Abstract
Descriptions of the postbellum South vary. Farmers either were postharvest debt peons, were subject to "seasonal credit peonage" to a monopolistic store, or relied on seasonal credit from stores that faced spatial competition. Analysis of Georgia Agricultual Departmenta data shows that postharvest debt peonage was not a major problem in the 1880s. Most other results are consistent with both monopolistic and competitive views of the stores. Increases in income reduced indebtedness; and reliance on purchased supplies increased the likelihood of indebtedness and of future reliance on purchased supplies. Past reliance on purchased supplies, however, did not affect the crop mix.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 219-236 |
Number of pages | 18 |
Journal | Explorations in Economic History |
Volume | 26 |
Issue number | 2 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Apr 1989 |
Externally published | Yes |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- History
- Economics and Econometrics