14 SOCIAL SCIENTIST turn, may have wider implications on the future prospects of agriculture and the economy as a whole. This set of [issues which did not figure in the discussions of the past deserves attention. It is also necessary to look at the scale factor in the wider context of the operations of the economy. The data contained in the Studies in Economics of Farm Management (SEFM) conducted on a sample survey basis in Thanjavur district in 1967-68 and in 1969-70 and in Coimbatore district from 1970-71 to 1972-73 make it possible to explore some of these aspects of the scale factor.7 They also touch upon some of the other questions listed above. An analysis of the SEFM data to gain a better insight into the scale factor in agriculture is the objective of this paper. It emerges that many farm operations are indeed scale neutral, but there are also some identifiable differences that scale introduces. In particular, it is seen that farms of different sizes differ in terms of the utilization of basic factors, owned land and owned labour. This theme is further developed later on and some of its dynamic aspects are brought out using also data from other sources pertaining to the state. In the end a brief reference is made to the implications of the findings. The Thanjavur SEFM were conducted separately for 1967-68 and for 1969-70. Only information pertaining to the second year is used as the first period was one of severe drought in the state. The Coimbatore study gives information for 1970-71, 1971-72 and 1972-73 and the average for the three years. Unless otherwise specified, the average figures are made use of in the analysis that follows. The two studies differ in their size classifications. In the Thanjavur study the groups arc upto 1.16 hectares, 1.17 to 2.02, 2.02 to 3.05, 3.06 to 5.71 and above 5.71 hectares. Since the very large farms have all been clubbed together into one group, the usefulness of the study from the point of view of the impact of the scale factor is considerably limited. Altogether only 150 farms (operational holdings) were studied and their distribution on the basis of size shows that the lowest three groups account for 23.33 percent each, the fourth 16.67 percent and the top group 13.34 percent. The average size of holdings is 3.06 hectares which compares with 1.23 hectares for the district as a whole as given in the World Agricultural Census. Table I shows the breakdown of investment in different assets according to size groups. Land and buildings put together account for between 80 and 85 percent in all size groups. The share of major implements moves up and that of minor implements moves down with size. Livestock and durable consumer