IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genstf/201209010700001348.html

A test for complementarities among multiple technologies that avoids the curse of dimensionality

Author

Listed:
  • Yu, Li
  • Hurley, Terrance
  • Kliebenstein, James
  • Orazem, Peter F.

Abstract

We propose a strategy to identify the complementarity or substitutability among technology bundles. Differences between the observed distribution of technology choices can be subjected to statistical tests. Combinations of technologies that occur with greater frequency than would occur under independence are complementary technologies. Combinations that occur with less frequency are substitute technologies. We use the strategy to evaluate multiple technology adoptions on US hog farms. As the number of bundled technologies increases, they are increasingly likely to be complementary with one another, even if subsets are substitutes when viewed in isolation.

Suggested Citation

  • Yu, Li & Hurley, Terrance & Kliebenstein, James & Orazem, Peter F., 2012. "A test for complementarities among multiple technologies that avoids the curse of dimensionality," ISU General Staff Papers 201209010700001348, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:isu:genstf:201209010700001348
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/84129e47-1423-41d1-8158-fdc1852978d8/content
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kassie, Menale & Jaleta, Moti & Shiferaw, Bekele A. & Mmbando, Frank & Mekuria, Mulugetta, 2012. "Interdependence in Farmer Technology Adoption Decisions in Smallholder Systems: Joint Estimation of Investments in Sustainable Agricultural Practices in Rural Tanzania," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126791, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. D. Thorleuchter & D. Van Den Poel, 2012. "Protecting Research and Technology from Espionage," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 12/824, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    3. Gebremariam, Gebrelibanos & Tesfaye, Wondimagegn, 2018. "The heterogeneous effect of shocks on agricultural innovations adoption: Microeconometric evidence from rural Ethiopia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 154-161.
    4. D. Thorleuchter & D. Van Den Poel, 2013. "Quantitative Cross Impact Analysis with Latent Semantic Indexing," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 13/861, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    5. Tolulope E. Oladimeji & Oyakhilomen Oyinbo & Abubakar A. Hassan & Oseni Yusuf, 2020. "Understanding the Interdependence and Temporal Dynamics of Smallholders’ Adoption of Soil Conservation Practices: Evidence from Nigeria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, March.
    6. D. Thorleuchter & D. Van Den Poel, 2012. "Technology Classification with Latent Semantic Indexing," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 12/814, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    7. Rivaldo A. B. Kpadonou & Bruno Barbier & Tom Owiyo & Fatima Denton & Franck Rutabingwa, 2019. "Manure and adoption of modern seeds in cereal‐based systems in West African drylands: linkages and (non)complementarities," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(1), pages 41-55, February.
    8. An, Henry, 2012. "Complementarities in Production Technologies: An Empirical Analysis of the Dairy Industry," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124653, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Kassie, Menale & Jaleta, Moti & Shiferaw, Bekele & Mmbando, Frank & Muricho, Geoffrey, 2012. "Plot and Household-Level Determinants of Sustainable Agricultural Practices in Rural Tanzania," RFF Working Paper Series dp-12-02-efd, Resources for the Future.
    10. D. Thorleuchter & D. Van Den Poel, 2013. "Semantic Compared Cross Impact Analysis," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 13/862, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    11. Hennessy, David A. & Zhang, Jing & Bai, Na, 2019. "Animal health inputs, endogenous risk, general infrastructure, technology adoption and industrialized animal agriculture," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 355-362.
    12. Jeetendra Prakash Aryal & Dil Bahadur Rahut & Sofina Maharjan & Olaf Erenstein, 2018. "Factors affecting the adoption of multiple climate‐smart agricultural practices in the Indo‐Gangetic Plains of India," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 42(3), pages 141-158, August.
    13. Glawe, Linda & Wagner, Helmut, 2022. "Is schooling the same as learning? – The impact of the learning-adjusted years of schooling on growth in a dynamic panel data framework," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    14. Ndiritu, S. Wagura & Kassie, Menale & Shiferaw, Bekele, 2014. "Are there systematic gender differences in the adoption of sustainable agricultural intensification practices? Evidence from Kenya," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 117-127.
    15. Goundan, Anatole & Sall, Moussa & Henning, Christian H. C. A., 2020. "Modeling interrelated inputs adoption in rainfed agriculture in Senegal," Working Papers of Agricultural Policy WP2020-05, University of Kiel, Department of Agricultural Economics, Chair of Agricultural Policy.
    16. Yang, Qi & Zhu, Yueji & Liu, Ling & Wang, Fang, 2021. "Land tenure stability and adoption intensity of sustainable agricultural practices: Evidence from banana farmers in China," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315254, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Menale Kassie & Jesper Stage & Hailemariam Teklewold & Olaf Erenstein, 2015. "Gendered food security in rural Malawi: why is women’s food security status lower?," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 7(6), pages 1299-1320, December.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • L25 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Performance
    • C12 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Hypothesis Testing: General

    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:isu:genstf:201209010700001348. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Curtis Balmer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deiasus.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.