Investigating Yield Variability and Inefficiency in Rice Production: A Case Study in Central China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methodological Framework and Materials
2.1. Integration of Risk into Stochastic Frontier Analysis
2.2. Data Description
2.3. Empirical Model Specification and Estimation
3. Estimation Results and Discussion
4. Conclusions
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Liu, G.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, Q.; Zipporah, M. The response of grain production to changes in quantity and quality of cropland in Yangtze River Delta, China. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2015, 95, 480–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- FAO. The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2008; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- FAO. FAO Statistical Yearbook 2009; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- NBS. China Agriculture Statistical Yearbook; China Agriculture Press: Beijing, China, 2013. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- You, L.Z. A tale of two countries: Spatial and temporal patterns of rice productivity in China and Brazil. China Econ. Rev. 2012, 23, 690–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, S.; Hanjra, M.A.; Mu, J. Water management and crop production for food security in China: A review. Agric. Water Manag. 2009, 96, 349–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tao, F.; Yokozawa, M.; Liu, J.; Zhang, Z. Climate change, land use change, and China’s food security in the twenty-first century: An integrated perspective. Clim. Chang. 2009, 93, 433–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Z.; Yu, Z.; Zhao, J. Theory and application for the promotion of wheat production in China: Past, present and future. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2013, 93, 2339–2350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McBeath, J.; McBeath, J.H. Environmental stressors and food security in China. J. Chin. Political Sci. 2009, 14, 49–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piao, S.; Ciais, P.; Huang, Y.; Shen, Z.; Peng, S.; Li, J.; Zhou, L.; Liu, H.; Ma, Y.; Ding, Y. The impacts of climate change on water resources and agriculture in China. Nature 2010, 467, 43–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhou, D.; An, P.; Pan, Z.; Zhang, F. Arable land use intensity change in China from 1985 to 2005: Evidence from integrated cropping systems and agro economic analysis. J. Agric. Sci. 2012, 150, 179–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, X.; Hockmann, H.; Bai, J. Technical Efficiency and Producers’ Individual Technology: Accounting for Within and Between Regional Farm Heterogeneity. Can. J. Agric. Econ. 2012, 60, 561–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Wang, X.; Glauben, T.; Brümmer, B. The impact of land reallocation on technical efficiency: Evidence from China. Agric. Econ. 2011, 42, 495–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brümmer, B.; Glauben, T.; Lu, W. Policy reform and productivity change in Chinese agriculture: A distance function approach. J. Dev. Econ. 2006, 81, 61–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, M.; Sicular, T. Aging of the labor force and technical efficiency in crop production: Evidence from Liaoning province, China. China Agric. Econ. Rev. 2013, 5, 342–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, L.; Feng, S.; Reidsma, P.; Qu, F.; Heerink, N. Identifying entry points to improve fertilizer use efficiency in Taihu Basin, China. Land Use Policy 2014, 37, 52–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Villano, R.; Fleming, E. Technical Inefficiency and Production Risk in Rice Farming: Evidence from Central Luzon Philippines. Asian Econ. J. 2006, 20, 29–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tveteras, R.; Flaten, O.; Lien, G. Production risk in multi-output industries: Estimates from Norwegian dairy farms. Appl. Econ. 2011, 43, 4403–4414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bokusheva, R.; Hockmann, H. Production risk and technical inefficiency in Russian agriculture. