IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/canjag/v53y2005i2-3p141-160.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost Efficiency for Alberta and Ontario Dairy Farms: An Interregional Comparison

Author

Listed:
  • Getu Hailu
  • Scott Jeffrey
  • James Unterschultz

Abstract

In this study, two non‐homothetic translog stochastic meta‐frontier cost functions—with and without local concavity imposed—are estimated using a nonlinear maximum likelihood estimation procedure to compare the cost efficiency of Alberta and Ontario dairy farms for the period 1984–96. The resulting cost efficiency estimates are not very sensitive to whether or not curvature is imposed. In contrast, the properties of the cost and input demand functions (e.g., elasticities) are sensitive to imposition of local concavity during estimation. The implication is that if an inappropriate model that does not satisfy the properties required by the economic theory is used, the estimated input demand functions may not be reliable. Average cost efficiency for the pooled sample, with local concavity imposed, is approximately 89%. This suggests some potential for improved performance in the sector. The results also suggest that Ontario dairy farms may be more cost efficient than Alberta dairy farms, but the statistical evidence is inconclusive. Dans la présente étude, nous avons estimé deux fonctions de coût métafrontières, stochastiques, non homothétiques de forme translogarithmique, avec et sans la concavité locale imposée, à l'aide de la procédure d'estimation du maximum de vraisemblance non linéaire pour comparer l'efficacité‐coût des exploitations laitières de l'Alberta et de l'Ontario au cours de la période 1984–96. Les estimations des indices d'efficacité‐coût ne sont pas très sensibles à l'imposition ou non de la concavité. En revanche, les propriétés des fonctions de coût et de demande d'intrants (ex. élasticités) sont sensibles à l'imposition de la concavité locale. La conséquence est que si on utilise un modèle incorrect qui ne respecte pas les propriétés requises par la théorie économique, les fonctions estimées de demande d'intrants peuvent ne pas être fiables. L'efficacité‐coût moyen de l'échantillon total, avec la concavité locale imposée, est d'environ 89%. Ces résultats laissent supposer que certaines améliorations sont possibles dans le secteur. Ils laissent également supposer que les exploitations laitières de l'Ontario sont plus efficaces par rapport aux coûts que celles de l'Alberta, mais ces résultats ne sont pas statistiquement concluants.

