- Email: [email protected]
Local family history in England
Journal
of Rural
Studies,
Printed
in Great
Britain
Vol. 8. No. 3, pp. 335-346,
0743-0167/92 $5.00 + 0.00 Pergamon Press Ltd
1992
Book Reviews analyse survey evidence on aspects of retirement, inheritance, succession and the transfer of managerial control in greater depth. Finally Chapter 9 presents a summary of the study and its conclusions.
Getting Out of Farming? Part Two: The Farmers. A Study of Short-term Adjustment and Plans for Long-term Change in English Farm-family Businesses, A. Errington and R. Tranter, 140 pp. + 11 pp. appendices, Farm Management Unit Study No. 27, University of Reading, f7.50 pb
Comparisons are made at various times throughout the report with results obtained in the 1986/1987 study. The authors conclude that there exists a general reluctance to change radically amongst farmers. Instead, their strategies are ‘to produce their way out of financial difficulty’ and simultaneously cut labour and machinery costs. Twice as many farmers were taking up off-farm employment in 1990 as were in the previous study, and 60% of the 1990 sample were setting up non-farming enterprises on farm. The gradual shift towards these alternative approaches needs a response from trainers and advisors as well as policy-makers since, as the authors explain. stress results not only from the pressures of declining incomes and increasing overdrafts but relates also to both financial and technical management ability.
This report is part of a Study Series published by the Farm Management Unit at the University of Reading and, unusually for this series, has its beginnings in two earlier studies. The earliest antecedent was Getting Started in Farming (Errington et al., 1988), the second being Part 1 of this study - Getting Out of Farming? (Giles, 1990). Part 1 looks specifically at the problems and attitudes of salaried farm managers, whilst Part Two: The Farmer examines the broader and more complex concerns of selfemployed farmers and their families as they face or contemplate farm business adjustments. This is done in the context of farm-family seasonal and life-cycle experiences, along with the internal and external pressures they face which lead them to change, accommodate or ‘get out of farming’. It is particularly reassuring that other noneconomic dimensions to management are considered, in addition to the more traditional approach to the farm business.
The final chapter also deals with the implications of a reluctance to retire amongst farmers on the planning and financial incentives which might be considered, and the need for training and advice to deal with succession and the potential dilemma of inheritance. The authors’ final conclusion raises the issue of the role of farmers’ daughters as ‘neglected resources in English farming’. Although in this way they address the issue to some degree, it would have been further enhanced had such a study extended and explored this potential by giving more time to the role and experience of women in the ‘getting out’ process. They might also have considered exploring the wider implications in a broader sense for the farm household as a whole. The study is clearly and explicitly structured and written, and provides an interesting and useful contribution to this area of research both in the reporting of its findings and in focusing on future research agendas which need addressing.
The study has four objectives, fulfilled quite effectively by the survey, which include: (i) analysing the processes of financial readjustment; (ii) categorising farmers and their businesses according to the levels of financial pressure to which they respond; (iii) exploring the steps and actions taken and planned to counteract such pressures; and (iv) setting this into a context of retirement plans and arrangements being considered, and how and why these arrangements may or will be made. Following an introduction, Chapter 2 describes the study’s background and methodology, going into somewhat excessive detail in some parts such as the survey response section. In order to establish a sample representative of all farming areas in England, all sizes and types of farms, farm businesses and farmers, the study uses a sample previously obtained for work carried out by Harrison and Tranter (1986) through the Yellow Pages organisation. It is unfortunate that the sample for this survey could not have been obtained through MAFF. The authors believe their sample to be ‘a fair cross-section of English businesses’ but acknowledge the inevitable under-representation of smaller farm businesses. They also recognise that the average farm sizes in the survey area are larger than the national average. Having said this their ‘real’ response rate is very high for a postal survey at 72.7% or 814 completed questionnaires.
LYNETH
DAVIES
Aberystwyth,
U.K.
