IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v4y2014i4p288-307d43317.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Small Ruminant Production System Efficiency under Abu-Dhabi, United Arab Emirates Arid Land Conditions

Author

Listed:
  • Eihab Fathelrahman

    () (Department of Agribusiness and Consumer Sciences, College of Food and Agriculture, United Arab Emirates University, P.O. Box 15551, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates)

  • Sherin Sherif

    () (Economics and Agribusiness Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Alexandria University, El-Shatby, P.O. Box 21545, Alexandria, Egypt)

  • Dana L. K. Hoag

    () (Department of Agriculture and Natural Resource Economics, College of Agriculture, Colorado State University, B330 Clark Building, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA)

Abstract

Sheep and goat production systems in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) operate under scarce natural resource constraints. A cross-sectional survey that covered 661 mixed farms, including major sheep and goat production, was conducted in the three regions of Abu Dhabi Emirate (Al-Ain, Western Region and Abu Dhabi city) during 2012. A Cobb-Douglas, double-logarithmic stochastic frontier production function and maximum likelihood estimation were applied to estimate important economic derivatives and the associated risk of small ruminant production in this arid area. The highest impact of an input on the output level was found to be labor for raising sheep and alfalfa grass for raising goats. Both labor and alfalfa variables were found to be overutilized for sheep and goat production, respectively. Overall, the results indicate that average technical efficiency is 0.62 for raising sheep and only 0.34 for raising goats in the study area. Technical efficiency analysis included measuring the frequency of farms at each level of estimated technical efficiency in the range between zero and one. Zero for the technical efficiency coefficient indicates a lack of technical efficiency in resource use. The results of this study indicated that only 1% of the sheep farms show a technical efficiency coefficient of 0.25 or less; the same can be said for 41% of goat producers. However, these technical efficiencies were found to be more than 0.75 for 12% and 5% of the sheep and goat farms, respectively. Overall, goat farming in the UAE was found to be less efficient than sheep production. The results also indicated that flock size and type of breed were the most influential factors relative to other factors, and both show a positive relationship with technical efficiency. Other than flock size, factors, such as owners’ years of experience and management practices, were found to be more influential on goat farming system efficiency relative to sheep farming.

Suggested Citation

  • Eihab Fathelrahman & Sherin Sherif & Dana L. K. Hoag, 2014. "Small Ruminant Production System Efficiency under Abu-Dhabi, United Arab Emirates Arid Land Conditions," Agriculture, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 4(4), pages 1-20, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:4:y:2014:i:4:p:288-307:d:43317
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/4/4/288/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/4/4/288/
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fuss, Melvyn & McFadden, Daniel, 1978. "Production Economics: A Dual Approach to Theory and Applications (II): Applications of the Theory of Production," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 2, number fuss1978a.
    2. Jondrow, James & Knox Lovell, C. A. & Materov, Ivan S. & Schmidt, Peter, 1982. "On the estimation of technical inefficiency in the stochastic frontier production function model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2-3), pages 233-238, August.
    3. Hall, Harry H., 1998. "Choosing an Empirical Production Function: Theory, Nonnested Hypotheses, Costs of Specifications," Agricultural Economics Research Reports 31977, University of Kentucky, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    4. Chambers,Robert G., 1988. "Applied Production Analysis," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521314275, December.
    5. Villano, Renato A. & Fleming, Euan M. & Fleming, Pauline, 2008. "Measuring Regional Productivity Differences in the Australian Wool Industry: A Metafrontier Approach," 2008 Conference (52nd), February 5-8, 2008, Canberra, Australia 6036, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    6. Roberto Furesi & Fabio Madau & Pietro Pulina, 2013. "Technical efficiency in the sheep dairy industry: an application on the Sardinian (Italy) sector," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 1(1), pages 1-11, December.
    7. Kumar, Shalander, 2007. "Commercial Goat Farming in India: An Emerging Agri-Business Opportunity," Agricultural Economics Research Review, Agricultural Economics Research Association (India), vol. 20(Conferenc), pages 1-18.
    8. Griffin, Ronald C. & Montgomery, John M. & Rister, M. Edward, 1987. "Selecting Functional Form In Production Function Analysis," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 12(2), pages 1-12, December.
    9. Fuss, Melvyn & McFadden, Daniel, 1978. "Production Economics: A Dual Approach to Theory and Applications (I): The Theory of Production," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 1, number fuss1978.
    10. Suresh, A. & Gupta, D.C. & Mann, J.S., 2008. "Returns and Economic Efficiency of Sheep Farming in Semi-arid Regions: A Study in Rajasthan," Agricultural Economics Research Review, Agricultural Economics Research Association (India), vol. 21(2), pages 1-8.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    sheep and goats; arid land; technical efficiency; uncertainty; allocative efficiency; stochastic frontier; maximum likelihood; farm system intensity; food security;

    JEL classification:

    • Q1 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture
    • Q10 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - General
    • Q11 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Aggregate Supply and Demand Analysis; Prices
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness
    • Q14 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Finance
    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services
    • Q17 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agriculture in International Trade
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy

    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:gam:jagris:v:4:y:2014:i:4:p:288-307:d:43317. 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: (XML Conversion Team). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com/ .

    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.