- 6-


heightening the pace of development. This increase in knowledge is itself per-

haps one of the most significant inputs for accomplishing change in agriculture

as it is brought to bear on policies, plans and programs for agricultural change.

 The present paper is hopefully a contribution in the seventh area while

focusing on problems associated with the first.

B. The Subsistence Farmer

 A growing literature is emerging regarding the subsistence and peasant
 1/
 farmer. While conceptions and definitions differ in detail, the population

 embraced by most definitions of a "subsistence farmer" tend to result in

 basically the same group. The core group comprised by these definitions 2/ is

 a farmer who (a) consumes most of what he produces and/or sells very little of

 his product in the case market; (b) buys very few items to use in farming and for
 consumption;
 1/
 -/ For a more detailed rigorous exposition on the universe embraced by the terms
 "subsistence" and "peasant" see Wharton [1969, Ch. 2]. The use of the term
 "subsistence" is'sometimes'preferred in vide of the pejorative connotations of
 "peasant" in some societies, but as used, the term includes more than the "pure"
 subsistence farmer.

 Concern for peasantry is of long-standing among anthropologists. (For re-
 cent summaries see Wolf [19661, Nash [1966], and Firth (1969].) Economists have
 only recently focused their research upon peasant farmers [Wharton, 1969, Ch. 14].
 2/
 /- The critical factor is that these definitions do not seek to delineate a
 "subsistence" sector in the traditional dual model sense, but to identify a sub-
 set of farmers who share common characteristics which lead to common patterns of
 economic behaviour. However, some economists [Miracle, 1968] feel that the term
 "subsistence" however defined is too broadto cover the diversity and heterogeneity
 embraced by the term and may be misleading by focusing undue attention on merely
 one characteristic. While I readily applaud any stricture against univariate
 classification which masks the fundamental heterogeneity of any universe, one
 should be equally prepared to eschew the counsel of nc classification at all.
 Subsistence agriculture and subsistence farmers are rarely classified on the
 basis of a single characteristic [Beal, et al., 1967], despite sewing and stuffing
 of straw men by objectors. The critical issues are whether or not the classifica-
 tion system is appropriate for the analytical purpose at hand and whether or not
 the classification is appropriately determined. "Women" is an appropriate category
 for certain analyses; "blondes," "brunettes," and "redheads" for another. Sex
 may or may not be relevant; similarly, hair color. The classification can not be
 divorced from the purpose of analytical usage. Any caution to the contrary is a
 disservice to the cause of scientific inquiry.