The trend and nature of technological change in the poultry industry of Iran

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 University of Tabriz

2 University of Tabriz, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Agricultural E conomics

3 Tabriz university

Abstract

Abstract
Introduction: The growing population and increasing demand for agricultural products, including protein products such as chicken meat due to limited resources, have made it necessary to improve the productivity of inputs. Since the technological change is one of the significant components of productivity change, therefor, the present study was conducted to evaluate the trend and nature of technological change in the Iranian poultry industry.
Material and methods: For this purpose, required data were collected from 27 provinces during the period 1996-2017. In the present study, a cost function approach is used as a basis for estimating technological change using panel data. Technological change may be neutral or biased, depending on how the relationship between inputs is affected. The estimation is based on an output and multi-input Translog cost function. The Translog function has the advantage of being a flexible functional form. The parameters of the cost function were estimated on the basis of the model system including the cost function and four of the five share equations using Seemingly Unrelated Regression (SURE). The estimation was performed imposing the normal symmetry conditions. The F-Limer test is used to measure whether the data are panel or pooled. Then the Hausman test is then used to determine the use of the fixed or random effects model. In order to estimating the system of equations, one of the equations of input cost share is eliminated and all cost function equations and share of input demand are estimated simultaneously. In the model used, the price of all inputs was divided by the price of one-day-old chickens.
Results and discussion: The estimation of the models performed relatively well. There was a very high degree of explanation, and most of the parameters had the expected sign. The estimation gave a very high degree of explanation, so that the value of R2 was equal to 0.96. The rate of technological change in some provinces that used the latest technology was above the national average. A negative sign in technological change indicates a decrease in the growth of production costs over time. Thus, it can be seen that the improvement of technology, the use of new production methods as symbols of technology, has reduced the cost of the poultry industry. Using the original breed of day-old chickens, poultry feed and high-quality materials, benefiting from efficient heating and cooling system are among the symbols of technological change. This shows that by using different forms of technology, poultry units have been able to increase the amount of chicken meat production. The rate of technology change has been declining until 2014 and reached its minimum in that year. That is, in 2014, compared to other years, the cost of producing each unit of chicken meat in poultry farms in different provinces of the country has decreased. The results of pure technological change showed that in all years under review, the amount of neutral technological change was positive and its average was 0.93. In general, it can be said that the process of changing pure technology over time has increased the production cost. The results of changing the input biased technological change showed that its average values were -0.26. Thus, it can be said that in the production of broiler chicken, technological developments have led to savings in production factors. the average rate of technology change was -1.61 percent over the mentioned time period, which means that in the study period the rate of cost change of production units has been decreased. Since cost elasticity was less than one (0.37), so the production is faced with the increasing return to scale. Therefore, the reduction in the cost causes economic savings in the production process. Material and methods: For this purpose, required data were collected from 27 provinces during the period 1996-2017. In the present study, a cost function approach is used as a basis for estimating technological change using panel data. Technological change may be neutral or biased, depending on how the relationship between inputs is affected. The estimation is based on an output and multi-input Translog cost function. The Translog function has the advantage of being a flexible functional form. The parameters of the cost function were estimated on the basis of the model system including the cost function and four of the five share equations using Seemingly Unrelated Regression (SURE). The estimation was performed imposing the normal symmetry conditions. The F-Limer test is used to measure whether the data are panel or pooled. Then the Hausman test is then used to determine the use of the fixed or random effects model. In order to estimating the system of equations, one of the equations of input cost share is eliminated and all cost function equations and share of input demand are estimated simultaneously. In the model used, the price of all inputs was divided by the price of one-day-old chickens.
Conclusion: According to the results of this research, the technology has changed in order to use more poultry feed; In other words, the technological change in the Iranian poultry industry is energy and labor saving. The results of cost elasticity, which was less than one, showed that product production in these units has an upward return to scale, so it confirms the existence of economies of scale in the poultry industry. Finally, it is suggested that the poultry industry utilizes the new technology and increases the production scale in order to access comparative advantage.

