While such effect of tenure pattern upon the social organization is not supported by empirical evidence, the reverse effect, that the social environment increases tenancy, does receive some support. The accompanying diagrammatic table presents a visual summary of the preceding discussion. The overconcreteness implied with lines and boxes is unavoidable and the chart should be read in terms of the text and other specific strictures. Foremost of these strictures is the fact that the whole chain of causation and intercausation is valid only within the frame of reference of the culture common to the two communities and the area of industrialized farming. Thus the scale of farm operations only creates the occupational structure found under the assumption that land is individually owned and requires hired labor. Cooperative farming would have a different effect. Again, the effect of occupation structure upon social institutions, retail trade, level of living, and demographic character of the population is applicable only in terms of accepted class patterns of behavior and wage scales general in the area. To be complete, therefore, these cultural forces would have to be recognized. Intermediate steps and causal mechanisms have frequently been left out. The second stricture is that all terms indicating qualitative or quantitative comparisons Clow, few, poverty, etc.) have direct reference to the comparison of Arvin to Dinuba. Specifically, the causal forces relate to the explanation of the differences between those two communities. |