Rights, Water Use and Technical Efficiency in U.S. Agricultural Production

Andrew L. Zaeske
{"title":"Rights, Water Use and Technical Efficiency in U.S. Agricultural Production","authors":"Andrew L. Zaeske","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2429458","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Use of water in agriculture has a major driving force behind general water use patterns in the United States. To assess water's usage and value to agricultural production, this paper adopts the two error stochastic frontier analysis model of Battese and Coelli (1995) to estimate a translog production frontier for agriculture at the county level with four inputs: capital; labor; intermediate inputs; and water withdrawals. We include environmental variables to account for climate effects and pay particular attention to pair-wise differences between the riparian and modified riparian, and the prior appropriation and hybrid water regimes, to place an aggregate value on additional restrictions on water use.All of the primary input coefficients are significant, except for the cross-effect between intermediates and water, with intermediates and cropland having similar marginal products across all regions. The two riparian-based regimes have comparable marginal products of water, while the hybrid average is larger than the prior appropriation value by a factor of ten. Similar patterns appear when looking at measures of efficiency, with riparian and modified riparian regimes having nearly equal efficiency and climate losses when taken in dollar terms, while prior appropriation counties display the largest efficiency losses for each measure.We combine the marginal product and the marginal effect of water-based variables on efficiency to construct a more accurate shadow price of water. The efficiency component displays a consistent premium to regulation, with an average value of $0.71 per acre-foot and a maximum of $1.47, but this does not carry through to the shadow prices. Prior appropriation rights counties have the lowest average shadow price of $15.66 and hybrid rights counties the highest at $162.26, compared to the overall average of $51.79. These differences do seem to be primarily due to the efficiency of water use in production and not due to crop choices.","PeriodicalId":308822,"journal":{"name":"Water Sustainability eJournal","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Water Sustainability eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2429458","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Use of water in agriculture has a major driving force behind general water use patterns in the United States. To assess water's usage and value to agricultural production, this paper adopts the two error stochastic frontier analysis model of Battese and Coelli (1995) to estimate a translog production frontier for agriculture at the county level with four inputs: capital; labor; intermediate inputs; and water withdrawals. We include environmental variables to account for climate effects and pay particular attention to pair-wise differences between the riparian and modified riparian, and the prior appropriation and hybrid water regimes, to place an aggregate value on additional restrictions on water use.All of the primary input coefficients are significant, except for the cross-effect between intermediates and water, with intermediates and cropland having similar marginal products across all regions. The two riparian-based regimes have comparable marginal products of water, while the hybrid average is larger than the prior appropriation value by a factor of ten. Similar patterns appear when looking at measures of efficiency, with riparian and modified riparian regimes having nearly equal efficiency and climate losses when taken in dollar terms, while prior appropriation counties display the largest efficiency losses for each measure.We combine the marginal product and the marginal effect of water-based variables on efficiency to construct a more accurate shadow price of water. The efficiency component displays a consistent premium to regulation, with an average value of $0.71 per acre-foot and a maximum of $1.47, but this does not carry through to the shadow prices. Prior appropriation rights counties have the lowest average shadow price of $15.66 and hybrid rights counties the highest at $162.26, compared to the overall average of $51.79. These differences do seem to be primarily due to the efficiency of water use in production and not due to crop choices.
美国农业生产中的权利、用水和技术效率
农业用水是美国一般用水模式背后的主要驱动力。为了评估水的利用和对农业生产的价值,本文采用batese和Coelli(1995)的双误差随机前沿分析模型,在四种投入条件下估算了县域农业的跨对数生产前沿:资本;劳动;中间投入;还有取水。我们纳入了环境变量,以解释气候影响,并特别关注河岸和改造河岸之间的成对差异,以及先前的拨款和混合水制度,以对水资源使用的额外限制进行汇总。除了中间体和水之间的交叉效应外,所有初级投入系数都很显著,所有区域的中间体和农田的边际产品相似。两种以河岸为基础的制度具有相当的边际水产量,而混合平均值比先前的占用值大10倍。在考察效率措施时,也出现了类似的模式,以美元计算,河岸和改良的河岸制度具有几乎相等的效率和气候损失,而先前拨款的县在每种措施中都显示出最大的效率损失。结合边际产量和水基变量对效率的边际效应,构建了更为准确的水价影子。效率部分显示出对监管的一贯溢价,平均价值为每英亩英尺0.71美元,最高为1.47美元,但这并没有传递到影子价格。优先占有权县的平均影子价格最低,为15.66美元,混合权县的平均影子价格最高,为162.26美元,而总体平均价格为51.79美元。这些差异似乎主要是由于生产用水的效率,而不是由于作物的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信