Twelve-month and Nine-month Agricultural Economics Faculty Salaries

Lynn W. Robbins and Michael Reed

Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 2013, vol. 42, issue 3, 561-570

Abstract: Ever more agricultural economics departments are offering appointments for nine rather than twelve months but little if any analysis of the impact of this change has been done. Our research shows that converting to nine-month contracts is an effective way to raise salaries without an initial outlay of new funds and thus meets the retention criterion. Lower ranks do not suffer significantly lower salaries (without supplements) and professors earn more. Because the nine-month alternative costs more, justification for converting all twelve-month faculty members must rest on other factors, such as enhanced grants or comparability.

Date: 2013
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/ ... type/journal_article link to article abstract page (text/html)

Related works:
Journal Article: Twelve-month and Nine-month Agricultural Economics Faculty Salaries (2013)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:cup:agrerw:v:42:y:2013:i:03:p:561-570_00

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Agricultural and Resource Economics Review from Cambridge University Press Cambridge University Press, UPH, Shaftesbury Road, Cambridge CB2 8BS UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Kirk Stebbing ().