IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Eficiencia versus innovación en explotaciones agrarias / Efficiency versus innovation in multicrop farms



    () (Dpto. de Estadística e Investigación Operativa. E.T.S.I.A.M. Universidad de Córdoba.)


    () ( Economía Aplicada. Facultad de Economía y Empresa. Universidad de Murcia.)


    () (Escuela Técnica Empresarial Agrícola. (ETEA)Universidad de Córdoba.)


El presente trabajo recoge los resultados de una investigación en la que se estiman la Eficiencia técnica y el nivel de innovación de una muestra de explotaciones agrarias multicultivo, situadas en la provincia de Córdoba. Para la primera, se aplica la metodología de función frontera estocástica. El nivel de innovación se calcula como índice compuesto de otros tres, que revelan niveles tecnológicos en los siguientes aspectos: gestión, maquinaria y técnicas de cultivo. Los resultados obtenidos muestran la ausencia de relación entre las medidas de eficiencia e innovación aunque el tamaño de la explotación y la pertenencia a asociaciones agrarias son factores que se asocian con ambos. Cabría pues afirmar que, y para este caso, los indicadores de eficiencia e innovación son complementarios y la construcción de ambos permite profundizar mejor en el conocimiento de la estructura productiva en la zona. This work presents the results of research carried out in order to estimate the technical efficiency and innovation level in a sample of multicrop farms in the province of Córdoba. The stochastic frontier model is applied to calculate the latter, the former being achieved as a compossed index that collects the technological level of the studied farms in the three following aspects: management, machinery and agricultural techniques. We have found that there is no relation between efficiency and innovation, but there are two factors associated with both indexes. They are the size of the farm and being a membership of an agrarian association. Therefore we conclude that, as far as this zone is concerned, efficiency and innovation may be considered as complementary. For this reason, each provides us a valiable means of acquiring a better knowledge of the productive structure of the zone.

Suggested Citation

  • Dios Palomares, R. & Martínez Paz, J.M. & Vicario Modroño, V., 2003. "Eficiencia versus innovación en explotaciones agrarias / Efficiency versus innovation in multicrop farms," Estudios de Economía Aplicada, Estudios de Economía Aplicada, vol. 21, pages 485-501, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:lrk:eeaart:21_3_5

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Birkhaeuser, Dean & Evenson, Robert E & Feder, Gershon, 1991. "The Economic Impact of Agricultural Extension: A Review," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(3), pages 607-650, April.
    2. Timothy G. Conley & Christopher R. Udry, 2010. "Learning about a New Technology: Pineapple in Ghana," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 35-69, March.
    3. Feder, Gershon & Just, Richard E & Zilberman, David, 1985. "Adoption of Agricultural Innovations in Developing Countries: A Survey," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(2), pages 255-298, January.
    4. 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.
    5. Catherine Beaudry & Stefano Breschi, 2000. "Does 'Clustering' really help firms'innovative activities?," KITeS Working Papers 111, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Jul 2000.
    6. Kodde, David A & Palm, Franz C, 1986. "Wald Criteria for Jointly Testing Equality and Inequality Restriction s," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(5), pages 1243-1248, September.
    7. Battese, George E. & Corra, Greg S., 1977. "Estimation Of A Production Frontier Model: With Application To The Pastoral Zone Of Eastern Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 21(3), pages 1-11, December.
    8. Conley, Timothy G. & Udry, Christopher R., 2000. "Learning About a New Technology: Pineapple In Ghana," Center Discussion Papers 28400, Yale University, Economic Growth Center.
    9. Battese, G E & Coelli, T J, 1995. "A Model for Technical Inefficiency Effects in a Stochastic Frontier Production Function for Panel Data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 325-332.
    10. Aigner, Dennis & Lovell, C. A. Knox & Schmidt, Peter, 1977. "Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 21-37, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Isidoro Guzmán Raja & Narciso Arcas Lario & Domingo García Pérez de Lema, 2006. "La eficiencia técnica como medida de rendimiento de las cooperativas agrarias," CIRIEC-España, revista de economía pública, social y cooperativa, CIRIEC-España, issue 55, pages 289-311, August.
    2. Calatrava, Javier & Franco Martínez, Juan A., 2011. "Difusión de prácticas de lucha contra la erosión en el olivar de la cuenca del Alto Genil Granadino/Diffusion of Soil Erosion Control Practices in the Olive Orchards of the Alto Genil Basin (Granada, ," Estudios de Economía Aplicada, Estudios de Economía Aplicada, vol. 29, pages 359-384, Abril.

    More about this item


    Multicrop Agriculture; Technique efficiency; innovation;

    JEL classification:

    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets


    Access and download statistics


    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:lrk:eeaart:21_3_5. 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: (Beatriz Rodríguez Prado). General contact details of provider: .

    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.