This paper discusses the benefits and costs of antitrust intervention in agriculture. We argue that over the long run, fixed costs have increased and marginal costs have decreased, which has created a tension between lower food prices and having a large number of farms. As opposed to policies of most industries, agricultural policy seems to place more importance upon producer surplus instead of consumer surplus, which runs directly counter to the goals of antitrust laws. While protecting small farms may potentially be an appropriate use of other policy instruments (such as the Farm Bill), using antitrust laws to break up large agricultural firms and/or protect small farms may result in higher food prices, which is regressive and exacerbates inequality. Furthermore, the application of antitrust law for the purpose of raising food prices and producer surplus is antithetical to its historic purpose.

中文翻译：

---

我们应该对大农业使用反垄断政策吗？

本文讨论了反垄断干预农业的收益和成本。我们认为，从长远来看，固定成本增加而边际成本降低，这在较低的食品价格和拥有大量农场之间造成了紧张关系。与大多数行业的政策相反，农业政策似乎更重视生产者剩余而不是消费者剩余，这与反垄断法的目标直接背道而驰。虽然保护小农场可能是对其他政策工具（如农业法案）的适当使用，但使用反垄断法拆分大型农业公司和/或保护小农场可能会导致食品价格上涨，这是一种倒退并加剧不平等. 此外，