IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v114y2013icp32-37.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trade-adjusted measures of productivity increases in US hog production

Author

Listed:
  • Mathews, Kenneth H.
  • Jones, Keithly G.
  • McConnell, Michael J.
  • Johnson, Rachel J.

Abstract

The average dressed weight for barrows and gilts slaughtered in the United States has increased 23% since 1977, from an annual average of 163lbs to 201lbs in 2010. This measure of pork production includes pork produced from US born and raised hogs as well as hogs imported from Canada. This paper addresses technological change in US born and raised pork production. Since pork produced from Canadian hogs could distort estimates of technological improvement and other variables describing changes in US born and raised pork production, a method of adjusting production data series for the portion of US pork production that comes from foreign-born hogs is developed. The resulting data are used to estimate the rate of change in average dressed weight, assumed to be due to technical change in the US swine herd.

Suggested Citation

  • Mathews, Kenneth H. & Jones, Keithly G. & McConnell, Michael J. & Johnson, Rachel J., 2013. "Trade-adjusted measures of productivity increases in US hog production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 32-37.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:114:y:2013:i:c:p:32-37
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2012.07.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X12001205
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lutton, Thomas J., 1982. "Input Demand Formulations and Duality Theory," Agricultural Economics Research, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, issue 4.
    2. Marsh, John M., 1999. "Economic Factors Determining Changes In Dressed Weights Of Live Cattle And Hogs," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 24(02), December.
    3. Giancarlo Moschini & Harvey Lapan, 1997. "Intellectual Property Rights and the Welfare Effects of Agricultural R&D," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1229-1242.
    4. Brester, Gary W. & Marsh, John M., 1999. "U.S. Beef And Cattle Imports And Exports: Data Issues And Impacts On Cattle Prices," Trade Research Center Policy Issues Papers 29162, Montana State University, Department of Agricultural Economics and Economics.
    5. Hans P. Binswanger, 1974. "A Cost Function Approach to the Measurement of Elasticities of Factor Demand and Elasticities of Substitution," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 56(2), pages 377-386.
    6. Robert G. Chambers, 1982. "Duality, the Output Effect, and Applied Comparative Statics," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 64(1), pages 152-156.
    7. Alfranca, Oscar & Huffman, Wallace E, 2003. "Aggregate Private R&D Investments in Agriculture: The Role of Incentives, Public Policies, and Institutions," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(1), pages 1-21, October.
    8. Huffman, Wallace E. & Evenson, Robert E., 1993. "Science for Agriculture: A Long Term Perspective," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10997, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    9. Grisley, William & Gitu, Kangethe W., 1985. "A Translog Cost Analysis of Turkey Production in the Mid-Atlantic Region," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(01), pages 151-158, July.
    10. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," NBER Chapters,in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 17-45 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Lawrence J. Lau & Pan A. Yotopoulos, 1972. "Profit, Supply, and Factor Demand Functions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 54(1), pages 11-18.
    12. Grisley, William & Gitu, Kangethe W., 1985. "A Translog Cost Analysis Of Turkey Production In The Mid-Atlantic Region," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 17(01), July.
    13. Charles A. Towe & Mitchell J. Morehart, 2009. "Credit Constraints: Their Existence, Determinants, and Implications for U.S. Farm and Nonfarm Sole Proprietorships," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(1), pages 275-289.
    14. J. Edwin Faris, 1960. "Analytical Techniques Used in Determining the Optimum Replacement Pattern," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 42(4), pages 755-766.
    15. Christensen, Laurits R & Jorgenson, Dale W & Lau, Lawrence J, 1975. "Transcendental Logarithmic Utility Functions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(3), pages 367-383, June.
    16. Key, Nigel D. & McBride, William D., 2007. "The Changing Economics of U.S. Hog Production," Economic Research Report 6389, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    17. Brester, Gary W. & Schroeder, Ted C. & Mintert, James R., 1997. "Challenges to the Beef Industry," Choices, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 12(4).
    18. Subhash C. Ray, 1982. "A Translog Cost Function Analysis of U.S. Agriculture, 1939–77," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 64(3), pages 490-498.
    19. Ramon E. Lopez, 1980. "The Structure of Production and the Derived Demand for Inputs in Canadian Agriculture," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 62(1), pages 38-45.
    20. Fare, R. & Grosskopf, S. & Lovell, C. A. K., 1988. "An indirect approach to the evaluation of producer performance," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 71-89, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Hogs; Pork; Productivity; Genetics; Imports;

    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:eee:agisys:v:114:y:2013:i:c:p:32-37. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.