IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Choice of Index Numbers in Measuring Agricultural Productivity: A Canadian Empirical Case Study


  • Fantino, Alberto A.
  • Weeman, Terrence S.


The measurement of agricultural productivity is important in understanding growth in agriculture and in assessing competitiveness. In this paper, some difficulties related to the empirical measurement of productivity are analyzed using a Canadian case study. The paper focuses in particular on the choice of index number procedures, comparing traditional fixed base weight indexes with flexible or superlative indexes such as the Divisia and Fisher. Indexes of aggregate agricultural output, total farm input use, and total factor productivity are estimated for Canada and for the prairie region of western Canada from 1948 to 1991. Alternative productivity growth rates are reported and compared. The productivity results based on the Tornqvist-Theil approximation to the Divisia index and the chained Fisher index are very similar. Both these flexible weight index procedures are to be preferred over the Laspeyres, the most commonly used approach in Canada.

Suggested Citation

  • Fantino, Alberto A. & Weeman, Terrence S., 1997. "The Choice of Index Numbers in Measuring Agricultural Productivity: A Canadian Empirical Case Study," 1997 Occasional Paper Series No. 7 198061, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaaeo7:198061
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.198061

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Hulten, Charles R, 1973. "Divisia Index Numbers," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(6), pages 1017-1025, November.
    2. Diewert, W. E., 1976. "Exact and superlative index numbers," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 115-145, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Agribusiness; Productivity Analysis;


    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:iaaeo7:198061. 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.