Stochastic estimation of firm technology, inefficiency, and productivity growth using shadow cost and distance functions

Journal of Econometrics

Volumn 108, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 203-225

  Atkinson, Scott E ^a   Primont, Daniel ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Allocative inefficiency; Distance and cost frontiers; Productivity change; Technical change; Technical inefficiency

Indexed keywords

COSTS; ELECTRIC INDUSTRY; ELECTRIC UTILITIES; PROBLEM SOLVING; RANDOM PROCESSES; REGULATORY COMPLIANCE;

ALLOCATIVE INEFFICIENCY; COST FRONTIERS; PRODUCTIVITY CHANGE; STOCHASTIC ESTIMATION; TECHNICAL CHANGE; TECHNICAL INEFFICIENCY;

ECONOMICS;

EID: 0347354957     PISSN: 03044076     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0304-4076(01)00133-6     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Atkinson S.E., Cornwell C. Parametric measurement of technical and allocative inefficiency with panel data. International Economic Review. 35:1994;231-244.
2. Atkinson S.E., Halvorsen R. Parametric efficiency tests, economies of scale, and input demand in US electric power generation. International Economic Review. 25:1984;647-662.
3. Atkinson, S.E., Cornwell, C., Honerkamp, O., 2000. Measuring and decomposing productivity change: stochastic distance function estimation vs. dea. Working paper, Department of Economics, University of Georgia.
4. Baltagi B.H., Griffin J.M. A general index of technical change. Journal of Political Economy. 96:1988;20-41.
5. Blackorby C., Diewert W.E. Expenditure functions, local duality, and second order approximations. Econometrica. 47:1979;579-601.
6. Callan S. The sensitivity of productivity growth measures to alternative structural and behavioral assumptions: an application to electric utilities 1951-1984. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics. 9:1991;207-213.
7. Christensen L.R., Jorgenson D.W. US real product and real factor input, 1928-1967. Review of Income and Wealth. 16:1970;19-50.
8. Coelli T., Perelman S. A comparison of parametric and non-parametric distance functions: with application to European railways. European Journal of Operational Research. 117:1999;326-339.
9. Coelli T., Rao D.S.P., Battese G.E. An Introduction to Efficiency and Productivity Analysis. 1998;Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.
10. Cornwell C., Schmidt P., Sickles R.C. Production frontiers with time series variation in efficiency levels. Journal of Econometrics. 46:1990;185-200.
11. Färe R., Grosskopf S., Norris M., Zhang Z. Productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change in industrial countries. American Economic Review. 84:1994;66-83.
12. Grosskopf S., Hayes K., Taylor L., Weber W. Budget-constrained frontier measures of fiscal equality and efficiency in schooling. Review of Economics and Statistics. 79:1997;116-124.
13. Hansen L.P. Large sample properties of generalized method of moments estimation. Econometrica. 50:1982;1029-1054.
14. Moody's Public Utility Manual, Moody's Investors Service, New York, various years.
15. Nelson R.A. Regulation, capital vintage, and technical change in the electric utility industry. Review of Economics and Statistics. 66:1984;59-69.
16. Newey W.K., West K.D. A simple, positive semi-definite, heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent covariance matrix. Econometrica. 55:1987;703-706.
17. Primont, D., 1996. Getting from quantity space to price space and back, mimeo, Department of Economics, Southern Illinois University.
18. Reinhard, S., Thijssen, G., 1997. Sustainable efficiency of Dutch dairy farms: a parametric distance function approach. Working Paper, Agricultural Economics Research Institute, The Hague, the Netherlands.
19. Shephard R.W. Cost and Production Functions. 1953;Princeton University Press, Princeton.
20. US Federal Power Commission, Steam Electric Plant Construction Cost and Annual Production Expenses, Washington DC, annually.
21. US Federal Power Commission, Statistics of Privately Owned Electric Utilities in the U.S.-Classes A and B, Washington DC, annually.
22. US Federal Power Commission, Performance Profiles - Private Electric Utilities in the United States: 1963-70, Washington DC, annually.