Measuring And Explaining The Decline In U.S. Cotton Productivity Growth
Tornquist input quantity indices were used to derive total and partial factor productivity measures for U.S. cotton across time, region, and scale. Total factor productivity for U.S. cotton increased .2 percent per year between 1974 and 1982. Partial productivity measures revealed that yield growth was about .6 percent and input use grew about .4 percent per year. Cotton enterprises in Alabama and Mississippi gained and those in the Texas High Plains lost competitive advantage relative to California. In 1982, very large (1750-5900 acres) and large (950-1749 acres) cotton enterprises were 2 percent more productive than medium-size enterprises (570-949 acres).
Volume (Year): 23 (1991)
Issue (Month): 01 (July)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.saea.org/jaae/jaae.htm|
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Duffy, Patricia A. & Richardson, James W. & Wohlgenant, Michael K., 1987. "Regional Cotton Acreage Response," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(01), pages 99-110, July.
- Thirtle, Colin G., 1985. "Technological Change And The Productivity Slowdown In Field Crops: United States, 1939-78," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 17(02), December.
- Thirtle, Colin G., 1985. "Technological Change and the Productivity Slowdown in Field Crops: United States, 1939-78," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(02), pages 33-42, December.
- Diewert, W. E., 1976. "Exact and superlative index numbers," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 115-145, May.
- Chan, M W Luke & Mountain, Dean C, 1983. "Economies of Scale and the Tornqvist Discrete Measure of Productivity Growth," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 65(4), pages 663-667, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:sojoae:30305. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.