No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A Test of Asset Fixity in Southeastern U.S. Agriculture
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 September 2016
Abstract
A test for static equilibrium developed by Schankerman and Nadiri is used to evaluate the hypothesis that land and capital in aggregate south-eastern U.S. agriculture behave as fixed inputs. Empirical results reject the hypothesis that these two inputs are at their long-run equilibrium levels implied by observed prices. Thus, some degree of asset fixity may be concluded.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1990
References
Bemdt, E.R. and Fuss, M.A.. “Productivity Measurement with Adjustments for Variations in Capacity Utilization and Other Forms of Temporary Equilibrium.” J. Econometrics, 33 (1986):7–29.Google Scholar
Capalbo, S. “A Comparison of Econometric Models of U.S. Agricultural Productivity and Aggregate Technology.” In Agricultural Productivity: Measurement and Explanation, Capalbo, S.M. and Antle, J.M., eds., Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, 1988.Google Scholar
Chambers, R.G. and Vasavada, U.. “Testing Asset Fixity for U.S. Agriculture.” Am. J. Agr. Econ. 65 (1983):761–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, R.G. and Vasavada, U.. “Testing Asset Fixity for U.S. Agriculture: Reply.” Am. J. Agr. Econ. 67 (1985): 139–140.Google Scholar
Conrad, K. and Unger, R.. “Ex Post Tests for Short- and Long-Run Optimization.” J. Econometrics
36 (1987):339–358.Google Scholar
Diewert, W.E. “Exact and Superlative Index Numbers.” J. Econometrics
4 (1976): 115–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diewert, E.W. “Duality Approaches to Microeconomic Theory.” In Handbook of Mathematical Economics, Vol. 2, Arrow, K. and Intrilligator, M., eds., New York, NY: North Holland Publishing Company, 1982.Google Scholar
Edwards, C. “Resource Fixity and Farm Organization.” J. Farm Econ. 41 (1959):747–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, C. “Testing Asset Fixity for U.S. Agriculture: Comment.” Am. J. Agr. Econ. 67 (1985):136–138.Google Scholar
Fuss, M.A. “Factor Substitution in Electricity Generation: A Test of the Putty-Clay Hypothesis.” In Production Economics: A Dual Approach to Theory and Practice, Fuss, M. and McFadden, D., eds., Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company, 1978.Google Scholar
Johnson, G.L. “The State of Agricultural Supply Analysis.” J. Farm Econ. 42 (1960):435–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, G.L. “An Opportunity Cost View of Fixed Asset Theory and the Overproduction Trap: Comment.” Am. J. Agr. Econ. 64 (1982):773–775.Google Scholar
Johnson, M. and Pasour, E.C. Jr. “An Opportunity Cost View of Fixed Asset Theory and the Overproduction Trap.” Am. J. Agr. Econ. 63 (1981): 1–7.Google Scholar
Johnson, M., and Pasour, E.C. Jr. “An Opportunity Cost View of Fixed Asset Theory and the Overproduction Trap: Reply.” Am. J. Agr. Econ. 64 (1982):776–777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judge, G.G.
Griffiths, W.E., Hill, R.C., and Lee, T.. Theory and Practice of Econometrics. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1980.Google Scholar
Kulatilaka, N. “Tests on the Validity of Static Equilibrium Models.” J. Econometrics
28 (1985):253–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monson, M. “A Dynamic Model of Input Demand for Agriculture in the Southeastern United States.” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Florida, 1986.Google Scholar
Schankerman, M. and Nadiri, M.. “A Test of Static Equilibrium Models and Rates of Return to Quasifixed Factors, with an Application to the Bell System.” J. Econometrics
33 (1986):97–118.Google Scholar
Shephard, R.
Theory of Cost and Production Functions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1970.Google Scholar
Shumway, C.R. and Fawson, C.. “A Nonparametric Analysis of Agricultural Production Behavior for U.S. Subregions.” Am. J. Agr. Econ. 70 (1988):311–317.Google Scholar
Taylor, T.G. and Monson, M.J.. “Dynamic Factor Demands for Aggregate Southeastern United States Agriculture.” So. J. Agr. Econ. 18 (1985): 1–9.Google Scholar
Vasavada, U. and Chambers, R.G.. “Investment in U.S. Agriculture.” Am. J. Agr. Econ. 68 (1986):950–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar