FACULTY AND RESEARCH

For a period of seven years, French agronomists were embroiled in a controversy regarding the use of double-entry bookkeeping in agriculture that became quite heated at times. The debate during this time pitched Paul-Claude Dubost, a professor of rural economics at the School of Agriculture of Grignon, against the supporters of the accounting model of Mathieu de Dombasle, developed in the 1820s, replicated in numerous textbooks and taught in agricultural schools. Dubost complained about the complexity, the cumbersomeness and the arbitrariness of its valuations. He also argued that it did not have any relevance in assessing the profitability of farms due to the interdependence of the varied crops within a given agricultural production system. He proposed a simplified alternative, which his opponents considered too rudimentary. More than 15 authors participated in a discussion that is without equivalent in the French industrial world of the 19th century. This discussion reflects the importance attached to accounting by agronomists, for whom it was, above all, a means to test their hypotheses and to verify the soundness of their technical options. It is not our purpose, 150 years after, to say who was right and who was wrong, but rather to emphasise the recurrent nature of the question of the adaptation of accounting tools to the needs of users and the futility of searching for a supposedly universal solution.