IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae18/277318.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How did technical change affect land use in Brazilian agriculture?

Author

Listed:
  • Queiroz, P.
  • Silva, F.D.F.
  • Fulginiti, L.

Abstract

How did technical change affect land use in Brazilian agriculture? We use data from the last two Agricultural Censuses of 1995/1996 and 2006 to answer this question for five different regions. We focus on the estimation of the Hicksian bias induced by technical change over this period and found that technical change was, in general, land-using. In the Southeast region, we found labor-saving behavior. Both results can be interpreted in light of the induced innovation hypothesis under Acemoglu s approach that allows testing when prices are not available. Acknowledgement :

Suggested Citation

  • Queiroz, P. & Silva, F.D.F. & Fulginiti, L., 2018. "How did technical change affect land use in Brazilian agriculture?," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277318, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae18:277318
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.277318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/277318/files/1650.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.277318?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fulginiti, Lilyan E & Perrin, Richard K, 1993. "Prices and Productivity in Agriculture," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 75(3), pages 471-482, August.
    2. Krüger, Jens & Hampf, Benjamin, 2017. "Estimating the Bias in Technical Change: A Nonparametric Approach," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 92489, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    3. Binswanger, Hans P, 1974. "The Measurement of Technical Change Biases with Many Factors of Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 64(6), pages 964-976, December.
    4. Daron Acemoglu, 2002. "Directed Technical Change," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 69(4), pages 781-809.
    5. Paula Bustos & Bruno Caprettini & Jacopo Ponticelli, 2016. "Agricultural Productivity and Structural Transformation: Evidence from Brazil," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(6), pages 1320-1365, June.
    6. Hampf, Benjamin & Krüger, Jens J., 2017. "Estimating the bias in technical change: A nonparametric approach," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 88-91.
    7. Kawagoe, Toshihiko & Otsuka, Keijiro & Hayami, Yujiro, 1986. "Induced Bias of Technical Change in Agriculture: The United States and Japan, 1880-1980," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 523-544, June.
    8. Kennedy, Charles, 1973. "A Generalisation of the Theory of Induced Bias in Technical Progress," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 83(329), pages 48-57, March.
    9. Federico José Trindade & Lilyan Estela Fulginiti, 2015. "Is there a slowdown in agricultural productivity growth in South America?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 46(S1), pages 69-81, November.
    10. Nicholas E. Rada & Steven T. Buccola, 2012. "Agricultural policy and productivity: evidence from Brazilian censuses," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 43(4), pages 355-367, July.
    11. Martha, Geraldo B. & Alves, Eliseu & Contini, Elisio, 2012. "Land-saving approaches and beef production growth in Brazil," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 173-177.
    12. Lilyan E. Fulginiti, 2010. "Estimating Griliches' k-Shifts," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(1), pages 86-101.
    13. Cassiano Bragagnolo & Humberto F. S. Spolador & Geraldo Sant’Ana de Camargo Barros, 2010. "Regional Brazilian Agriculture TFP Analysis: A Stochastic Frontier Analysis Approach," Economia, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics], vol. 11(4), pages 217-242.
    14. Joaquim Bento de Souza Ferreira Filho & Luis Ribera & Mark Horridge, 2015. "Deforestation Control and Agricultural Supply in Brazil," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 97(2), pages 589-601.
    15. David K. Lambert & J.S. Shonkwiler, 1995. "Factor Bias under Stochastic Technical Change," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(3), pages 578-590.
    16. Hayami, Yujiro & Ruttan, V W, 1970. "Factor Prices and Technical Change in Agricultural Development: The United States and Japan, 1880-1960," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(5), pages 1115-1141, Sept.-Oct.
    17. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Queiroz, Pedro & Fulginiti, Lilyan & Perrin, Richard, 2021. "Induced Innovation in South American Agriculture: Deforestation and Directed Technical Change," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315416, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Liu, Yucan & Shumway, C. Richard, 2009. "Induced innovation and marginal cost of new technology," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 106-109, October.
    3. Pardey, Philip G. & Alston, Julian M. & Ruttan, Vernon W., 2010. "The Economics of Innovation and Technical Change in Agriculture," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 939-984, Elsevier.
    4. Liu, Qinghua & Shumway, C. Richard, 2003. "Induced Innovation Tests On Western American Agriculture: A Cointegration Analysis," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22237, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    5. Orachos Napasintuwong Artachinda, 2011. "Modeling Directions of Technical Change in Agricultural Sector," Working Papers 201101, Kasetsart University, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    6. Yucan Liu & C. Richard Shumway, 2009. "Induced Innovation in U.S. Agriculture: Time-series, Direct Econometric, and Nonparametric Tests," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(1), pages 224-236.
    7. Felipe Figueiredo Silva & Lilyan E. Fulginiti & Richard K. Perrin & Marcelo Jose Braga, 2022. "The increasing opportunity cost of sequestering CO2 in the Brazilian Amazon forest," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 62(2), pages 439-460, February.
    8. Silva, F.D.F. & Fulginiti, L. & Perrin, R., 2018. "Agricultural productivity and forest preservation in the Brazilian Amazon," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277167, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Koiry, Subrata & Huang, Wei, 2023. "Do ecological protection approaches affect total factor productivity change of cropland production in Sweden?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    10. Alston, Julian M. & Chalfant, James A. & Pardey, Philip G., 1993. "Structural Adjustment In Oecd Agriculture: Government Policies And Technical Change," Working Papers 14473, University of Minnesota, Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy.
    11. Rainer Klump & César Miralles Cabrera, 2008. "Biased Technological Change in Agriculture: The Hayami-Ruttan Hypothesis Revisited," DEGIT Conference Papers c013_016, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    12. Li, George Yunxiong & Ascani, Andrea & Iammarino, Simona, 2024. "The material basis of modern technologies. A case study on rare metals," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(1).
    13. Fernando S. Machado, 1995. "Testing The Induced Innovation Hypothesis Using Cointegration Analysis," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3), pages 349-360, September.
    14. F. Shirani Bidabadi & M. Hashemitabar, 2009. "The induced innovation test (co-integration analysis) of Iranian agriculture," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 55(3), pages 126-133.
    15. Benson, Aaron & Shumway, C. Richard, 2005. "Induced Innovation or a Paradox of Environmental Regulation?," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19450, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    16. Nathan P. Hendricks & Aaron Smith & Nelson B. Villoria & Matthieu Stigler, 2023. "The effects of agricultural policy on supply and productivity: Evidence from differential changes in distortions," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 54(1), pages 44-61, January.
    17. Dewitte, Ruben & Dumont, Michel & Merlevede, Bruno & Rayp, Glenn & Verschelde, Marijn, 2020. "Firm-Heterogeneous Biased Technological Change: A nonparametric approach under endogeneity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 283(3), pages 1172-1182.
    18. Shumway, C. Richard & Liu, Yucan, 2006. "Induced Innovation in the Agricultural Sector: Evidence From a State Panel," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21089, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. Juan Qian & Ruibing Ji, 2022. "Impact of Energy-Biased Technological Progress on Inclusive Green Growth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-24, December.
    20. Noel Uri, 2003. "The Effect of Incentive Regulation in Telecommunications in the United States," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 169-191, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Land Economics/Use;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:iaae18:277318. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.html .

    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.