IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Land Fragmentation and Market Integration - Heterogeneous Technologies in Kosovo


  • Sauer, Johannes
  • Davidova, Sophia
  • Gorton, Matthew


This paper empirically measures the prevalence of heterogeneous technologies in a sample of small-scale agricultural producers as an answer to structural conditions and market risks. Such risks are closely linked to the effects of land fragmentation and the degree of market integration. We use the empirical case of Kosovo as a transition country to investigate the efficiency effects of land fragmentation by simultaneously considering the effects of market integration. Different to previous studies, we assume that land fragmentation and market integration lead to the prevalence of heterogeneous technologies allowing farm households to respond more efficiently to exogenous price and policy shocks given their fragmentation and subsistence situation. The empirical work links the latent class frontier method to the estimation of a directional output distance function. We estimate beside primal technology measures also dual Morishima type elasticities of substitution investigating changes in production decisions based on relative shadow price changes.

Suggested Citation

  • Sauer, Johannes & Davidova, Sophia & Gorton, Matthew, 2012. "Land Fragmentation and Market Integration - Heterogeneous Technologies in Kosovo," 52nd Annual Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, September 26-28, 2012 137385, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:gewi12:137385

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Jean-Paul Chavas & Ragan Petrie & Michael Roth, 2005. "Farm Household Production Efficiency: Evidence from The Gambia," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(1), pages 160-179.
    2. Kelvin Balcombe & Iain Fraser & Jae Kim, 2006. "Estimating technical efficiency of Australian dairy farms using alternative frontier methodologies," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(19), pages 2221-2236.
    3. Chen, Zhuo & Huffman, Wallace E. & Rozelle, Scott, 2009. "Farm technology and technical efficiency: Evidence from four regions in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 153-161, June.
    4. Johannes Sauer & Sophia Davidova & Laure Latruffe, 2012. "Determinants of Smallholders’ Decisions to Leave Land Fallow: The Case of Kosovo," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(1), pages 119-141, February.
    5. Subal Kumbhakar & Efthymios Tsionas & Timo Sipiläinen, 2009. "Joint estimation of technology choice and technical efficiency: an application to organic and conventional dairy farming," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 151-161, June.
    6. Alvarez, Antonio & del Corral, Julio & Tauer, Loren W., 2012. "Modeling Unobserved Heterogeneity in New York Dairy Farms: One-Stage versus Two-Stage Models," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 41(3), December.
    7. Blarel, Benoit, et al, 1992. "The Economics of Farm Fragmentation: Evidence from Ghana and Rwanda," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 6(2), pages 233-254, May.
    8. David Stern, 2011. "Elasticities of substitution and complementarity," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 79-89, August.
    9. Fare, Rolf & Grosskopf, Shawna & Noh, Dong-Woon & Weber, William, 2005. "Characteristics of a polluting technology: theory and practice," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 469-492, June.
    10. Barrett, Christopher B., 2008. "Smallholder market participation: Concepts and evidence from eastern and southern Africa," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 299-317, August.
    11. Van Hung, Pham & MacAulay, T. Gordon & Marsh, Sally P., 2007. "The economics of land fragmentation in the north of Vietnam," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 51(2), June.
    12. Chambers, Robert G. & Chung, Yangho & Fare, Rolf, 1996. "Benefit and Distance Functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 407-419, August.
    13. 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.
    14. Greene, William, 2005. "Reconsidering heterogeneity in panel data estimators of the stochastic frontier model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 269-303, June.
    15. Sophia Davidova, 2011. "Semi‐Subsistence Farming: An Elusive Concept Posing Thorny Policy Questions," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(3), pages 503-524, September.
    16. Laure Latruffe & Kelvin Balcombe & Sophia Davidova & Katarzyna Zawalinska, 2004. "Determinants of technical efficiency of crop and livestock farms in Poland," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(12), pages 1255-1263.
    17. del Corral, J. & Pérez, J.A. & Roibás, D., 2010. "The impact of land fragmentation on milk production," Efficiency Series Papers 2010/02, University of Oviedo, Department of Economics, Oviedo Efficiency Group (OEG).
    18. Wu, Ziping & Liu, Minquan & Davis, John, 2005. "Land consolidation and productivity in Chinese household crop production," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 28-49.
    19. Luis Orea & Subal C. Kumbhakar, 2004. "Efficiency measurement using a latent class stochastic frontier model," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 169-183, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Land fragmentation; market integration; farm households; Landfragmentierung; Marktintegration; Farmhaushalte; Kosovo; Land Economics/Use; O13; Q12;

    JEL classification:

    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    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:ags:gewi12:137385. 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: .

    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.