发帖
雷达卡
英文文献：Incorporating "Bads" and "Goods" in the Measurement of Agricultural Productivity Growth in the U.S-将“坏事”和“好事”纳入美国农业生产力增长的衡量中，资源的生产性利用使美国农业能够以高效率为国家提供大量的食物
英文文献作者：Plesha, Nataliya,Ray, Subhash C.,Nehring, Richard F.,Ball, V. Eldon
英文文献摘要：
Productive utilization of resources has enabled American agriculture to supply the nation with vast quantities of food at a high level of efficiency. However, the USDA shows that 2011 pesticide expenses increased by about $100 million resulting from a slight increase of planted acres and a one-percent rise in prices paid. Some believe that increased food and fiber production has come at a cost to environmental quality. Modern pest management utilizes a wider range of appropriate pest management options despite the diversity of chemical use in agriculture. In fact, modern agriculture may suffer significant economic losses in yield and quality without intensive use of pesticides and other chemicals. This paper presents findings on the efficiency score measures with undesirable or bad outputs and the offending bad input (i.e., pesticides and fertilizers) for twelve key corn producing states, twelve key cotton producing states, and fifteen key soybean producing states using a unique panel of state-level data set for 1960-1997. Our preliminary findings indicate that the efficiency scores for corn, cotton, and soybean producing states are consistent with the pesticide risk indicators for protection of drinking water patterns discussed in Kellogg et al, 2002. In general, there is more room for reducing the bad output along with the polluting input (e.g., pesticide and fertilizer) than for expanding the good outputs (e.g., crops, livestock, and farm related output) in the major corn and soybean producing states. Only half of the 12 cotton producing states were found to be efficient over the entire period. Our findings using the updated, revised and extended through 1997 USDA data on “goods” and “bads” differ from the previous results reported in Harper et al. “New Developments in Productivity Analysis” (2001) due to the different approach (i.e., measured efficiency scores) used in this study.
然而，美国农业部表示，由于种植面积的轻微增加和价格上涨了1%，2011年的农药支出增加了约1亿美元。一些人认为，食品和纤维产量的增加是以环境质量为代价的。尽管在农业中使用的化学物质多种多样，现代害虫管理利用了更广泛的适当的害虫管理选择。事实上，如果不大量使用杀虫剂和其他化学品，现代农业在产量和质量方面可能遭受重大经济损失。本文利用1960-1997年的一组独特的国家级数据集，对12个主要玉米生产州、12个主要棉花生产州和15个主要大豆生产州的不良产出和违规不良投入(即杀虫剂和化肥)的效率评分指标进行了研究。我们的初步研究结果表明，玉米、棉花和大豆生产州的效率得分与Kellogg等人在2002年讨论的保护饮用水模式的农药风险指标一致。一般而言，在主要玉米和大豆生产国，减少不良产出和污染投入(如杀虫剂和化肥)比扩大良好产出(如作物、牲畜和与农业有关的产出)有更大的空间。12个产棉州中只有一半在整个时期内是高效的。我们使用了美国农业部1997年关于“商品”和“坏事”数据的更新、修订和扩展后的研究结果，与Harper等人在《生产力分析的新发展》(2001)中报告的结果有所不同，这是由于本研究使用了不同的方法(即衡量效率分数)。
京公网安备 11010802022788号