Local Family History in England, Colin D. Rogers and John H. Smith, 217 pp., 1991, Manchester University Press, f9.95 pb
This book is an attempt to bridge the gap between the geneologist and the local historian, bringing together an impressive resource reading list which has been long used by both, but is now rearranged to bring about the emergence of the family as a feature for study. The authors start by emphasising the role of the geneologist and protecting him or most likely her from what seems to be a bias towards the amateur stigma, and suggest they have a lot to learn from family history, and then accept
The following six chapters then present the evidence. Chapter 3 assesses on-farm responses to the current economic squeeze; Chapter 4 examines the concept of a family business and proposes an agenda for research developed in more detail in Appendix 4. Chapters 5-8 335
336
Book
that the knowledge may be two-way. This is a book for genealogists to further their studies into local family history. Part One deals with the history of the family from 1538 to 1914 which sets out to explore the relationship of the family’s response to, and its responsibility for, the economic climate in which it found itself. The English family is dealt with in an assortment of source references and related theories. The feeling of this section is one of .informed ama&eur’ to which the authors have been able to place literary sources. Unfortunate, as their aim seemed to have been to eliminate the amateur lab& Perhaps because the pages are so easily readable, I hesitated over the credibility of such seemingly hegemonic sources as Lasfett (196.5). Where later sources are used (Rogers, 1989) (p. 31) we are given such well-known facts, as to almost eliminate the necessity of their being repeated. For example, ‘Neither church nor state laid dawn whom one could marry, except for the prohibited degrees of siblings, parents, aunts, uncles, nephews and nieces after 1540.’ Nevertheless other snippets do add to the readability and common interest, as with the facts about the history of divorce on p. 36. Marriage, children and solitaries are discussed in this section under the headings of ‘early modern’ and “industrial age’ - quite a large order for SU pages which includes several tables. Part Two is ‘The exploitation of source material.’ Rogers and Smith explain that their research is based on demography but that much has had to involve a multidisciplinary approach. The demographic techniques are used to substantiate facts whilst other approaches add flesh to the bones. The first section follows lists and listings and census material, and endeavours to show how a family ‘snapshot’ can be taken on a slow shutter speed over extended periods. The authors accept the flaw of this method, but such a huge genealogical resource just cannot be ignored where other sources are absent which furnish the necessary information of both surnames and location of ancestors. tasleit is the hero once more; the author who seemingly challenged and demolished the belief of the extended family as a common bases of household structure in pre-industrial England (p. 95) in his book ‘2%~ World we HCJW hsf’ (Lasiett, 1965). The section of aggregative analysis explains how to identify social change by putting unconnected events together covering a time scale and ending up with a cartoon, if not exactly a feature-length film. This theory was developed in the 19htOs by E.A. Wrigley. Again comes the feeling that one is being taught to paint by numbers. the enumerations being authors and their works over the last 40 years, and us the readers carefully referring to the back of the book for every new idea or colour. For example on pp. 1 i&l 19, ten test algorithm are listed from Drake (1974), with phrases interspersed . . . ‘we should perhaps add . . .‘. But why use Drake’s list of 10 for new theory? The reason why all the changes (which are so ~~verwhelmjngly covered in the source material) take place is anaiysed in ‘Family and total reconstitution’. Here Rogers and Smith bring togcthcr all types of records and placing them alongside the work of the genealogists form a total reconstitution of the family and its environs, and thus a more complete picture of the social framework, much in the same way as an iconologist would research a work of art. Part Three -- ‘A family history research agenda’ - gets down to the basics: Grganisatton; What to investigate; Making it puhlir. It is very clearly written and urges and
Reviews enlhuses those whose interest has been awakened by the previous chapters to actually do something. I felt that this section thoroughly compensated for the low-key approach of the rest of the book, and put the emphasis on the amateur into perspective. It concludes with examples of sources from Appendix 1 - ‘Hearth Tax return from Tintwistle, Cheshire, 1664’ to Appendix 6 ‘List of family reconstitutions held by the Cambridge Group for the History of Population and Social Structure.’ This book is interesting reading should you require a hobby, but I would hesitate to say that it would make the amateur into a professional - perhaps into a betterinformed amateur with better-stocked book shelves. WENDY FGULGER Lampeter, U.K.
St Duvid’s Universiiy,
Land and Property Development in a Changing Context, Patsy Healey ano Rupert Nabarro (eds), 1990, Gower, London
This book has its origins in a seminar held in September 19% and was completed in early 1990. Since then the property development industry has entered its worst slump for 20 years. However, the book is both timely and useful for two reasons. First, even if we are perhaps not quite as ignorant of the industry as Edwards suggests (Chapter 10, there is a need for clearly directed research on the property development process, the structure of the industry and its links with the wider economy. Second, the sector has undergone a number of major changes since the last period when it was the focus of research attentions (the 1970s). These include the rise of institutional investors, the increased role played by property professionals and consultants in shaping the market, a changing relationship with the construction industry, and growing interrratiorlalisatiirn. The book comprises 11 chapters by xuious authors drawn from academic research and private sector consultancy. After an introductory chapter by Healey and an overview of the 1980s by members of Property Market Analysis, the book is organ&d into three major themes. These deal with actors and strategies (with chapters by Nabarro, McNamara, and Leyshon, Thrift and Daniels); case studies of specific local land and property markets (by Adams on Manchester: Cameron and Fleming on Wakefield); and policy implications (with chapters on France hy Renard and the U.S.A. by Altermann, together with more general discussions by Edwards and by Solesburp). While many of the chapters provide much illuminative material, I felt that a number of gaps remained. These could perhaps have been better filled by tighter specification of the brief to the various authors. For example, a number of chapters call for research into the linkages between property development and the wider economy. Apart from a nod towards David Harvey’s work on the relationship between investment in the built environment and economic change (by Edwards), there is no attempt to conceptualist these wider links. Nor is there any real discussion of the relationship between the construction industry and property development. While the editors make it clear that this was not the aim of the book, the importance of speculative property development - hous-
of Rural
Studies,
Printed
in Great
Britain
Vol. 8. No. 3, pp. 335-346,
0743-0167/92 $5.00 + 0.00 Pergamon Press Ltd
1992
Book Reviews analyse survey evidence on aspects of retirement, inheritance, succession and the transfer of managerial control in greater depth. Finally Chapter 9 presents a summary of the study and its conclusions.
Getting Out of Farming? Part Two: The Farmers. A Study of Short-term Adjustment and Plans for Long-term Change in English Farm-family Businesses, A. Errington and R. Tranter, 140 pp. + 11 pp. appendices, Farm Management Unit Study No. 27, University of Reading, f7.50 pb
Comparisons are made at various times throughout the report with results obtained in the 1986/1987 study. The authors conclude that there exists a general reluctance to change radically amongst farmers. Instead, their strategies are ‘to produce their way out of financial difficulty’ and simultaneously cut labour and machinery costs. Twice as many farmers were taking up off-farm employment in 1990 as were in the previous study, and 60% of the 1990 sample were setting up non-farming enterprises on farm. The gradual shift towards these alternative approaches needs a response from trainers and advisors as well as policy-makers since, as the authors explain. stress results not only from the pressures of declining incomes and increasing overdrafts but relates also to both financial and technical management ability.
This report is part of a Study Series published by the Farm Management Unit at the University of Reading and, unusually for this series, has its beginnings in two earlier studies. The earliest antecedent was Getting Started in Farming (Errington et al., 1988), the second being Part 1 of this study - Getting Out of Farming? (Giles, 1990). Part 1 looks specifically at the problems and attitudes of salaried farm managers, whilst Part Two: The Farmer examines the broader and more complex concerns of selfemployed farmers and their families as they face or contemplate farm business adjustments. This is done in the context of farm-family seasonal and life-cycle experiences, along with the internal and external pressures they face which lead them to change, accommodate or ‘get out of farming’. It is particularly reassuring that other noneconomic dimensions to management are considered, in addition to the more traditional approach to the farm business.
