Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

USING INPUT DEMAND AND PRODUCTION FUNCTION MODELS TO ASSESS THE NET BENEFITS OF DAIRY HERD IMPROVEMENT

USING INPUT DEMAND AND PRODUCTION FUNCTION MODELS TO ASSESS THE NET BENEFITS OF DAIRY HERD... Two methods of evaluating (the net social benefits of the dairy herd‐improvement scheme operated by the New South Wales Department of Agriculture are described. The first involves derivation of 'an input demand' function for the herd‐recording aspect of the scheme and use of this function to estimate the economic surplus (net of both private and public costs) provided by the service. The second approach involves deriving a production function for milk from which it is possible to estimate the contribution herd‐recording and artificial breeding have made to increasing milk yields per cow. Social benefits are shown to have been less than social costs for herd‐recording, however dairy farmers have made net private gains. The herd‐recording scheme has contained a regressive subsidy element. The production function approach show that artificial breeding and herd‐recording were profitable complements in production. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The Australian Journal of Agricultural Resource Economics Wiley

USING INPUT DEMAND AND PRODUCTION FUNCTION MODELS TO ASSESS THE NET BENEFITS OF DAIRY HERD IMPROVEMENT

Download PDF
16 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/using-input-demand-and-production-function-models-to-assess-the-net-BLmA4AS0TW

References (6)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 1975 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
1364-985X
eISSN
1467-8489
DOI
10.1111/j.1467-8489.1975.tb00143.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Two methods of evaluating (the net social benefits of the dairy herd‐improvement scheme operated by the New South Wales Department of Agriculture are described. The first involves derivation of 'an input demand' function for the herd‐recording aspect of the scheme and use of this function to estimate the economic surplus (net of both private and public costs) provided by the service. The second approach involves deriving a production function for milk from which it is possible to estimate the contribution herd‐recording and artificial breeding have made to increasing milk yields per cow. Social benefits are shown to have been less than social costs for herd‐recording, however dairy farmers have made net private gains. The herd‐recording scheme has contained a regressive subsidy element. The production function approach show that artificial breeding and herd‐recording were profitable complements in production.

Journal

The Australian Journal of Agricultural Resource Economics – Wiley

Published: Apr 1, 1975

There are no references for this article.