IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea14/170454.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Decomposing the inverse land size-yield relationship

Author

Listed:
  • Pieralli, Simone

Abstract

Faster agricultural development requires understanding whether the inverse land size-yield relationship exists or not. To verify the presence of this relationship, this study decomposes a yield index into separate components attributable to (1) efficiency, (2) soil quality, (3) land size, (4) variable inputs, (5) capital inputs, and (6) outputs. Nonparametric productivity accounting methods are used to decompose the inverse land size-yield relationship in a multi-output representation of the technology without specific assumptions on returns to scale. A strongly significant inverse (positively convex) land size-yield relationship is present in the Kenyan data, but vanishes in favor of a linear inverse relationship when accounting for the effect of outputs' diversification.

Suggested Citation

  • Pieralli, Simone, 2014. "Decomposing the inverse land size-yield relationship," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170454, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea14:170454
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.170454
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/170454/files/georgikas.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. D. W. Jorgenson & Z. Griliches, 1967. "The Explanation of Productivity Change," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(3), pages 249-283.
    2. Barrett, Christopher B. & Bellemare, Marc F. & Hou, Janet Y., 2010. "Reconsidering Conventional Explanations of the Inverse Productivity-Size Relationship," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 88-97, January.
    3. Subodh Kumar & R. Robert Russell, 2002. "Technological Change, Technological Catch-up, and Capital Deepening: Relative Contributions to Growth and Convergence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(3), pages 527-548, June.
    4. Carletto, Calogero & Savastano, Sara & Zezza, Alberto, 2013. "Fact or artifact: The impact of measurement errors on the farm size–productivity relationship," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 254-261.
    5. de Boer, Paul, 2009. "Generalized Fisher index or Siegel-Shapley decomposition?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 810-814, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:aaea14:170454. 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/aaeaaea.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.