A Nonparametric Efficiency Analysis for a Sample of Kansas Swine Operations

Abstract

This study evaluates the economic competitiveness of a sample of Kansas farrow-to-finish operations by estimating relative firm efficiency using nonparametric mathematical programming techniques. Measures of technical, allocative, scale, economic, and overall efficiency are then related to farm characteristics to identify sources of efficiency. Results indicate that overall efficient farms produce a high quantity of pork per litter, produce a portion of their own feed grains, generate a large portion of their income from swine and other livestock enterprises, and have a lower debt-to-asset ratio.

Multidirectional analysis of technical efficiency for pig production systems: The case of Sweden

“…Moreover, farms producing their own feed can take advantage of economies of scale (Rowland et al, 1998). Rydberg et al (2011) in their study of implementing lean concepts in pig production came to the conclusion that communication (e.g.…”

“…Pig industry research in Sweden and other countries has revealed differences in TE (Galanopoulos et al, 2006;Heshmati et al, 1995;Oude Lansink and Reinhard, 2004;Rowland et al, 1998;Sharma et al, 1999;Tonsor and Featherstone, 2009), suggesting that less efficient farms could benefit from using resources more efficiently. These studies typically estimated aggregated TE measures (overall input or output efficiencies) in order to explain how production could become more efficient by radial reduction of inputs or radial expansion of outputs.…”

“…These studies typically estimated aggregated TE measures (overall input or output efficiencies) in order to explain how production could become more efficient by radial reduction of inputs or radial expansion of outputs. Furthermore, TE estimates have often been related to some 'farm-specific characteristics' 2 or socioeconomic variables to explain the differences in TE (Galanopoulos et al, 2006;Gaspar et al, 2009;Heshmati et al, 1995;Oude Lansink and Reinhard, 2004;Rowland et al, 1998;Sharma et al, 1999;Tonsor and Featherstone, 2009). Other studies have examined the relationship between animal welfare compliance and TE in pig production (Czekaj et al, 2013) or with environmental TE, where environmental inputs or outputs are included in the analysis (Asmild and Hougaard, 2006;PiotLepetit and Vermersch, 1998;Yang et al, 2008).…”

Communicative diagnosis of cost-saving options for reducing nitrogen emission from pig finishing

“…DEA is widely used for efficiency analysis of agricultural holdings (e.g., Manos and Psychoudakis, 1997;Piot-Lepetit et al, 1997;Townsend et al, 1998;Shafiq and Rehman, 2000;Fousekis et al, 2001;Iraizoz et al, 2003;Lansink and Reinhard, 2004;Galanopoulos et al, 2006;Hansson and Öhlmér, 2008;Gaspar et al, 2009). Examples of DEA for pig production analysis can be found in Piot-Lepetit and Vermersch (1998), Rowland et al (1998), Sharma et al (1999), Asmild and Hougaard (2006) and Galanopoulos et al (2006). When studying the Hawaiian pig industry, Sharma et al (1999) compare the results of DEA and the parametric approach of Stochastic Frontier Analysis (SFA).…”

Determinants of technical efficiency among cash-crop producers: Evidence from East Malaysia

“…For that reason, this study used the Tobit Model to replace OLS [12]. The Tobit Model was also used previous thirty years by several scholars [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] in their study.…”