Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T18:32:49.126Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nonrobustness of Dynamic Dual Models of the Northeastern and U.S. Dairy Industries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

Alfons Weersink
Alfons Weersink*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Business, University of Guelph
Get access

Abstract

The robustness of dynamic dual models examined by Howard and Shumway is reevaluated with the proper specification for the modified generalized Leontief (GL) and normalized quadratic (NQ) functional forms. In an application to the Northeastern and U.S. dairy industries, the theoretical properties, adjustment rates, and predictive ability were similar under both functional forms. However, elasticity measures differed significantly.

Type
Articles
Information
Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , April 1990 , pp. 12 - 16
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The helpful comments of Spiro E. Stefanou and an anonymous reviewer are gratefully acknowledged.

References

Blackorby, C., and Schworn, W. “Aggregate Investment and Consistent Intertemporal Technologies.” Review of Economic Studies 49 (1982): 595–614.Google Scholar
Chambers, R. G., and Lopez, R. “A General Dynamic Supply Response Model.” Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 13 (1984): 142–154.Google Scholar
Chang, C., and Shumway, C. R. “Sensitivity of Supply Elasticities to Model Specification.” Selected paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Agricultural Economics Association, Knoxville, TN, August 1988.Google Scholar
Epstein, L. “Duality Theory and Functional Forms for Dynamic Factor Demands.” Review of Economic Studies 48 (1981): 81–95.Google Scholar
Howard, W. H., and Shumway, C. R. “Nonrobustness of Dynamic Dual Models of the U.S. Dairy Industry.” Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 17 (1989): 18–25.Google Scholar
Larson, B. A. “Dynamic Factor Demands Using Intertemporal Duality.” Agricultural Economics Research 41 (1988): 27–32.Google Scholar
Swamy, G., and Binswanger, H. P. “Flexible Demand Systems and Linear Estimation: Food in India.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 65 (1983): 675–684.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. R. “Stochastic Dynamic Duality: Theory and Empirical Applicability.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66 (1984): 351–357.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Statistics. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service. Economic Indicators of the Farm Sector: Production and Efficiency Statistics. Washington, DC.Google Scholar