The final chapter also deals with the implications of a reluctance to retire amongst farmers on the planning and financial incentives which might be considered, and the need for training and advice to deal with succession and the potential dilemma of inheritance. The authors’ final conclusion raises the issue of the role of farmers’ daughters as ‘neglected resources in English farming’. Although in this way they address the issue to some degree, it would have been further enhanced had such a study extended and explored this potential by giving more time to the role and experience of women in the ‘getting out’ process. They might also have considered exploring the wider implications in a broader sense for the farm household as a whole. The study is clearly and explicitly structured and written, and provides an interesting and useful contribution to this area of research both in the reporting of its findings and in focusing on future research agendas which need addressing.
The study has four objectives, fulfilled quite effectively by the survey, which include: (i) analysing the processes of financial readjustment; (ii) categorising farmers and their businesses according to the levels of financial pressure to which they respond; (iii) exploring the steps and actions taken and planned to counteract such pressures; and (iv) setting this into a context of retirement plans and arrangements being considered, and how and why these arrangements may or will be made. Following an introduction, Chapter 2 describes the study’s background and methodology, going into somewhat excessive detail in some parts such as the survey response section. In order to establish a sample representative of all farming areas in England, all sizes and types of farms, farm businesses and farmers, the study uses a sample previously obtained for work carried out by Harrison and Tranter (1986) through the Yellow Pages organisation. It is unfortunate that the sample for this survey could not have been obtained through MAFF. The authors believe their sample to be ‘a fair cross-section of English businesses’ but acknowledge the inevitable under-representation of smaller farm businesses. They also recognise that the average farm sizes in the survey area are larger than the national average. Having said this their ‘real’ response rate is very high for a postal survey at 72.7% or 814 completed questionnaires.
LYNETH
DAVIES
Aberystwyth,
U.K.
Local Family History in England, Colin D. Rogers and John H. Smith, 217 pp., 1991, Manchester University Press, f9.95 pb
This book is an attempt to bridge the gap between the geneologist and the local historian, bringing together an impressive resource reading list which has been long used by both, but is now rearranged to bring about the emergence of the family as a feature for study. The authors start by emphasising the role of the geneologist and protecting him or most likely her from what seems to be a bias towards the amateur stigma, and suggest they have a lot to learn from family history, and then accept
The following six chapters then present the evidence. Chapter 3 assesses on-farm responses to the current economic squeeze; Chapter 4 examines the concept of a family business and proposes an agenda for research developed in more detail in Appendix 4. Chapters 5-8 335
336
Book
that the knowledge may be two-way. This is a book for genealogists to further their studies into local family history. Part One deals with the history of the family from 1538 to 1914 which sets out to explore the relationship of the family’s response to, and its responsibility for, the economic climate in which it found itself. The English family is dealt with in an assortment of source references and related theories. The feeling of this section is one of .informed ama&eur’ to which the authors have been able to place literary sources. Unfortunate, as their aim seemed to have been to eliminate the amateur lab& Perhaps because the pages are so easily readable, I hesitated over the credibility of such seemingly hegemonic sources as Lasfett (196.5). Where later sources are used (Rogers, 1989) (p. 31) we are given such well-known facts, as to almost eliminate the necessity of their being repeated. For example, ‘Neither church nor state laid dawn whom one could marry, except for the prohibited degrees of siblings, parents, aunts, uncles, nephews and nieces after 1540.’ Nevertheless other snippets do add to the readability and common interest, as with the facts about the history of divorce on p. 36. Marriage, children and solitaries are discussed in this section under the headings of ‘early modern’ and “industrial age’ - quite a large order for SU pages which includes several tables. Part Two is ‘The exploitation of source material.’ Rogers and Smith explain that their research is based on demography but that much has had to involve a multidisciplinary approach. The demographic techniques are used to substantiate facts whilst other approaches add flesh to the bones. The first section follows lists and listings and census material, and endeavours to show how a family ‘snapshot’ can be taken on a slow shutter speed over extended periods. The authors accept the flaw of this method, but such a huge genealogical resource just cannot be ignored where other sources are absent which furnish the necessary information of both surnames and location of ancestors. tasleit is the hero once more; the author who seemingly challenged and demolished the belief of the extended family as a common bases of household structure in pre-industrial England (p. 95) in his book ‘2%~ World we HCJW hsf’ (Lasiett, 1965). The section of aggregative analysis explains how to identify social change by putting unconnected events together covering a time scale and ending up with a cartoon, if not exactly a feature-length film. This theory was developed in the 19htOs by E.A. Wrigley. Again comes the feeling that one is being taught to paint by numbers. the enumerations being authors and their works over the last 40 years, and us the readers carefully referring to the back of the book for every new idea or colour. For example on pp. 1 i&l 19, ten test algorithm are listed from Drake (1974), with phrases interspersed . . . ‘we should perhaps add . . .‘. But why use Drake’s list of 10 for new theory? The reason why all the changes (which are so ~~verwhelmjngly covered in the source material) take place is anaiysed in ‘Family and total reconstitution’. Here Rogers and Smith bring togcthcr all types of records and placing them alongside the work of the genealogists form a total reconstitution of the family and its environs, and thus a more complete picture of the social framework, much in the same way as an iconologist would research a work of art. Part Three -- ‘A family history research agenda’ - gets down to the basics: Grganisatton; What to investigate; Making it puhlir. It is very clearly written and urges and
Reviews enlhuses those whose interest has been awakened by the previous chapters to actually do something. I felt that this section thoroughly compensated for the low-key approach of the rest of the book, and put the emphasis on the amateur into perspective. It concludes with examples of sources from Appendix 1 - ‘Hearth Tax return from Tintwistle, Cheshire, 1664’ to Appendix 6 ‘List of family reconstitutions held by the Cambridge Group for the History of Population and Social Structure.’ This book is interesting reading should you require a hobby, but I would hesitate to say that it would make the amateur into a professional - perhaps into a betterinformed amateur with better-stocked book shelves. WENDY FGULGER Lampeter, U.K.
St Duvid’s Universiiy,
Land and Property Development in a Changing Context, Patsy Healey ano Rupert Nabarro (eds), 1990, Gower, London
This book has its origins in a seminar held in September 19% and was completed in early 1990. Since then the property development industry has entered its worst slump for 20 years. However, the book is both timely and useful for two reasons. First, even if we are perhaps not quite as ignorant of the industry as Edwards suggests (Chapter 10, there is a need for clearly directed research on the property development process, the structure of the industry and its links with the wider economy. Second, the sector has undergone a number of major changes since the last period when it was the focus of research attentions (the 1970s). These include the rise of institutional investors, the increased role played by property professionals and consultants in shaping the market, a changing relationship with the construction industry, and growing interrratiorlalisatiirn. The book comprises 11 chapters by xuious authors drawn from academic research and private sector consultancy. After an introductory chapter by Healey and an overview of the 1980s by members of Property Market Analysis, the book is organ&d into three major themes. These deal with actors and strategies (with chapters by Nabarro, McNamara, and Leyshon, Thrift and Daniels); case studies of specific local land and property markets (by Adams on Manchester: Cameron and Fleming on Wakefield); and policy implications (with chapters on France hy Renard and the U.S.A. by Altermann, together with more general discussions by Edwards and by Solesburp). While many of the chapters provide much illuminative material, I felt that a number of gaps remained. These could perhaps have been better filled by tighter specification of the brief to the various authors. For example, a number of chapters call for research into the linkages between property development and the wider economy. Apart from a nod towards David Harvey’s work on the relationship between investment in the built environment and economic change (by Edwards), there is no attempt to conceptualist these wider links. Nor is there any real discussion of the relationship between the construction industry and property development. While the editors make it clear that this was not the aim of the book, the importance of speculative property development - hous-