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 2006, 33, 93–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Just, R.E.; Pope, R.D. Stochastic specification of production functions and economic implications. J. Econom. 1978, 7, 67–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumbhakar, S.C. Specification and estimation of production risk, risk preferences and technical efficiency. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2002, 84, 8–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aigner, D.; Lovell, C.A.; Schmidt, P. Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models. J. Econom. 1977, 6, 21–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meeusen, W.; van den Broeck, J. Efficiency estimation from Cobb-Douglas production functions with composed error. Int. Econ. Rev. 1977, 18, 435–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tiedemann, T.; Latacz-Lohmann, U. Production Risk and Technical Efficiency in Organic and Conventional Agriculture—The Case of Arable Farms in Germany. J. Agric. Econ. 2013, 64, 73–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jondrow, J.; Knox Lovell, C.; Materov, I.S.; Schmidt, P. On the estimation of technical inefficiency in the stochastic frontier production function model. J. Econom. 1982, 19, 233–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reinhard, S.; Lovell, C.K.; Thijssen, G. Econometric estimation of technical and environmental efficiency: An application to Dutch dairy farms. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 1999, 81, 44–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karagiannis, G.; Tzouvelekas, V.; Xepapadeas, A. Measuring irrigation water efficiency with a stochastic production frontier. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2003, 26, 57–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gardebroek, C.; Chavez, M.D.; Lansink, A.O. Analysing Production Technology and Risk in Organic and Conventional Dutch Arable Farming using Panel Data. J. Agric. Econ. 2010, 61, 60–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, H.H.; Wen, F.I. Off-farm work, technical efficiency, and rice production risk in Taiwan. Agric. Econ. 2011, 42, 269–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mariano, M.J.; Villano, R.; Fleming, E. Technical Efficiency of Rice Farms in Different Agroclimatic Zones in the Philippines: An Application of a Stochastic Metafrontier Model. Asian Econ. J. 2011, 25, 245–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Külekçi, M. Technical efficiency analysis for oilseed sunflower farms: A case study in Erzurum, Turkey. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2010, 90, 1508–1512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Speelman, S.; D’Haese, M.; Buysse, J.; D’Haese, L. A measure for the efficiency of water use and its determinants, a case study of small-scale irrigation schemes in North-West Province, South Africa. Agric. Syst. 2008, 98, 31–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Watto, M.A.; Mugera, A. Measuring efficiency of cotton cultivation in Pakistan: A restricted production frontier study. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2014, 94, 3038–3045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Watto, M.A.; Mugera, A.W. Efficiency of irrigation water application in sugarcane cultivation in Pakistan. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2015, 95, 1860–1867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Demircan, V.; Binici, T.; Zulauf, C.R. Assessing pure technical efficiency of dairy farms in Turkey. Agric. Econ. 2010, 56, 141–148. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, H.Z.; Chen, T. Impact of farmers’ differentiation on farmland-use efficiency: Evidence from household survey data in rural China. Agric. Econ. 2013, 59, 227–234. [Google Scholar]
