Capital use intensity and productivity biases
Tóm tắt
Measures of productivity growth are often pro-cyclical. This paper focuses on measurement errors in capital inputs, associated with unobserved variations in capital utilization rates, as an explanation for the existence of pro-cyclical patterns in measures of productivity. Recently constructed national and state-specific indexes of inputs, outputs, and productivity in U.S. agriculture for 1949–2002 are used to estimate production functions that include proxy variables for changes in the utilization of durable inputs. The proxy variables include an index of farmers’ terms of trade and an index of local seasonal growing conditions. We find that utilization responses by farmers are significant and bias measures of productivity growth in a pro-cyclical pattern. We quantify the bias, adjust the measures of productivity for the estimated utilization responses, and compare the adjusted and conventional measures.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Acquaye AK, Alston JM, Pardey PG (2003) Post-war productivity patterns in U.S. Agriculture: influences of aggregation procedures in a state-level analysis. Am J Agri Econ 85:59–80
Ball VE, Butault JP, Nehring R (2001) U.S. Agriculture, 1960–1996: A multilateral comparison of total factor productivity. USDA technical bulletin number 1895
Basu S (1996) Procyclical productivity: increasing returns or cyclical utilization? Q J Econ 111:719–751
Basu S, Fernald J (2000) Why is productivity procyclical? Why do we care? NBER working paper number 7940. National Bureau of Economic Research, Washington
Basu S, Kimball MS (1997) Cyclical productivity with unobservable input variation NBER working paper number 5915. National Bureau of Economic Research, Washington
Baxter M, Farr D (2001) The effects of variable capital utilization on the measurement and properties of sectoral productivity: some underlying international evidence. NBER working paper 8475. National Bureau of Economic Research, Washington
Baxter M, Farr D (2005) Variable capital utilization and international business cycles. J Int Econ 65:335–347
Berndt ER, Fuss MA (1986a) Editors’ introduction. J Econ 33:1–5
Berndt ER, Fuss MA (1986b) Productivity measurement with adjustments for variations in capacity utilization and other forms of temporary equilibrium. J Econ 33:7–29
Capalbo SM, Denny M (1986) Testing long-run productivity models for the Canadian and U.S. agricultural sectors. Am J Agri Econ 68:615–625
Celikko P, Stefanou SE (1999) Measuring the impact of price-induced innovation on technological progress: application to U.S. Food processing and distribution sector. J Prod Anal 12:135–151
Craig BJ, Pardey PG (1996) Productivity measurement in the presence of quality change. Am J Agri Econ 78:1349–1354
Esposti R (2000) Stochastic technical change and procyclical TFP the case of Italian agriculture. J Prod Anal 14:119–141
Foss MF (1963) The utilization of capital equipment: postwar compared with prewar. Survey of current business. Bureau of Census, Washington, pp 8–16
Fousekis P, Papakonstantinou A (1997) Economic capacity utilization and productivity growth in Greek agriculture. J Agric Econ 48:38–51
Fulginiti LE, Perrin RK (1993) Prices and productivity in agriculture. The review of economics and statistics 75:471–482
Griliches Z, Jorgenson DW (1967) The explanation of productivity change. Rev Econ Stud 34:249–283
Hayami Y, Ruttan VW (1986) Agricultural productivity differences among countries. Am Econ Rev 60:895–911
Helliwell JF, Chung A (1986) Aggregate output with variable rates of utilization of employed factors. J Econ 33:285–310
Hicks J (1932) The theory of wages. Macmillan 1963 edition, London. (Original printing 1932)
Jin S, Rozelle S, Aston JM, Huang J (2005) Economies of scale and scope and the economic efficiency of China’s agricultural research system. Int Econ Rev 46:1033–1057
Jorgenson DW (1990) Productivity and economic growth. In: Berndt E, Triplett J (eds) Fifty years of economic measurement: the jubilee conference on research in income and wealth. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 19–118
Luh YH, Stefanou SE (1991) Productivity growth in U.S. agriculture under dynamic adjustment. Am J Agri Econ 73:1116–1125
Morrison CJ (1985) On the economic interpretation and measurement of optimal capacity utilization with anticipatory expectations. Rev Econ Stud 52:295–310
Morrison CJ (1986) Productivity measurement with non-static expectations and varying capacity utilization: an integrated approach. J Econ 33:51–74
Moschini G (2001) Production risk and estimation of ex-ante cost functions. J Econ 100:357–380
Mundlak Y (1988) Endogenous technology and the measurement of productivity. In: Capalbo SM, Antle JM (eds) Agricultural productivity: measurement and explanation. Resources for the Future, Washington, pp 316–331
Mundlak Y (1996) Production function estimation: reviving the primal. Econometrica 64:431–438
Mundlak Y (2000) Agriculture and economic growth: theory and measurement. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Mundlak Y, Larson D, Butzer R (1997) The determinants of agricultural production: a cross-country analysis. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 1827, Washington
Pardey PG, Andersen MA, Craig BJ, Alston JM (2010) The InSTePP accounts: U.S. Agricultural input, output, and productivity series primary data documentation, 1949–2002 (Version 4). University of Minnesota: International Science and Technology Practice and Policy Center, Minnesota
Paris Q, Caputo M (1995) The rhetoric of duality. J Agri Res Econ 20:195–214
Pope RD, Just RE (1996) Empirical implementation of ex ante cost functions. J Econ 72:231–249
Slade ME (1986) Total-factor-productivity measurement when equilibrium is temporary: a Monte Carlo assessment. J Econ 33:75–95
Wen Y (2004) What does it take to explain procyclical productivity? Contrib Macroecon 4:1–38