IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/crt/wpaper/0409.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Explaining Output Growth with a Heteroscedastic Non-neutral Production Frontier: The Case of Sheep Farms in Greece

Author

Listed:
  • Giannis Karagiannis
  • Vangelis Tzouvelekas

    () (Department of Economics, University of Crete, Greece)

Abstract

This paper extends the primal decomposition of total factor productivity (TFP) changes to the case of non-neutral production frontiers. Output growth is decomposed into input growth (size effect), changes in technical efficiency, technical change, and the effect of returns to scale. Within the proposed formulation, however, technical efficiency changes are attributed not only to autonomous changes (i.e. passage of time) but also to changes in input use and in farm-specific characteristics. A heteroscedastic non-neutral production frontier is estimated for an unbalanced panel of Greek sheep farms for the period 1989--1992. Technical efficiency change is found to be the main source of TFP growth. The farm-specific characteristics were the most important determinant of technical efficiency changes. Copyright 2005, Oxford University Press.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Giannis Karagiannis & Vangelis Tzouvelekas, 2004. "Explaining Output Growth with a Heteroscedastic Non-neutral Production Frontier: The Case of Sheep Farms in Greece," Working Papers 0409, University of Crete, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:crt:wpaper:0409
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://economics.soc.uoc.gr/wpa/docs/0409.pdf
    File Function: First version
    Download Restriction: No

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Konstantinos Giannakas & Kien Tran & Vangelis Tzouvelekas, 2000. "Efficiency, technological change and output growth in Greek olive growing farms: a Box-Cox approach," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(7), pages 909-916.
    2. Schmidt, Peter & Lin, Tsai-Fen, 1984. "Simple tests of alternative specifications in stochastic frontier models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 349-361, March.
    3. Munir Ahmad & Boris E. Bravo-Ureta, 1995. "An Econometric Decomposition of Dairy Output Growth," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(4), pages 914-921.
    4. Karagiannis, Giannis & Tzouvelekas, Vangelis, 2001. "Self-Dual Stochastic Production Frontiers and Decomposition of Output Growth: The Case of Olive-Growing Farms in Greece," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(02), pages 168-178, October.
    5. Konstantinos Giannakas & Richard Schoney & Vangelis Tzouvelekas, 2001. "Technical Efficiency, Technological Change and Output Growth of Wheat Farms in Saskatchewan," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 49(2), pages 135-152, July.
    6. Loren Tauer, 1995. "Age and Farmer Productivity," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 17(1), pages 63-69.
    7. Reifschneider, David & Stevenson, Rodney, 1991. "Systematic Departures from the Frontier: A Framework for the Analysis of Firm Inefficiency," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 32(3), pages 715-723, August.
    8. Kumbhakar, Subal C & Ghosh, Soumendra & McGuckin, J Thomas, 1991. "A Generalized Production Frontier Approach for Estimating Determinants of Inefficiency in U.S. Dairy Farms," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 9(3), pages 279-286, July.
    9. Jensen, Michael C, 1986. "Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(2), pages 323-329, May.
    10. Caudill, Steven B & Ford, Jon M & Gropper, Daniel M, 1995. "Frontier Estimation and Firm-Specific Inefficiency Measures in the Presence of Heteroscedasticity," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 13(1), pages 105-111, January.
    11. Kumbhakar, Subal C., 1990. "Production frontiers, panel data, and time-varying technical inefficiency," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1-2), pages 201-211.
    12. Hung-Jen Wang, 2002. "Heteroscedasticity and Non-Monotonic Efficiency Effects of a Stochastic Frontier Model," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 241-253, November.
    13. Hung-jen Wang & Peter Schmidt, 2002. "One-Step and Two-Step Estimation of the Effects of Exogenous Variables on Technical Efficiency Levels," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 129-144, September.
    14. Paul W. Bauer, 1988. "Decomposing TFP growth in the presence of cost inefficiency, nonconstant returns to scale, and technological progress," Working Paper 8813, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
    15. Cornwell, Christopher & Schmidt, Peter & Sickles, Robin C., 1990. "Production frontiers with cross-sectional and time-series variation in efficiency levels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1-2), pages 185-200.
    16. K.P. Kalirajan & M.B. Obwona & S. Zhao, 1996. "A Decomposition of Total Factor Productivity Growth: The Case of Chinese Agricultural Growth before and after Reforms," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(2), pages 331-338.
    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.
    18. Welch, F, 1970. "Education in Production," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(1), pages 35-59, Jan.-Feb..
    19. 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.
    20. W, Y, 1995. "Productivity Growth, Technological Progress, and Technical Efficiency Change in China: A Three-Sector Analysis1," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 207-229, October.
    21. Christopoulos, Dimitris K. & Lolos, Sarantis E. G. & Tsionas, Efthymios G., 2002. "Efficiency of the Greek banking system in view of the EMU: a heteroscedastic stochastic frontier approach," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 24(9), pages 813-829, December.
    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. Giannis Karagiannis, 2014. "Modeling issues in applied efficiency analysis: agriculture," Economics and Business Letters, Oviedo University Press, vol. 3(1), pages 12-18.
    2. Roberto Furesi & Fabio Madau & Pietro Pulina, 2013. "Technical efficiency in the sheep dairy industry: an application on the Sardinian (Italy) sector," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 1(1), pages 1-11, December.
    3. Madau, Fabio A., 2011. "Parametric Estimation of Technical and Scale Efficiencies in Italian Citrus Farming," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 12(1), January.
    4. Madau, Fabio A., 2015. "Technical and Scale Efficiency in the Italian Citrus Farming: Comparison between SFA and DEA Approaches," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 16(2), June.
    5. Minviel, Jean Joseph & Latruffe, Laure, 2014. "Meta-regression analysis of the impact of agricultural subsidies on farm technical efficiency," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182767, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Kellermann, Magnus A., 2015. "Total Factor Productivity Decomposition and Unobserved Heterogeneity in Stochastic Frontier Models," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 44(1), April.
    7. Dakpo, K & Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffee, Laure, 2015. "Empirical comparison of pollution generating technologies in nonparametric modelling: The case of greenhouse gas emissions in French sheep meat farming," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211557, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Lokina, Razack B., 2008. "Technical Efficiency and the Role of Skipper Skill in Artisanal Lake Victoria Fisheries," Discussion Papers dp-08-13-efd, Resources For the Future.
    9. Madau, Fabio A., 2012. "Technical and scale efficiency in the Italian Citrus Farming: A comparison between Stochastic Frontier Analysis (SFA) and Data Envelopment Analysis(DEA) Models," MPRA Paper 41403, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Serra, Teresa & Zilberman, David & Gil, Jose Maria, 2008. "Farms' technical inefficiencies in the presence of government programs," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(1), March.
    11. repec:oup:erevae:v:45:y:2018:i:1:p:3-25. is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Saldias, Rodrigo & von Cramon-Taubadel, Stephan, 2012. "Access to credit and the determinants of technical inefficiency among specialized small farmers in Chile," DARE Discussion Papers 1211, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    13. K Hervé Dakpo & Philippe Jeanneaux & Laure Latruffe, 2014. "Inclusion of undesirable outputs in production technology modeling:The case of greenhouse gas emissions in French meat sheep farming," Working Papers SMART - LERECO 14-08, INRA UMR SMART-LERECO.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    primal approach; scale effect; TFP decomposition; stochastic frontier model;

    JEL classification:

    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services

    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:crt:wpaper:0409. 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: (Kostis Pigounakis). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/deuchgr.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.