The production structure of the South African agricultural sector is analyzed using duality theory in production and cost. An unrestricted translog cost function is estimated, and a number of model restrictions (homothetic, homogenous, unitary elasticity of substitution, Hick’s neutral technical change, and no technical change) are tested for, but none of them was found to be statistically significant. The Allen Elasticity of Substitution (AES) and the Morishima Elasticity of Substitution (MES) are calculated to analyze factor substitution, and found that the AES may give erroneous results in the case of number of factors exceeding two. The substitution of land is found to be easiest while that of fuel to be hardest. Furthermore, technical change is found to have a negative impact on agriculture, but there are increasing returns to scale in South African agriculture. However, technical change dominates over scale effect, and results in negative total factor productivity growth. When these results are combined with the finding that, it is easier to substitute machinery by labor than vice-versa, it appears that labor-intensive technologies may be useful for agriculture growth.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Van ZylJohann (1998). “Agriculture in South Africa”, Finance Week, 16October, 5–6.
2.
AllF.ParikhA. (1992). “Relationships among Labour-Bullock-Tractor Inputs in Pakistan Agriculture.”American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 74(2), 371–377.
3.
BayriT.FurtanW. (1989). “The Impact of New Wheat Technology on Income Distribution: A Green Revolution Case Study, Turkey, 1960–1983.”Economic Development and Cultural Exchange, 38, 113–127.
4.
BerndtE.R. (1991). The Practice of Econometrics: Classical and Contemporary. Reading: Wesley Publishing Co.
5.
BerndtE.R.WoodD.O. (1975). “Technology, Prices, and the Derived Demand for Energy”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 57, 259–267.
6.
BerndtE.R.WhiteM. (1979). “Energy, Capital and Productivity”, Resource Paper No. 38, Department of Economics, University of British Columbia, July.
7.
BlackorbyC.RussellR.R. (1975). “The Partial Elasticity of Substitution.” Discussion Paper No. 751, Economics, University of California, San Diego.
8.
BlackorbyC.RussellR.R. (1989). “Will the real elasticity of substitution please stand up? (A comparison of the Allen/Uzawa and Morishima elsticities).”American Economic Review, 79, 882–888.
9.
BinswangerH. (1974). “A Cost Function Approach to the Measurement of Elasticities of Factor Demand and Elasticities of Substitution.American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 57, 377–84.
10.
BrownR.S.ChristensenL.R. (1980). “Estimating elasticities of substitution in a model of partial state equilibrium: an application to US agriculture, 1947–1979.”Workshop Series No. 8007, Social Systems Research Institute, University of Wisconsin.
11.
BurgerD. ed. (1998). South Africa Yearbook 1998. Government Communication and Information System, Pretoria.
12.
ChotigeatT. (1978). “An Econometric Analysis of the Translog Function and the Substitution of Capital, Fertilizers and Labor in Thai Agriculture, 1953–1972”, Ph D Dissertation, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.
13.
ChristensenL.R.JorgensenD.W.LauL.J. (1971). “Conjugate Duality and Transcendental Logarithmic Production Function.”Econometrica, 39, 255–256.
14.
ChristensenL.R.JorgensenD.W.LauL.J. (1973). “Transcendental Logarithmic Production Function.”Review of Economics and Statistics, 55, 28–45.
15.
DenisonE.F. (1967). “Why Growth Rates Differ: Post War Experiences in Nine Western Countries”. The Brooking Institution, Washington, D.C.
16.
DennyM.FussM.WavermanL. (1981). “The Measurement and Interpretation of Total Factor Productivity in Regulated Industries, with an Application to Canadian Telecommunications.”Productivity Measurement in Regulated Industries. CowingThomas G.StevensonRodney E., eds. 179–218. New York: Academic Press.
17.
GlassJ.C.McKillopD.G. (1989). “A Multi-Product Multi-Input Cost Function Analysis of Northern Ireland Agriculture, 1955–85”Journal of Agricultural Economics, 40(1), 57–70.
18.
GrilichesZ.“The Sources of Measured Productivity Growth: U. S. Agriculture, 1940–1960”. Journal of Political Economy, 71, August (1973), 331–346.
19.
GrilichesZ.“The Sources of Measured Productivity Growth: U. S. Agriculture, 1940–1960”. Journal of Political Economy, 71, August (1967). “Production Function in Manufacturing: Some Preliminary Results”. In The Theory and Empirical Analyses in Production (BrownM, ed.). NBER Studies in Income and Wealth, 31, 275–232. Columbia Univ. Press, New York.
20.
GuyomardH. (1988). “Quasi-fixed factors and production theory: the case of self-employed labour in French agriculture.”Irish Journal of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, 13, 21–33.
