IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Induced Innovation in U.S. Agriculture: Time-series, Direct Econometric, and Nonparametric Tests

  • Yucan Liu
  • C. Richard Shumway

    ()

    (School of Economic Sciences, Washington State University)

The hypothesis of induced innovation is tested for U.S. agriculture using a high-quality state-level panel data set and three disparate testing techniques – time series, direct econometric, and nonparametric. We find little support for the hypothesis. That conclusion is robust across testing techniques. However, as with all empirical tests of this hypothesis conducted to date, ours focus only on the demand side of the hypothesis. The hypothesis could have been rejected simply because the marginal cost of developing and implementing input-saving technologies for the relatively expensive inputs is greater than for the relatively cheap inputs.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://faculty.ses.wsu.edu/WorkingPapers/Shumway/IIH_20080310.pdf
File Function: First version, 2008
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by School of Economic Sciences, Washington State University in its series Working Papers with number 2008-3.

as
in new window

Length: 42 pages
Date of creation: May 2008
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wsu:wpaper:shumway-1
Contact details of provider: Postal: PO Box 646210, Pullman, WA 99164-646210
Phone: 509-335-5555
Fax: 509-335-1173
Web page: http://faculty.ses.wsu.edu/

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. V. Eldon Ball & Charles Hallahan & Richard Nehring, 2004. "Convergence of Productivity: An Analysis of the Catch-up Hypothesis within a Panel of States," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(5), pages 1315-1321.
  2. Qinghua Liu & C. Richard Shumway, 2006. "Geographic aggregation and induced innovation in American agriculture," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(6), pages 671-682.
  3. Funk, Peter, 2002. "Induced Innovation Revisited," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 69(273), pages 155-71, February.
  4. 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 1115-41, Sept.-Oct.
  5. Kaddour Hadri, 1999. "Testing For Stationarity In Heterogeneous Panel Data," Research Papers 1999_04, University of Liverpool Management School.
  6. Binswanger, Hans P., 1973. "The Measurement Of Technical Change Biases With Many Factors Of Production," Staff Papers 14205, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
  7. Peter Pedroni, 1999. "Critical Values for Cointegration Tests in Heterogeneous Panels with Multiple Regressors," Department of Economics Working Papers 2000-02, Department of Economics, Williams College.
  8. Yucan Liu & C. Richard Shumway, 2008. "Induced Innovation in U.S. Agriculture: Time-series, Direct Econometric, and Nonparametric Tests," Working Papers 2008-3, School of Economic Sciences, Washington State University.
  9. Granger, C. W. J., 1980. "Long memory relationships and the aggregation of dynamic models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 227-238, October.
  10. Robert Evenson & Daniel Johnson, 1997. "Introduction: Invention Input-Output Analysis," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 149-160.
  11. Thirtle, C. & Townsend, R. & Zyl, J. van, 1998. "Testing the induced innovation hypothesis: an error correction model of South African agriculture," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 19(1-2), September.
  12. Olmstead, Alan L & Rhode, Paul, 1993. "Induced Innovation in American Agriculture: A Reconsideration," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(1), pages 100-118, February.
  13. Nair-Reichert, Usha & Weinhold, Diana, 2001. " Causality Tests for Cross-Country Panels: A New Look at FDI and Economic Growth in Developing Countries," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 63(2), pages 153-71, May.
  14. Jean-Paul Chavas & Michael Aliber & Thomas L. Cox, 2000. "An Analysis Of The Source And Nature Of Technical Change: The Case Of U.S. Agriculture," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(3), pages 482-492, August.
  15. 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 523-44, June.
  16. Thirtle, C. & Townsend, R. & van Zyl, J., 1998. "Testing the induced innovation hypothesis: an error correction model of South African agriculture," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 19(1-2), pages 145-157, September.
  17. V. Eldon Ball & Jean-Christophe Bureau & Richard Nehring & Agapi Somwaru, 1997. "Agricultural Productivity Revisited," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1045-1063.
  18. Fernando S. Machado, 1995. "Testing The Induced Innovation Hypothesis Using Cointegration Analysis," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3), pages 349-360.
  19. Isabelle Armanville & Peter Funk, 2003. "Induced innovation: an empirical test," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(15), pages 1627-1647.
  20. Colin G. Thirtle & David E. Schimmelpfennig & Robert E Townsend, 2002. "Induced Innovation in United States Agriculture, 1880–1990: Time Series Tests and an Error Correction Model," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(3), pages 598-614.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wsu:wpaper:shumway-1. 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: (Danielle Engelhardt)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.