agricultural development in Anglo countries and Argentina (Australia, government, Canada)

[yofie]

1) Was wheat farming assisted by the government in the US less than in Canada or Australia, like through settlement and through scientific and extension projects, just like it was assisted by the government in Argentina less than in Canada or Australia?

2) Did exclusively agricultural development (e.g. Argentina) foster significantly less innovation and more collusion than mineral development in whole (e.g. South Africa since the discovery of gold and diamonds) or in part (e.g. US, Canada, Australia)? To put it in somewhat technical terms, is it impossible for exclusively agricultural development to avoid collusive quasi-rents and promote innovation?

3) Were farms in the Australian wheat belt owner-occupied like in the Canadian Prairies or renter-occupied and owned by large-scale landlord-farmers like in the Pampas?

[Felix C]

Is this a school project you are working on?

[yofie]

Originally Posted by Felix C

Is this a school project you are working on?

No, but I'm interested in knowing.

[Frihed89]

Collusive quasi-rents? Do you mean oligopoly profits?

I don't know much about agricultural development in Argentina, Canada and Australia, but the US Federal government did not get involved until the Morrill and Homestead Acts. The transcontinental railways promoted agricultural settlement/development and were subsidized by the US government. US "farm programs" support payments were a 20th-century phenomenon. Rural electrification also played heavily in indirect supports to the US ag. sector.