IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/applec/v55y2023i33p3915-3930.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Winners and losers of the productivity gains of the American agricultural sector

Author

Listed:
  • Humberto Brea-Solís
  • Emili Grifell-Tatjé

Abstract

The aim of this study is twofold. First, to identify who benefited from the productivity growth of the American agricultural sector from 1960 to 2004. Second, to measure the relationship between changes in productivity, its distribution, and the evolution of variables linked with climate change. This study shifts the attention from the drivers of productivity change to how it is distributed. Our results show that the stakeholders of the US agricultural sector do not benefit equally from productivity growth. Moreover, it provides empirical evidence that supports the treadmill theory about how technological innovation pushes some farmers out of the market. Concerning the relationship between extreme weather variables (precipitation, temperature, and droughts) and the distribution of productivity change, this depends on the geographical situation of the state. Some stakeholders might be the winners of anomalous climate events in some regions of the US. These findings suggest that reaching a consensus on initiatives to stop climate change will be extremely difficult.

Suggested Citation

  • Humberto Brea-Solís & Emili Grifell-Tatjé, 2023. "Winners and losers of the productivity gains of the American agricultural sector," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(33), pages 3915-3930, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:55:y:2023:i:33:p:3915-3930
    DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2022.2120179
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00036846.2022.2120179
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00036846.2022.2120179?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    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:taf:applec:v:55:y:2023:i:33:p:3915-3930. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20 .

    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.