21.
HicksJ.R. (1932). Theory of Wages. London: Macmillan.
22.
HsuH.H. (1984). “A Translog Cost Function Study of Purchased Inputs Used in U. S. Farm Production.” Dissertation, Michigan State University.
23.
IslamT.VeemanT.. (1980). “Changing Input Use and Productivity in Canadian Agriculture.”Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 6, 39–47.
KantS.NautiyalJ. (1997). “Production Structure, Factor Substitution, Technical Change, and Total Factor Productivity in the Canadian Logging Industry.“Canadian Journal of Forest Resources, 27, 701–710.
26.
KhawajaM.J. (1994). “A Contribution to the Energy-Capital Complementarity Debate”, Indian Economic Review, 29, 91–102.
27.
LopezR.TungF.L. (1982). “Energy and Non-Energy Input Substitution Possibilities and Output Scale Effects in Canadian Agriculture.”Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 30, 115–132.
28.
KurodaY. (1987). “The Production Structure and the Demand for Labor in Postwar Japanese Agriculture, 1951–82.”American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 69(2), 328–337.
29.
KurodaY. (1988). “Biased technological change and factor demand in postwar Japanese agriculture, 1958–84.”Agricultural Economics, 2(2), 101–122.
30.
KurodaY. (1989). “Impacts of Economies of Scale and Technological Change on Agricultural Productivity in Japan.”Journal of the Japanese and International Economy, 3(2), 145–173.
31.
KurodaY. (1995). “Labor productivity measurement in Japanese agriculture, 1956–90.”Agricultural Economics, 12(1), 55–68.
32.
KurodaY. (1997). “Research and Extension Expenditures and Productivity in Japanese Agriculture, 1960–1990.”Agricultural Economics, 16(2), 111–124.
33.
McKillopD.G.GlassJ.C. (1991). “The Structure of Production in Irish Agriculture: A Multi-Input Multi-Output Analysis.”Economic and Social Review, 22(3), 213–228.
34.
MensahE.K.MiranowskiJ.A.“Derived Demand for Energy in Agriculture: Effects of Price, Substitution, and Technology.”Proceedings AREA Meeting, July–August1979.
35.
Ministry of Agriculture, & Land Affairs (1998). Agricultural Policy in South Africa: A Discussion Document. Pretoria: Government Printer.
36.
MorishimaM. (1967 ). “A Few Suggestions on the Theory of Elasticity.”Keizai Hyoron (Econ. Rev.), 16, 144–150.
37.
MullenJ.D.CoxL. (1996). “Measuring Productivity Growth in Australian Broad-acre Agriculture.”Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 40(3), 189–210.
38.
PaulS.MehtaR. (1991). “Technology, Factor Demand and Substitution in Indian Agriculture 1960–1983.”Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 46(4), 530–541.
39.
ParikhA. (1980). “Impact of Technical Change on Employment in Indian Agriculture.” Discussion Papers No. 39, University of East Anglia.
40.
ParikhA. (1985). “Some Aspects of Employment in Indian agriculture.”World Development, 13(6), 691–704.
41.
ParikhA.ShahM.K. (1994). “Measurement of Cost Inefficiency with Safety First Measure of Risk.”Agricultural Economics, 11(2–3), 197–206.
42.
RayS. (1982). “A Translog Cost Function Analysis of U.S. Agriculture, 1939–197.”American Journalof Agricultural Economics, 50, 490–498.
43.
RostamizadehA. (1981). “The Duality between Cost and Production Functions with Applications to the Agriculture Labor Markets in the United States.” Dissertation, Washington State University.
44.
SharmaS.C. (1987). “Technological Change and Elasticities of Substitution in Korean agriculture.”Journal of Development Economics, 35(1), 147–172.
45.
SolowR M.“Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Function”. Rev. Econ. Statist39, August (1957): 312–320.
46.
StarS.“Accounting for the Growth of Output”. Am. Econ. Rev, 64, March (1974), 123–135.
47.
TownsendR.F.KhatriY.ThirtleC. (1998). “Biases of Technical Change in South African Agriculture: A Cost Function Approach.”Journal for Studies in Economics and Econometrics, 22(2), 15–27.
48.
TruettD.TruettL. (1998). “A cost function analysis of the Mexican non-electrical machinery industry.”The Journal of Applied Economics, 30.
49.
VarianH.R. (1992). Microeconomic Analysis. New York: W. W. Norton.
50.
VincentD. (1977). “Factor Substitution in Australian Agriculture”Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 21.
51.
ZellnerA. (1962). “An Efficient Method for Estimating Seemmingly Unrelated Regression and Tests for Aggregation Bias”, Journal of American Statistical Association, 57, 348–368.
