The interplay between micro-frontier and sectoral short-run production functions

Scandinavian Journal of Economics

Volumn 98, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 365-386

  Førsund, Finn R ^a   Hjalmarsson, Lennart ^b   Summa, Timo ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

^c AALTO UNIVERSITY   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030494106     PISSN: 03470520     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/3440732     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Aigner, D. J. and Chu, S. F.: On estimating the industry production function. American Economic Review 58, 226-39, 1968.
2. Airaksinen, T.: A dynamic model of interrelated demand for capital and labour. A theoretical model with an application to time-series cross-section data for Finnish breweries in 1954-1972. Acta academiae oeconomicae Helsingensis, series A:20, Helsinki, 1977.
3. Farrell, M. J.: The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A (General), 120 (III), 253-81 (290), 1957.
4. Fuss, M. A.: Factor substitution in electricity generation: A test of the putty-clay hypothesis. Econometrica 45(8), 1197-822, 1977.
5. Førsund, F. R. and Hjalmarsson, L.: Frontier production function and technical progress: A study of general milk processing in Swedish dairy plants. Econometrica 47, 883-900, 1979.
6. Førsund, F. R. and Hjalmarsson, L.: Technological progress and structural change in the Swedish cement industry 1955-1979. Econometrica 51, 1449-67, 1983.
7. Førsund, F. R. and Hjalmarsson, L.: Analyses of Industrial Structure: A Putty-Clay Approach. Industrial Institute for Economic and Social Research, Almqvist and Wiksell International, Stockholm, 1987.
8. Førsund, F. R., Hjalmarsson, L. and Eitrheim, O.: An intercountry comparison of cement production: The short-run production function approach. In F. R. Førsund, M. Hoel and S. Longva (eds.), Production, Multi-Sectoral Growth and Planning, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 11-42, 1985a.
9. Førsund, F. R., Hjalmarsson, L., Karko, J., Eitrheim, O. and Summa, T.: An intercountry comparison of productivity and technical change in the Nordic cement industry. ETLA Report B 44, Helsinki, 1985b.
10. Førsund, F. R., Lovell, C. A. K. and Schmidt, P.: A survey of frontier production functions and of their relationship to efficiency measurement. Journal of Econometrics 13, 1-13, 1980.
11. Greene, W. H.: The econometric approach to efficiency analysis. In H. O. Fried, C. A. K. Lovell and S. S. Schmidt (eds.), The Measurement of Productive Efficiency: Techniques and Applications, Oxford University Press, 68-119, 1993.
12. Gregory, R. G. and James, D. W.: Do new factories embody best practice technology? Economic Journal 83, 1133-55, 1973.
13. Grosskopf, S.: Efficiency and productivity. In H. O. Fried, C. A. K. Lovell and S. S. Schmidt (eds.), The Measurement of Productive Efficiency: Techniques and Applications, Oxford University Press, 160-94, 1993.
14. Haig, B. D., Gregory, R. G. and James, D. W.: Do new factories embody best practice technology? - An interchange. Economic Journal 85, 378-88, 1975.
15. Johansen, L.: Production Functions. North Holland, Amsterdam, 1972.
16. Kumbhakar, S. and Summa, T.: Technical efficiency of Finnish brewing plants: A production frontier approach. Scandinavian Journal of Economics 97(1), 147-60, 1989.
17. Lovell, C. A. K.: Production frontiers and productive efficiency. In H. O. Fried, C. A. K. Lovell and S. S. Schmidt (eds.), The Measurement of Productive Efficience: Techniques and Applications, Oxford University Press. 3-67, 1993.
18. McHugh, R. and Lane, J.: The embodiment hypothesis: An interregional test. Review of Economics and Statistics 65(2), 323-7, 1983.
19. McHugh, R. and Lane, J.: The age of capital, the age of utilized capital, and tests of the embodiment hypothesis. Review of Economics and Statistics 69(2), 362-7, 1987.
20. Nishimizu, M. and Page, J. M.: Total factor productivity growth, technological progress and technical efficiency change: Dimensions of productivity change in Yugoslavia 1965-78. Economic Journal 92, 920-36, 1982.
21. Pratten, C. F.: Economies of scale in manufacturing industries. Department of Applied Economics Occasional Papers, No. 28, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1971.
22. Salter, W. E. G.: Productivity and technical change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1960.
23. Sato, R.: The estimation of biased technical progress and the production function. International Economic Review 11, 179-208, 1970.
24. Scherer, F. M., Beckenstein, A., Kaufer, E. and Murphy, R. D.: The economics of multi-plant operation. An international comparison study. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1975.
25. Schmidt, P.: Frontier production functions. Economic Review 4, 289-328, 1985-86.
26. Summa, T.: Development of intra-industry efficiency. An application to Finnish breweries in 1954-1972. Licentiate dissertation. Helsinki School of Economics, 1984.
27. Summa, T.: Intra-Industrial Technical Progress and Structural Change. ETLA, Helsinki, 1986.
28. You, J. K.: Embodied and disembodied technical progress in the United States, 1929-1968. Review of Economics and Statistics 58(1), 123-7, 1976.