Crop Level Productivity in the Eastern Counties of England, 1970‐97

Amadi, Juliana; Piesse, Jenifer; Thirtle, Colin

doi:10.1111/j.1477-9552.2004.tb00101.x

Cited by 9 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(9 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding the magnitude of TFP growth, there are very few comparable studies in the literature on sugar beet TFP growth because productivity is usually measured at the farm rather than the crop level. Two exceptions are and Amadi et al (2004), who use crop-specific input data for sugar beet to calculate partial and TFP indices. finds that TFP in sugar beet production increased by 2.7% per year between 1954 and 1992.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…finds that TFP in sugar beet production increased by 2.7% per year between 1954 and 1992. Amadi et al (2004) use more recent data from the same data source to analyse growth rates between 1970 to 1996. According to their estimates, TFP growth rate in the UK was 3.39% per annum.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bogetoft et al (2007) show that under an efficient quota allocation, EU market liberalisation would lead to a 25% decline in Danish sugar beet production while aggregate profits were predicted to fall by 70%. In a different context, Wu et al (2003) study technical efficiency of sugar beet farms in Idaho, and and Amadi et al (2004) Our article contributes to the literature in three ways. First, we investigate farmlevel changes in profitability and productivity following the 2006 reform from an expost perspective.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Profitability Development and Resource Reallocation: The Case of Sugar Beet Farming in Germany

Wimmer

Sauer

2020

J Agricultural Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following the 2006 reform of the European Union sugar market, and in anticipation of the quota abolition, a reallocation of sugar production has occurred. Using a Lowe quantity index, we evaluate the productivity and profitability of sugar beet farming in Germany from 2004 to 2013. The results show that an increase in total factor productivity partly compensated for losses in terms of trade. Moreover, the contribution of production reallocation to sector productivity growth varied across regions with distinct ownership structures of sugar processing companies. These findings have implications for policy and industry, as it transitions to a liberalised market.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Profitability Development and Resource Reallocation: The Case of Sugar Beet Farming in Germany

Wimmer

Sauer

2020

J Agricultural Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In broad terms, it is an index based on the ratio of the value of all agricultural outputs to all inputs. It is calculated from the logarithm of the ratio of each input or output from one year to next, which is then weighted according to a moving average of the financial value of the input or output (Amadi et al, 2004). The TFP index of UK agriculture showed a steady annual rise between 1953 and 1984, with the exception of a decline associated with the drought of 1976.…”

Section: Total Factor Productivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Agricultural technology and land use futures: The UK case

Burgess

Morris

2009

Land Use Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThis paper explores how agricultural technology has interacted with recent land use in the UK and how it might do so in the next 50 years. From 1960 to 1985, farmers successfully used technology to increase the output of crop and animal products per unit of land and particularly of labour. This reduced the number of people employed in agriculture, and promoted larger and more specialised farm enterprises. Between 1985 and 2006, food prices were relatively low, and although labour productivity continued to increase, land productivity remained relatively static. However during this period, farmers started to address the effects of agriculture on reduced water quality and habitat loss.For established agricultural products, technological innovation tends to have an incremental effect, working through genetic improvement, the removal of abiotic and biotic stress (e.g. crop nutrition and protection, irrigation and drainage, and animal nutrition, health and housing) and the substitution of labour. Whereas the first two processes tend to be scale-neutral, the substitution of labour is usually easiest to achieve on larger farms. Other key areas for technological innovation include addressing air, soil and water quality, biodiversity, waste reduction, and information management. Over the next 50 years, large step-changes in land use arising from agricultural technology are predicted to arise from the development of new markets for agricultural products. A strong bioenergy sector will strengthen the links between crop commodity and energy prices and will have a major effect on future land use. Climate change and the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions will alter the relative profitability of crop and animal production systems. Lastly, increased public awareness of the links between food, health and the environment could substantially shift the demand for specific agricultural products.Continual improvements in agricultural technology are pivotal to providing society with the flexibility to balance the challenges of improving human well-being with the management of the planet's ecosystem. Increased technological innovation increases the probability that agricultural land can be used for other purposes, but the exact relationship is dependent on trade and environmental policies. The large external effects of agriculture mean that decisions regarding the adoption of future technologies should be taken by farmers working with other stakeholders.

show abstract

“…The main crop is wheat, but with increasing amounts of more valuable apples, pears, peaches and table grapes. Switching to higher valued crops is one factor that drives TFP growth (Amadi et al, 2004), so this is perhaps why Piketberg has both intensification and TFP growth for the full period, of 0.83%. This conjecture is reinforced by the lack of TFP growth in the first period, followed by a huge increase in output growth in the later period, to 5.6%, which gave TFP growth of 2.77%.…”

Section: Disaggregation Of Swartland: Productivity At the District Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the appropriate level of aggregation for productivity indices? Comparing district, regional and national measures

Conradie¹,

Piesse

Thirtle³

2009

Agrekon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Crop Level Productivity in the Eastern Counties of England, 1970‐97

Cited by 9 publications

References 8 publications

Profitability Development and Resource Reallocation: The Case of Sugar Beet Farming in Germany

Profitability Development and Resource Reallocation: The Case of Sugar Beet Farming in Germany

Agricultural technology and land use futures: The UK case

What is the appropriate level of aggregation for productivity indices? Comparing district, regional and national measures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About