Suggested Citation

  • Getu Hailu & Scott Jeffrey & James Unterschultz, 2005. "Cost Efficiency for Alberta and Ontario Dairy Farms: An Interregional Comparison," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 53(2‐3), pages 141-160, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:canjag:v:53:y:2005:i:2-3:p:141-160
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-7976.2005.00314.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7976.2005.00314.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1744-7976.2005.00314.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chambers,Robert G., 1988. "Applied Production Analysis," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521314275.
    2. Unknown, 1996. "The Canadian Dairy Sector: Structure, Performance And Policies," Proceedings of the 2nd Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshop, 1996: Understanding Canada\United States Dairy Disputes 16950, Farm Foundation, Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshops.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jiang, Nan & Sharp, Basil, 2014. "Cost Efficiency of Dairy Farming in New Zealand: A Stochastic Frontier Analysis," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 0, pages 1-13.
    2. Mei-Ying Huang & Tsu-Tan Fu, 2013. "An examination of the cost efficiency of banks in Taiwan and China using the metafrontier cost function," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 387-406, December.
    3. del Corral, J., 2009. "Studying the Impact of Managerial Activities on the Technical Efficiency of Wisconsin Dairy Farm," Efficiency Series Papers 2009/01, University of Oviedo, Department of Economics, Oviedo Efficiency Group (OEG).
    4. Elskamp, Rebecca & Hailu, Getu, 2013. "Do Efficient Dairy Producers Purchase Quota?," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 149678, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Alexander Bilson Darku & Stavroula Malla & Kien C. Tran, 2016. "Sources and Measurement of Agricultural Productivity and Efficiency in Canadian Provinces: Crops and Livestock," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 64(1), pages 49-70, March.
    6. Alphonse Singbo & Bruno Larue, 2016. "Scale Economies, Technical Efficiency, and the Sources of Total Factor Productivity Growth of Quebec Dairy Farms," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 64(2), pages 339-363, June.
    7. Nan Jiang & Basil Sharp, 2015. "Technical efficiency and technological gap of New Zealand dairy farms: a stochastic meta-frontier model," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 39-49, August.
    8. Yumei Liu & Wuyang Hu & Simon Jetté-Nantel & Zhihong Tian, 2014. "The Influence of Labor Price Change on Agricultural Machinery Usage in Chinese Agriculture," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 62(2), pages 219-243, June.
    9. Getu Hailu, 2023. "Reflections on technological progress in the agri‐food industry: Past, present, and future," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 71(1), pages 119-141, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alfons Oude Lansink, 1999. "Area Allocation Under Price Uncertainty on Dutch Arable Farms," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 93-105, January.
    2. Gilligan, Daniel O., 1998. "Farm Size, Productivity, And Economic Efficiency: Accounting For Differences In Efficiency Of Farms By Size In Honduras," 1998 Annual meeting, August 2-5, Salt Lake City, UT 20918, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Karagiannis, Giannis & Katranidis, Stelios D. & Velentzas, Kostas, 1996. "Decomposition Analysis Of Factor Cost Shares: The Case Of Greek Agriculture," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 28(2), pages 1-11, December.
    4. Pope, Rulon D. & Just, Richard E., 1995. "Cost Function Estimation Under Risk," Working Papers 197825, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    5. Moreno, Rosina & Lopez-Bazo, Enrique & Artis, Manuel, 2002. "Evaluating the optimality of Spanish industry (1980-1993)," ERSA conference papers ersa02p353, European Regional Science Association.
    6. Jongeneel, Roelof A. & Ge, Lan, 2005. "Explaining Growth in Dutch Agriculture: Prices, Public R&D, and Technological Change," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24573, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Guenter Lang, 2008. "Measuring the Returns of Research and Development: An Empirical Study of the German Manufacturing Sector over 45 Years," Working Papers 10, The German University in Cairo, Faculty of Management Technology.
    8. Paul, Saumik, 2019. "A Decline in Labor's Share with Capital Accumulation and Complementary Factor Inputs: An Application of the Morishima Elasticity of Substitution," IZA Discussion Papers 12219, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Dakpo, K & Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffee, Laure, 2015. "Empirical comparison of pollution generating technologies in nonparametric modelling: The case of greenhouse gas emissions in French sheep meat farming," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211557, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Massimo Filippini & Cornelia Luchsinger, 2007. "Economies of scale in the Swiss hydropower sector," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(15), pages 1109-1113.
    11. Peterson, Jeffrey M. & Boisvert, Richard N. & de Gorter, Harry, 1999. "Multifunctionality and Optimal Environmental Policies for Agriculture in an Open Economy," Working Papers 127701, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    12. Cai, Yiyong & Newth, David & Finnigan, John & Gunasekera, Don, 2015. "A hybrid energy-economy model for global integrated assessment of climate change, carbon mitigation and energy transformation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 381-395.
    13. Andreas Stephan, 1997. "The Impact of Road Infrastructure on Productivity and Growth: Some Preliminary Results for the German Manufacturing Sector," CIG Working Papers FS IV 97-47, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
    14. V. Vandenberghe, 2018. "The Contribution of Educated Workers to Firms’ Efficiency Gains: The Key Role of Proximity to the ‘Local’ Frontier," De Economist, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 259-283, September.
    15. Miguel A. Delgado & Jordi Jaumandreu & Ana Martín Marcos, 1999. "Input cost, capacity utilization and substitution in the short run," Spanish Economic Review, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 1(3), pages 239-262.
    16. Tchale, H. & Sauer, J., 2007. "Soil Fertility Management and Agricultural Productvity in Malawi," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 42, March.
    17. Tomas Baležentis & Alfons Oude Lansink, 2020. "Measuring dynamic biased technical change in Lithuanian cereal farms," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(2), pages 208-225, April.
    18. Oleg Badunenko & Michael Fritsch & Andreas Stephan, 2006. "What Determines the Technical Efficiency of a Firm? The Importance of Industry, Location, and Size," Jenaer Schriften zur Wirtschaftswissenschaft (Expired!) 33/2006, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    19. Rosemarie Bégin & Lota D. Tamini & Maurice Doyon, 2014. "L'effet du travail hors-ferme sur l'efficacité technique des fermes laitières québécoises: un modèle intégrant les biais de sélection sur les observables et inobservables," Cahiers de recherche CREATE 2014-9, CREATE.
    20. David Van Dijcke, 2022. "On the Non-Identification of Revenue Production Functions," Papers 2212.04620, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:canjag:v:53:y:2005:i:2-3:p:141-160. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caefmea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.