Measuring technical and environmental efficiency in a state-contingent technology

Most developed countries support farming activities through policies that are tailored to meet their specific social, economic and environmental objectives. Economic and environmental efficiency have recently become relevant targets of most of these policies, whose sound implementation can be enhanced by monitoring farm performance from a multidimensional perspective. This paper proposes farm-level technical and environmental efficiency measures that recognize the stochastic conditions in which production takes place. A state-contingent framework is used to model production uncertainty. An implementable representation of the technology is developed using data envelopment analysis. The application focuses on a sample of Catalan arable crop farms. Results suggest that technical efficiency is slightly lower in bad than in good growing conditions. Nitrogen pollution can decrease substantially more under good than bad growing conditions.

[1]  R. Chambers,et al.  Using ex ante output elicitation to model state-contingent technologies , 2015 .

[2]  Rolf Färe,et al.  Measuring the technical efficiency of production , 1978 .

[3]  J. Humphreys,et al.  Farm-gate nitrogen balances on intensive dairy farms in the south west of Ireland , 2008 .

[4]  H. O. Fried,et al.  Accounting for Environmental Effects and Statistical Noise in Data Envelopment Analysis , 2002 .

[5]  Isabelle Piot-Lepetit,et al.  Pricing Organic Nitrogen Under The Weak Disposability Assumption: An Application to the French Pig Sector , 1998 .

[6]  Ludwig Lauwers,et al.  Environmental efficiency measurement and the materials balance condition , 2007 .

[7]  Empirical Evidence of Technical Efficiency Levels in Greek Organic and Conventional Farms , 2002 .

[8]  R. Färe,et al.  The measurement of efficiency of production , 1985 .

[9]  A. Wossink,et al.  Efficiency and innovation offsets in non-point source pollution control and the role of education , 2007 .

[10]  Kyösti Pietola,et al.  Effciency and productivity of conventional and organic farms in Finland 1994--1997 , 2002 .

[11]  W. Griffiths,et al.  Estimating State‐Contingent Production Frontiers , 2006 .

[12]  P. W. Wilson,et al.  Estimation and inference in two-stage, semi-parametric models of production processes , 2007 .

[13]  J. Cummins,et al.  Comparison of Frontier Efficiency Methods: An Application to the U.S. Life Insurance Industry , 1998 .

[14]  V. Tzouvelekas,et al.  Technical efficiency of alternative farming systems: the case of Greek organic and conventional olive-growing farms , 2001 .

[15]  C. A. Knox Lovell,et al.  Environmental efficiency with multiple environmentally detrimental variables; estimated with SFA and DEA , 2000, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[16]  T. Park,et al.  Technical Efficiency of U. S. Organic Farmers: The Complementary Roles of Soil Management Techniques and Farm Experience , 2006, Agricultural and Resource Economics Review.

[17]  C.A.K. Lovell,et al.  Multilateral Productivity Comparisons When Some Outputs are Undesirable: A Nonparametric Approach , 1989 .

[18]  Elvira Silva,et al.  CO2 and Energy Efficiency of Different Heating Technologies in the Dutch Glasshouse Industry , 2003 .

[19]  Rolf Färe,et al.  Productivity and Undesirable Outputs: A Directional Distance Function Approach , 1995 .

[20]  John Quiggin,et al.  Cost Functions and Duality for Stochastic Technologies , 1998 .

[21]  Allen N. Berger,et al.  Consistency Conditions for Regulatory Analysis of Financial Institutions: A Comparison of Frontier Efficiency Methods , 1998 .

[22]  Floor Brouwer,et al.  Managing nitrogen pollution from intensive livestock production in the EU; economic and environmental benefits of reducing nitrogen pollution by nutritional management in relation to the changing CAP regime and the nitrates directive , 1999 .

[23]  P. Struik,et al.  Measuring agricultural sustainability in terms of efficiency: the case of Dutch sugar beet growers. , 2002, Journal of environmental management.

[24]  Finn R. Førsund,et al.  Good Modelling of Bad Outputs: Pollution and Multiple-Output Production , 2009 .

[25]  J. Chavas.  A Cost Approach to Economic Analysis Under State‐Contingent Production Uncertainty , 2008 .

[26]  Timo Sipiläinen,et al.  Learning in Organic Farming An Application on Finnish Dairy Farms , 2005 .

[27]  Harold O. Fried,et al.  The Measurement of Productive Efficiency and Productivity Growth , 2008 .

[28]  Robert G. Chambers,et al.  Efficiency analysis in the presence of uncertainty , 2010 .

[29]  A. Lansink.  Technical efficiency and CO2 abatement policies in the Dutch glasshouse industry , 2003 .

[30]  Sushama Murty,et al.  On modeling pollution-generating technologies , 2012 .

[31]  K. Arrow,et al.  Aspects of the theory of risk-bearing , 1966 .

[32]  C. Lovell,et al.  Econometric Estimation of Technical and Environmental Efficiency: An Application to Dutch Dairy Farms , 1999 .

[33]  R. Färe.  Derivation of Shadow Prices for Undesirable Outputs: A Distance Function Approach , 1993 .

[34]  Tiziano Bellini,et al.  Forward Search Outlier Detection in Data Envelopment Analysis , 2011, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[35]  A. Lansink.  Nonparametric modelling of CO2 emission quota , 2008 .

[36]  R. Pethig,et al.  Nonlinear Production, Abatement, Pollution and Materials Balance Reconsidered , 2005, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[37]  William L. Weber,et al.  Characteristics of a Polluting Technology: Theory and Practice , 2002 .

[38]  John Quiggin,et al.  Uncertainty, Production, Choice, and Agency: The State-Contingent Approach , 2000 .

[39]  R. Chambers.  Valuing Agricultural Insurance , 2007 .

[40]  Subal C. Kumbhakar,et al.  Stochastic frontier analysis , 2000 .

[41]  Rajiv D. Banker,et al.  The super-efficiency procedure for outlier identification, not for ranking efficient units , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[42]  Ragnar Frisch,et al.  Theory Of Production , 1965 .