- Khan, H.; Ali, F. Measurement of productive efficiency of tomato growers in Peshawar, Pakistan. Agric. Econ. 2013, 59, 381–388. [Google Scholar]
- Chavas, J.-P.; Petrie, R.; Roth, M. Farm household production efficiency: Evidence from the Gambia. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2005, 87, 160–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oseni, G.; Winters, P. Rural nonfarm activities and agricultural crop production in Nigeria. Agric. Econ. 2009, 40, 189–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haji, J. Production efficiency of smallholders’ vegetable-dominated mixed farming system in eastern Ethiopia: A non-parametric approach. J. Afr. Econom. 2007, 16, 1–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogundari, K. Resource-productivity, allocative efficiency and determinants of technical efficiency of rainfed rice farmers: A guide for food security policy in Nigeria. Agric. Econ. 2008, 54, 224–233. [Google Scholar]
Variable | Continuous Variables | Proportion of Farmers with Dummy Variables | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean | S.D. | Min. | Max. | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | |
Output | - | - | - | - | ||||
Rice production (kg) | 4234.09 | 7635.50 | 140.00 | 93,503.00 | - | - | - | - |
Inputs | - | - | - | - | ||||
Cropped area (ha) | 0.56 | 0.90 | 0.02 | 10.20 | - | - | - | - |
Seed (RMB yuan) | 802.18 | 1020.50 | 20.00 | 7874.00 | - | - | - | - |
Fertilizer(NPK) (kg) | 172.65 | 253.18 | 5.00 | 2683.00 | - | - | - | - |
Pesticide (RMB yuan) | 651.45 | 950.32 | 10.00 | 8497.00 | - | - | - | - |
Labor (man-days) | 39.15 | 41.36 | 4.00 | 263.00 | - | - | - | - |
Machinery (RMB yuan) | 1202.16 | 1558.51 | 10.00 | 9899.00 | - | - | - | - |
Environmental factors | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Soil quality (1 = poor, 2 = medium, 3 = good) | - | - | - | - | - | 7.79 | 58.01 | 45.83 |
Weather events (0 = no, 1 = yes) | - | - | - | - | 56.71 | 43.29 | - | - |
Xiangzhou (1 = if the household lives in Xiangzhou) | - | - | - | - | 33.77 | 66.23 | - | - |
Yicheng (1 = if the household lives in Yicheng) | - | - | - | - | 35.50 | 64.50 | - | - |
Managerial factors | ||||||||
Farmer’s age (years) | 52.07 | 9.67 | 27.00 | 79.00 | - | - | - | - |
Female ratio (the percentage of women among the workers) | 43.50 | 11.71 | 0.00 | 87.09 | - | - | - | - |
Education (years) | 8.04 | 3.13 | 0.00 | 16.00 | - | - | - | - |
Extension service (0 = no, 1 = yes) | - | - | - | - | 46.75 | 53.25 | - | - |
Off-farm income (0 = no, 1 = yes) | - | - | - | - | 16.88 | 83.12 | - | - |
Credit access (0 = no, 1 = yes) | - | - | - | - | 80.52 | 19.48 | - | - |
Environmental awareness (0 = no, 1 = yes) | - | - | - | - | 43.72 | 56.28 | - | - |
Farm size_small (<0.2 ha) | - | - | - | - | 60.61 | 39.39 | - | - |
Farm size_medium (0.2–0.5 ha) | 71.00 | 29.00 | - | - | ||||
Farm size_large (>0.5 ha) | 68.40 | 31.60 | - | - |
Variable | Unrestricted Risk Function | Restricted Risk Function | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Coefficient | Std.err. | Coefficient | Std.err. | |
Deterministic function | ||||
Ln area | 6.153 *** | 1.227 | 5.217 *** | 1.308 |
Ln seed | −0.629 | 0.641 | −0.371 | 0.796 |
Ln fertilizer | −0.354 | 0.759 | −0.209 | 0.813 |
Ln pesticide | −1.723 *** | 0.517 | −1.554 *** | 0.493 |
Ln labor | 0.681 | 0.629 | 1.076 ** | 0.430 |
Ln machinery | −2.537 *** | 0.891 | −2.617 *** | 0.711 |
Ln area × area | 0.439 *** | 0.085 | 0.395 *** | 0.130 |
Ln area × seed | −0.187 * | 0.109 | −0.151 | 0.129 |
Ln area × fertilizer | −0.017 | 0.116 | −0.005 | 0.103 |
Ln area × pesticide | −0.251 *** | 0.047 | −0.231 *** | 0.060 |
Ln area × labor | 0.085 | 0.071 | 0.180 ** | 0.077 |
Ln area × machinery | −0.392 *** | 0.103 | −0.401 *** | 0.125 |
Ln seed × seed | 0.047 | 0.041 | 0.060 | 0.053 |
