Agric. Econ. - Czech, 2009, 55(3):126-133 | DOI: 10.17221/588-AGRICECON

The induced innovation test (co-integration analysis) of Iranian agriculture

F. Shirani Bidabadi1, M. Hashemitabar2
1 Department of Agricultural Economics, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, Iran
2 Department of Agricultural Economics, Faculty of Agriculture (Saravan), Sistan and Baluchestan University, Zahedan, Iran

Technological change is a determinant index for agriculture that can lead to the productivity growth by either increasing the total output or increasing the usage of relatively cheap inputs and reducing the relatively expensive inputs. The determination of the magnitude and the direction of technological change in agricultural production has attracted much attention and has become the focal point of intense research efforts over the last couple decades. This topic is frequently studied in two different ways. One is considering the efforts of investment in the research and development technological change. The other is explaining the technological change by testing induced innovation hypothesis that was first proposed by Hicks. Therefore, in this study, with the help of time series by using the cointegration analysis, the induced innovation hypothesis is tested and the effect of investment in agricultural research on technological changing is considered.

Keywords: induced innovation, agriculture, cointegration analysis, Iran

Published: March 31, 2009  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Shirani Bidabadi F, Hashemitabar M. The induced innovation test (co-integration analysis) of Iranian agriculture. Agric. Econ. - Czech. 2009;55(3):126-133. doi: 10.17221/588-AGRICECON.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Ahmad S. (1966): On the theory of induced invention. Economic Journal, 76: 344-357. Go to original source...
    2. Alston J., Craig B., Pardey P. (1998): Dynamics in the Creation and Depreciation of Knowledge, and the Returns to Research. International Food Policy Research Institute, EPTD Discussion Paper No. 35.
    3. Binswanger H.P. (1978): Microeconomics of Induced Technical Change. In: Binswanger et al. (eds.): Induced Innovation. Baltimore and London, pp. 91-117.
    4. Binswanger H.P. (1974): The measurement of technical change biases with many factors of production. American Economic Review, 64: 964-976.
    5. Baldi L., Casati D. (2005): Induced Innovation in Italy: an Error Correction Model for the Period 1968-2002. 99th Seminar of the EAAE (European Association of Agricultural Economists), Copenhagen, Denmark.
    6. Clark J.S., Youngblood C.E. (1992): Estimating duality models with biased technical change: a time series approach. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 74: 353-360. Go to original source...
    7. Engle R., Granger C. (1987): Cointegration and error correction: representation, estimation and testing. Econometrica, 55: 251-276. Go to original source...
    8. Evenson R.E. (1993): Agricultural technology: in ternational di mensions (with emphasis on rice). Technology Forecasting and Social Change, 43: 337-351. Go to original source...
    9. Evenson R.E., Mckinsey J.W. (1991): Research, Extension, Infrastructure and Productivity Change in Indian Agriculture. In: Evenson R.E., Pray C.E. (eds.): Research and Productivity in Asian Agriculture. Cornell University Press, Ithaca. Go to original source...
    10. Hayami Y., Ruttan V.W. (1970): Factor prices and technical change in agricultural development: the United States and Japan, 1880-1960. Journal of Political Economy, 78: 1115-1141. Go to original source...
    11. Hicks J.R. (1932): The Theory of Wages. Macmillan, London.
    12. Hockmann H. (1992): Dimension und Bestimmungsgründe des Wachstums von Produktion und Produktivität in der Landwirtschaft in ausgewählten Ländern. Wissenschaftverlag Vauk Kiel KG, Kiel.
    13. Hockmann H., Voigt P. (2001): Measuring the Impact of Technological Change in Agricultural Production. In: Approaching Agricultural Technology and Economic Development of Central and Eastern Europe. Bornimer Agrartechnische Berichte, 27, Potsdam/Halle (Saale), pp. 49-54.
    14. Huffman W., Evenson R. (1993): Science for Agriculture: a Long-term Perspective. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA.
    15. Johansen S., Juselius K. (1990): Maximum likelihood estimation and inference on cointegration - with applications to the demand for money. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 52: 169-210. Go to original source...
    16. Hockmann H., Kopsidis M. (2005): The Choice of Technology in Russian Agriculture: An Application of the Induced Innovation Hypothesis. In: 11 th Congress of the EAAE (European Association of Agricultural Economists), Copenhagen, Denmark.
    17. Kawagoe T., Otsuka K., Hayami Y. (1986): Induced bias of technical change in agriculture: the United States and Japan, 1880-1980. Journal of Political Economy, 94 (3): 523-544. Go to original source...
    18. Kuroda Y. (1987): The production structure and demand for labor in postwar Japanese agriculture, 1952-82. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 69: 249-258. Go to original source...
    19. Kwiatkowski D., Phillips P.C.B., Schmidt P., Shin Y. (1992): Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root. Journal of Econometrics, 54: 159-178. Go to original source...
    20. Lee J.H. (1983): The measurement and sources of technological change biases, with an application to postwar Japanese agriculture. Econometrica, 50:159-174. Go to original source...
    21. Lin J.Y. (1991): Prohibition of facto market exchange and technological choice in Chinese agriculture. The Journal of Development Studies, 27: 1-15. Go to original source...
    22. Liu Q., Shumway C.R. (2003): Induced Innovation Tests on Western American Agriculture: a Cointegration Analysis. American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Montreal, Canada.
    23. Oniki S. (2000): Testing the Induced Innovation Hypothesis in a Cointegrating Regression Model. The Japanese Economic Review, 51: 544-554. Go to original source...
    24. Pardey P.G., Craig B. (1989): causal relationships between public sector agricultural research expenditures and output. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 71: 9-19. Go to original source...
    25. Schlitzer G. (1995): Testing the stationarity of economic time series: further Monte Carlo evidence. Ricerche Economiche, 49 (2): 125-144. Go to original source...
    26. Terrel K. (1993): Technical changes and factor bias in Polish industry (1962-1983). Review of Economics and Statistics, 75 (4): 741-747. Go to original source...
    27. Yuhn K.H. (1991): Growth and distribution: a test of the induced innovation hypothesis for the Korean economy. Applied Economics, 23: 543-552. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content