IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v68y1986i3p615-625..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing Long-Run Productivity Models for the Canadian and U.S. Agricultural Sectors

Author

Listed:
  • Susan M. Capalbo
  • Michael G. S. Denny

Abstract

The primary objective of this paper is to develop the linkages between the gross and net productivity indexes and the implied production structures. These linkages are developed as separability restrictions on various subgroups of inputs and time in a general production model. The restricted models are arranged in sequences for nested hypotheses testing. Empirical evidence from the U.S. and Canadian agricultural sectors based on a translog production function support the gross output total factor productivity structure. The net output Hicks neutrality hypothesis is rejected for both the United States and Canada.

Suggested Citation

  • Susan M. Capalbo & Michael G. S. Denny, 1986. "Testing Long-Run Productivity Models for the Canadian and U.S. Agricultural Sectors," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 68(3), pages 615-625.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:68:y:1986:i:3:p:615-625.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/1241545
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Shumway, C. Richard & Davis, George C., 2001. "Does consistent aggregation really matter?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 45(2), pages 1-34.
    2. Robert G. Chambers & Erik Lichtenberg, 1994. "Simple Econometrics of Pesticide Productivity," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(3), pages 407-417.
    3. Bashir, Kamaleldin Ali, 1990. "Technical change in Iowa agricultural production: a conditional demand approach," ISU General Staff Papers 1990010108000017619, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    4. C. Richard Shumway, 1993. "Production economics: Worthwhile investment?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 9(2), pages 89-108, August.
    5. Qinghua Liu & C. Richard Shumway, 2004. "Testing aggregation consistency across geography and commodities," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(3), pages 463-486, September.
    6. Capalbo, Susan & Denny, Michael & Hoque, Anwarul & Overton, C. Edward, 1991. "Methodologies for Comparisons of Agricultural Output, Input, and Productivity: A Review and Synthesis," Staff Reports 278532, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    7. Veeman, T.S. & Fantino, A.A. & Rahuma, A.A., 1989. "Productivity Growth and Profitability in the Prarie Grains Sector," Project Report Series 232075, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    8. Chambers, Robert G. & Pope, Rulon D., 1989. "What Do Aggregate Agricultural Supply and Demand Curves Mean?," Working Papers 197605, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    9. Paul E. Brockway & Matthew K. Heun & João Santos & John R. Barrett, 2017. "Energy-Extended CES Aggregate Production: Current Aspects of Their Specification and Econometric Estimation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-23, February.
    10. Chambers, Robert G. & Pope, Rulon D., 1989. "What Do Aggregate Agricultural Supply and Demand Curves Mean?," 1990 Conference (34th), February 13-15, 1990, Brisbane, Australia 144922, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    11. Aradhyula, Satheesh Venkata, 1989. "Policy structure, output supply and input demand for US crops," ISU General Staff Papers 198901010800009909, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. Krakar, Janice Eileen, 1990. "Canadian agriculture factor retention under different policy regimes," ISU General Staff Papers 1990010108000010380, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.

    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:oup:ajagec:v:68:y:1986:i:3:p:615-625.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.