Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:43:58.971Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Farmer Efficiency and Technology Use with Age

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Nazibrola Lordkipanidze  and
Loren W. Tauer
Nazibrola Lordkipanidze
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural, Resource, and Managerial Economics at Cornell University
Loren W. Tauer
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural, Resource, and Managerial Economics at Cornell University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Productivity of U.S. farmers by age is measured by non-parametric programming using 1992 Census data, decomposed into efficiency and technology Malmquist index components.

Productivity increases slightly with age and then decreases. In most states productivity variations are from technology use rather than efficiency differences.

Type
Articles
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 29 , Issue 1 , April 2000 , pp. 24 - 31
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Caves, D.W., Christensen, L.R. and Diewert, W.E. 1982. “The Economic Theory of Index Numbers and the Measurement of Input, Output and Productivity.” Econometrica 50: 1393–1414.Google Scholar
Comes, R. 1992. Duality and Modern Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., and Lovell, C.A.K. 1994. Production Frontiers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., Norris, M., and Zhang, Z. 1994. “Productivity Growth, Technical Progress, and Efficiency Change in Industrialized Countries.” American Economic Review 84: 66–83.Google Scholar
Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., Yaisawarng, S., Li, S.K. and Wang, Z. 1990. “Productivity Growth in Illinois Electric Utilities.” Resources and Energy 12: 383–98.Google Scholar
Färe, R. and Mitchell, T.M. 1987. “On Shephard's Attainability Axiom.” Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 143: 343–50.Google Scholar
Fulginiti, L.E. and Perrin, R.K. 1997. “LDC Agriculture: Nonparametric Malmquist Productivity Indexes.” J. Development Economics 53: 373–90.Google Scholar
Hjalmarsson, L. and Veiderpass, A. 1992. “Productivity in Swedish Electricity Retail Distribution.” Scandinavian Journal of Economics 94: 193–205. Supplement.Google Scholar
Malmquist, S. 1953. “Index Numbers and Indifference Curves.” Trabajos de Estatistic 4: 209–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, C.W. and Weyman-Jones, T. 1996. “Malmquist Indices of Productivity Change in the UK Gas Industry before and after Privatization.” Applied Economics 28: 29–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ray, S.C. and Mukherjee, K. 1996. “Decomposition of the Fisher Ideal Index of Productivity: A Non-Parametric Dual Analysis of U.S. Airlines Data.” The Economic Journal 106: 1659–678.Google Scholar
Tauer, L.W. 1984. “Productivity of Farmers at Various Ages.” North Central Journal of Agricultural Economics 6: 81–87.Google Scholar
Tauer, L.W. 1995. “Age and Farmer Productivity.” Review of Agricultural Economics 17: 63–69.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic and Statistics Administration, Bureau of the Census. 1992 Census of Agriculture.Google Scholar