Ln seed × fertilizer | 0.081 | 0.070 | 0.049 | 0.071 |
Ln seed × pesticide | −0.112 *** | 0.034 | −0.110 *** | 0.036 |
Ln seed × labor | −0.139 ** | 0.048 | −0.190 *** | 0.063 |
Ln seed × machinery | 0.078 | 0.055 | 0.108 ** | 0.059 |
Ln fertilizer × fertilizer | −0.141 *** | 0.037 | −0.114 ** | 0.061 |
Ln fertilizer × pesticide | 0.019 | 0.022 | 0.047 | 0.038 |
Ln fertilizer × labor | 0.051 | 0.064 | 0.105 | 0.073 |
Ln fertilizer × machinery | 0.117 | 0.083 | 0.061 | 0.102 |
Ln pesticide × pesticide | 0.072 *** | 0.018 | 0.079 *** | 0.030 |
Ln pesticide × labor | 0.115 *** | 0.023 | 0.107 *** | 0.034 |
Ln pesticide × machinery | 0.110 *** | 0.036 | 0.089 ** | 0.038 |
Ln labor × labor | −0.125 *** | 0.029 | −0.131 *** | 0.030 |
Ln labor × machinery | 0.030 | 0.041 | −0.032 | 0.029 |
Ln machinery × machinery | 0.035 | 0.041 | 0.084 ** | 0.034 |
Xiangzhou | 0.102 | 0.081 | 0.134 | 0.109 |
Yicheng | 0.254 | 0.197 | 0.236 | 0.201 |
Constant | 25.168 *** | 4.327 | 23.509 *** | 6.938 |
Risk function | ||||
Ln area | −2.031 | 1.572 | - | - |
Ln seed | −0.517 | 0.634 | - | - |
Ln fertilizer | −0.496 | 0.753 | - | - |
Ln pesticide | 0.857 | 0.501 | - | - |
Ln labor | −1.593 *** | 0.478 | - | - |
Ln machinery | 2.607 ** | 1.089 | - | - |
Soil quality | −1.105 *** | 0.381 | - | - |
Weather events | 0.504 | 0.737 | - | - |
Inefficiency function | ||||
Age | −0.033 *** | 0.010 | −0.025 ** | 0.012 |
Female ratio | 0.019 * | 0.011 | 0.015 * | 0.008 |
Education | −0.026 | 0.031 | −0.051 | 0.047 |
Extension service | −0.517 * | 0.291 | −0.705 *** | 0.232 |
Off-farm income | −0.892 ** | 0.403 | −0.496 | 0.380 |
Credit access | −0.305 | 0.367 | −0.237 | 0.359 |
Environmental awareness | −0.451 | 0.304 | −0.252 | 0.301 |
Farm size_medium | −0.251 | 0.419 | −0.491 | 0.370 |
Farm size_large | −0.718 * | 0.386 | −1.205 *** | 0.364 |
Log-likelihood | 101.29 | 87.03 |
Variables | Unrestricted Risk Function | Restricted Risk Function |
---|---|---|
Area | 1.419 | 1.267 |
Seed | −0.357 | −0.304 |
Fertilizer | 0.581 | 0.438 |
Pesticide | −0.362 | −0.330 |
Labor | 0.359 | 0.321 |
Machinery | −0.136 | −0.382 |
Returns to scale | 1.504 | 1.010 |
Efficiency Range | All | Small (≤0.2 ha) | Medium (0.2~0.5 ha) | Large (>0.5 ha) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Unrestricted | Restricted | Unrestricted | Restricted | Unrestricted | Restricted | Unrestricted | Restricted | |
<30 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
30–40 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
40–50 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
50–60 | 4 | 20 | 2 | 12 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 2 |
60–70 | 18 | 19 | 8 | 11 | 8 | 5 | 2 | 3 |
70–80 | 31 | 45 | 13 | 22 | 10 | 17 | 8 | 6 |
80–90 | 68 | 44 | 34 | 16 | 21 | 12 | 13 | 16 |
90–100 | 105 | 93 | 33 | 26 | 25 | 23 | 47 | 44 |
Mean | 0.84 | 0.79 | 0.83 | 0.78 | 0.84 | 0.80 | 0.87 | 0.85 |
Std. Dev. | 0.13 | 0.15 | 0.12 | 0.19 | 0.11 | 0.13 | 0.12 | e |
Minimum | 0.37 | 0.27 | 0.38 | 0.27 | 0.48 | 0.37 | 0.37 | 0.36 |
Maximum | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.98 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.98 |
Observations | 231 | 91 | 67 | 73 |
© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Yang, Z.; Mugera, A.W.; Zhang, F. Investigating Yield Variability and Inefficiency in Rice Production: A Case Study in Central China. Sustainability 2016, 8, 787. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8080787
Yang Z, Mugera AW, Zhang F. Investigating Yield Variability and Inefficiency in Rice Production: A Case Study in Central China. Sustainability. 2016; 8(8):787. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8080787
Chicago/Turabian StyleYang, Zhihai, Amin W. Mugera, and Fan Zhang. 2016. "Investigating Yield Variability and Inefficiency in Rice Production: A Case Study in Central China" Sustainability 8, no. 8: 787. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8080787