IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaae10/95773.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Estimating Technical Efficiency, Input substitution and complementary effects using Output Distance Function: A study of Cassava production in Nigeria

Author

Listed:
  • Ogundari, Kolawole
  • Brümmer, Bernhard

Abstract

In this study, we estimate an output distance function in the context of a multi-output and multi-input production technology by stochastic frontier techniques. Unbalanced panel data for smallholder farms that grown cassava and other crops in Southwestern Nigeria covering 2006/07 to 2008/09 farming seasons is used for the analysis. The results show that the marginal rate of transformation (MRT) between “other crops” grown by the farmers and cassava produced relative to the output mix is negative and significantly different from zero. We observed also that increasing returns-to-scale as well as technical progress characterized cassava production in the region. Furthermore, fertilizer and pesticides are found to have significant substitution effects on cassava production in the sample. We also found evidence that, in pairs, farm size and pesticides, labour and fertilizer as well as fertilizer and pesticides jointly exhibit significant complementary effects on cassava production in the region. An average technical efficiency level of 72.1 percent which implies approximately a 39 percent inefficiency level is observed from the study. Over the seasons, we found significant evidence of an increasing trend in technical efficiency level of the farms. Extension, credit and, occupation (i.e., full time farming) are indentified as efficiency increasing policy variables from the study.

Suggested Citation

  • Ogundari, Kolawole & Brümmer, Bernhard, 2010. "Estimating Technical Efficiency, Input substitution and complementary effects using Output Distance Function: A study of Cassava production in Nigeria," 2010 AAAE Third Conference/AEASA 48th Conference, September 19-23, 2010, Cape Town, South Africa 95773, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE);Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaae10:95773
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/95773
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Silvio Daidone & Francesco D’Amico, 2009. "Technical efficiency, specialization and ownership form: evidences from a pooling of Italian hospitals," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 203-216, December.
    2. Tim Coelli & Sergio Perelman, 2000. "Technical efficiency of European railways: a distance function approach," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(15), pages 1967-1976.
    3. 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.
    4. O'Donnell, Christopher J. & Coelli, Timothy J., 2005. "A Bayesian approach to imposing curvature on distance functions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 493-523, June.
    5. Brummer, B. & Glauben, T. & Lu, W., 2006. "Policy reform and productivity change in Chinese agriculture: A distance function approach," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 61-79, October.
    6. Catherine J. Morrison Paul & Warren E. Johnston & Gerald A. G. Frengley, 2000. "Efficiency in New Zealand Sheep and Beef Farming: The Impacts of Regulatory Reform," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 82(2), pages 325-337, May.
    7. Maria L. Loureiro, 2009. "Farmers' health and agricultural productivity," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(4), pages 381-388, July.
    8. Subal Kumbhakar & Luis Orea & Ana Rodríguez-Álvarez & Efthymios Tsionas, 2007. "Do we estimate an input or an output distance function? An application of the mixture approach to European railways," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 87-100, April.
    9. Paul, Catherine J. Morrison & Nehring, Richard, 2005. "Product diversification, production systems, and economic performance in U.S. agricultural production," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 525-548, June.
    10. Chambers,Robert G., 1988. "Applied Production Analysis," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521314275.
    11. Caudill, Steven B. & Ford, Jon M., 1993. "Biases in frontier estimation due to heteroscedasticity," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 17-20.
    12. Schmidt, Peter, 1988. "Estimation of a fixed-effect Cobb-Douglas system using panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 361-380, March.
    13. K. Hadri & C. Guermat & J. Whittaker, 2003. "Estimation of technical inefficiency effects using panel data and doubly heteroscedastic stochastic production frontiers," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 203-222, January.
    14. Grosskopf, S. & Margaritis, D. & Valdmanis, V., 1995. "Estimating output substitutability of hospital services: A distance function approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 575-587, February.
    15. Bernhard Brümmer & Thomas Glauben & Geert Thijssen, 2002. "Decomposition of Productivity Growth Using Distance Functions: The Case of Dairy Farms in Three European Countries," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(3), pages 628-644.
    16. Thiam, Abdourahmane & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E. & Rivas, Teodoro E., 2001. "Technical efficiency in developing country agriculture: a meta-analysis," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 25(2-3), September.
    17. Meeusen, Wim & van den Broeck, Julien, 1977. "Efficiency Estimation from Cobb-Douglas Production Functions with Composed Error," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 18(2), pages 435-444, June.
    18. 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.
    19. Mundlak, Yair, 1996. "Production Function Estimation: Reviving the Primal," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(2), pages 431-438, March.
    20. Fare, Rolf, et al, 1993. "Derivation of Shadow Prices for Undesirable Outputs: A Distance Function Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 75(2), pages 374-380, May.
    21. George E. Battese, 1997. "A Note On The Estimation Of Cobb-Douglas Production Functions When Some Explanatory Variables Have Zero Values," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(1-3), pages 250-252.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Nchinda, Valentine P. & Villano, Renato A. & Hadley, David & Morales, Emilio L., 2016. "Performance of smallholder minisett seed yam farm enterprises in Cameroon," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 11(4), December.
    2. Nguyen, Huy, 2014. "Crop diversification, economic performance and household’s behaviours Evidence from Vietnam," MPRA Paper 59090, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. repec:eee:agisys:v:153:y:2017:i:c:p:148-156 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Cullmann, Astrid & Zloczysti, Petra, 2013. "Towards an Efficient Use of R&D – Accounting for Heterogeneity in the OECD," CEPR Discussion Papers 9345, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    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:ags:aaae10:95773. 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). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aaaeaea.html .

    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.