通过数量或收入和成本评估农场效率：重要吗？

IF 1.6 Q2 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1017/aae.2023.30

W. Tirkaso, H. Hansson

{"title":"通过数量或收入和成本评估农场效率：重要吗？","authors":"W. Tirkaso, H. Hansson","doi":"10.1017/aae.2023.30","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n We examined the effect of using input and output quantities as compared with costs and revenues when estimating farm-level efficiency scores and ranking. We used farm-level data from the 2015 Ethiopia Rural Socioeconomic Survey (ERSS) where production inputs and outputs in quantities as well as monetary units could be distinguished. Average technical efficiency scores of 72.2% and 68.6%, respectively, were found for analysis based on quantities and on costs and revenues. Efficiency ranking differed significantly. Results suggest that type of data compilation introduces bias to the efficiency assessment and that conclusions may be unclear, which complicates policy advice.","PeriodicalId":14970,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing Farm Efficiency Through Quantities or Revenues and Costs: Does It Matter?\",\"authors\":\"W. Tirkaso, H. Hansson\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/aae.2023.30\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n We examined the effect of using input and output quantities as compared with costs and revenues when estimating farm-level efficiency scores and ranking. We used farm-level data from the 2015 Ethiopia Rural Socioeconomic Survey (ERSS) where production inputs and outputs in quantities as well as monetary units could be distinguished. Average technical efficiency scores of 72.2% and 68.6%, respectively, were found for analysis based on quantities and on costs and revenues. Efficiency ranking differed significantly. Results suggest that type of data compilation introduces bias to the efficiency assessment and that conclusions may be unclear, which complicates policy advice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14970,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/aae.2023.30\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/aae.2023.30","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

在估计农场水平效率得分和排名时，我们检查了使用投入和产出数量与成本和收入相比的影响。我们使用了2015年埃塞俄比亚农村社会经济调查(ERSS)的农场数据，其中可以区分生产投入和产出的数量以及货币单位。平均技术效率得分分别为72.2%和68.6%，以数量和成本和收入为基础进行分析。效率排序差异显著。结果表明，数据汇编类型对效率评估存在偏见，结论可能不明确，从而使政策建议复杂化。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

Assessing Farm Efficiency Through Quantities or Revenues and Costs: Does It Matter?

We examined the effect of using input and output quantities as compared with costs and revenues when estimating farm-level efficiency scores and ranking. We used farm-level data from the 2015 Ethiopia Rural Socioeconomic Survey (ERSS) where production inputs and outputs in quantities as well as monetary units could be distinguished. Average technical efficiency scores of 72.2% and 68.6%, respectively, were found for analysis based on quantities and on costs and revenues. Efficiency ranking differed significantly. Results suggest that type of data compilation introduces bias to the efficiency assessment and that conclusions may be unclear, which complicates policy advice.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY-

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

5.30%

发文量

审稿时长

8 weeks

期刊介绍： Published on behalf of the Southern Agricultural Economics Association, the Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics is a forum for creative and scholarly work in agricultural economics and related areas. Contributions on methodology and applications in business, extension, research, and teaching phases of agricultural and applied economics are equally encouraged. As of 2015 (Vol 47), articles are published on an open access basis.