Technical Efficiency of Dragon Fruit Farming Householdsin Chau Thanh District, Long AnProvince

Received: 02-04-2017

Accepted: 08-05-2017

DOI:

Views

0

Downloads

0

Section:

KINH TẾ XÃ HỘI VÀ PHÁT TRIỂN NÔNG THÔN

How to Cite:

Dang, N. (2024). Technical Efficiency of Dragon Fruit Farming Householdsin Chau Thanh District, Long AnProvince. Vietnam Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 15(4), 437–444. http://testtapchi.vnua.edu.vn/index.php/vjasvn/article/view/374

Technical Efficiency of Dragon Fruit Farming Householdsin Chau Thanh District, Long AnProvince

Nguyen Huu Dang (*) 1

  • 1 Trường Kinh tế, Đại học Cần Thơ
  • Keywords

    Technical efficiency, stochastic frontier model, production function, dragon fruit

    Abstract


    This studyattemptedto estimate the technical efficiency and its determinants ofdragon fruit farming, based on the data collected from 118 dragon fruit farming householdss in Chau Thanh district, Long An province. A Cobb-Douglas stochastic frontier model incorporating inefficiency effects was employed to analyze the data using the Frontier 4.1. The results revealed that the technical efficiency rangedbetween 49.5%-97.4 %(76.0%on average).Significant factors that were found to positively affect dragon fruit yield were cultivated area, potash fertilizer, and labor while seed (planted density) was negatively related to the fragon fruit yield. In addition, significant determinants that positively related to technical efficiency were farmers’ education attainment, membership of local associations, technical training and credit access. The improvement of these factors would lead to an increase in technical efficiency.

    References

    Aragon, C., Quilloy, A.J., Catelo, S., Reyes, J.D., Manilay, A., Elauria, M. and Quicoy, C. (2010). Farm Management: Approaches and Tools in a Changing Environment. Sky’s limit Printing, Houston.

    Aigner, D., Lovell, C. and Schmidt, P. (1977). Formulation and Estimation of Stochastic Frontier Production Function Models. Journal of Econometrics, 6: 21-37.

    Battese, G.E. (1992). Frontier production functions and technical efficiency: A survey of empirical applications in agricultural economics.J. Agricultural Economics, 7: 185-208.

    Coelli, T.J. (1996). A Guide to Frontier Version 4.1: A Computer Progam for Stochastic Frontier Production and Cost Function Estimation. Center for Efficiency and Productivity Analysis, University of New England, Armidale.

    Coelli, T., Rao, D.S.P. and Battese, G. (2005). An Introduction to Efficiency and Productivy Analysis.Springer Science Business Media, LLC, 2nd Ed.

    Dang, N.H. (2017). Technical effiency and technological change of rice farms in Mekong Delta, Vietnam.Proceedings of the 11th Asia-Pacific Conference on Global Business, Economics, Finance and Business Management (AP17Thai Conference). ISBN: 978-1-943579-72-3.

    Fadzim, W.R., Aziz M.I.A., Mat, S.H.C. and Maamor, S. (2016). Estimating the Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Cocoa Farmers in Malaysia. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 6(7): 1-5.

    Gul, M. (2006). Technical efficiency of apple farming in Turkey: A case study covering Isparta, Karaman and Niğde provinces. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences, 9(4): 601- 605.

    Hong, N.B and Yabe, M. (2015). Technical Efficiency Analysis of Tea Production in the Northern Mountainous Region of Vietnam.Global Journal of Science Frontier Research, 15(1): 30-42.

    Mar, S.,Yabe, M. and Ogata, K. (2013). Technical efficiency analysis of mango production in Central Myanmar.Journal of International Society for Southeast Asian Agricultural Sciences, 19(1): 49-62.

    Meeusen, W. and van den Broeck, J. (1977). Efficiency Estimation from Cobb-Douglas Production Functions with Composed Error. International Economic Review, 18: 435-444.

    Thong, Q.H., John F.Y. and Prabodh, I. (2011). Analysis of socio-economic factors affecting technical efficiency of small-holder coffee farming in the Krong Ana Watershed, Dak Lak Province, Vietnam. Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology, 3(1): 37-49.