Keywords


Abdi A, Dashti Gh, Ghahramanzadeh M and Hosseinzad J, 2016. Analysis of technical efficiency and technology gap of broiler poultry units in Sanandaj. Journal of Animal Science Research 3: 61-50.
Catherine JMP, Warren EJ and Gerald AGF, 2000. Efficiency in New Zealand sheep and farming: The impacts of regulatory reform. The Review of Economics and Statistics 82(2): 325-337.
Dashti Gh, 2015. Evaluation the trend and direction of technical change in industrial dairy farms in Iran. Journal of Animal Science Research 25(1): 25-35.
Dashti Gh, Sani F, Ghahramanzadeh M and Sani R, 2019. Measuring and decomposing total factor productivity growth of industrial dairy farms in Iran. Journal of Animal Science Research 29(1): 61-76.
Dashti N, Yavari K and Sadeghi H, 2010. A study of the nature and trend of technological change in the IRN industry (1350-1387). Economic Research Journal 1: 95-71.
Doraszelski U and Jaumandreu J, 2018. Measuring the bias of technological change. Journal of Political Economy 126(3): 1027-1084.
Feng G, Gao J and Zhang X, 2018. Estimation of technical change and price elasticities: a categorical time–varying coefficient approach. Journal of Productivity Analysis 50(3): 117-138.
Feyzabadi Y and Taghipour M, 2014. Calculation of concentration index and its effect on market margin in the poultry slaughter industry of Mazandaran province. Quarterly Journal of Business Research 71: 179-161.
Hadipoor H, Mousavi N and Najafi B, 2019. Evaluation of sustainability indicators of conservation agricultural technology: a case study of wheat crop in Marvdasht. Journal of Agricultural Economics Research 12(3): 72-41.
Heshmati A and Rashidghalam M, 2016. Estimation of technical change and TFP growth based on observable technology shifters. Journal of Productivity Analysis 53(1): 1-16.
Hosseinzad J and Rashidqalam M, 2017. The impact of exchange rates on the prices of main livestock and poultry inputs. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development Research 1: 1-8.
Hu J, Wang Z and Huang Q, 2021. Factor allocation structure and green-biased technological progress in Chinese agriculture. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja 34(1): 2034-2058.
Isfahani M and Khazaei J, 2010. Investigating the effective factors on the efficiency of poultry farmers in South Khorasan Province. Agricultural Economics Research 4: 180-165.
Jia P, Li K and Shao S, 2018. Choice of technological change for China's low-carbon development: Evidence from three urban agglomerations. Journal of Environmental Management 206:1308-1319.
Khodaparast Mashhadi M, Fitras M and Fathi B, 2015. Investigating the cost function structure of a two-product firm (Case study of Markazi Province Water and Sewerage Company). Scientific Quarterly 14: 217-193.
Kohansal M, 2014. Study of technology changes and economies of scale in irrigated wheat production in Khorasan Razavi province. Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development 85: 105-87.
Kumar S and M Khanna, 2003. The impact of CO2 abatement on productivity growth and GDP: a cross country analysis using distance function approach. www.ace.uiuc.edu/pERE/papers/pERE_WP29.pdf
Larson DF, 2008. Heterogeneous technology and panel data: the case of the agricultural production function (Vol. 4536). World Bank Publications.
Madani Rad M, 2015. Study and analysis of the production, supply and consumption of improved seeds in the country: Challenges and Solutions, Ministry of Jihad Agriculture, Planning Research Institute. Agricultural Economics and Rural Development 1-15.
Ministry of Jihad Agriculture, 2021. Statistical yearbook. https://www.maj.ir/
Motamed M and Pourkand S, 2011. Productivity of production factors in broilers production: case study of Gilan Province. Agricultural Economics Research 3(12): 97-114.
Pishbahar A, Ferdowsi R and Assadollahpour F, 2015. Investigation of price transfer in the chicken meat market: Applying the Markov-Switching Vector Self-Explanatory Model (MSVAR). Agricultural Economics, 2: 72-55.
Rasmussen S, 2000. Technological change and economies of scale in Danish agriculture No. 1322-2016-103579.
Shahbazi A and Javan Bakht A, 2019. Investigation of production structure of broiler breeding units in Masjed Soleiman city. Journal of Animal Research 2: 15-29.
Shao S, Luan R, Yang Z and Li C, 2016. Does directed technological change get greener: empirical evidence from Shanghai's industrial green development transformation. Ecological Indicators 69: 758-770.
Sheytanova T, 2015. The accuracy of the Hausman test in panel data: A Monte Carlo Study.
Solow RM, 1957. Technical change and the aggregate production function. The Review of Economics and Statistics 312-320.
Sotirakopoulos K, Barham R, Piper B and Nencini L, 2015. A statistical method for assessing network stability using the chow test. Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts 17(10): 1841-1850.
Souza GDS, Gomes EG, de Andrade Alves ER and Gasques JG, 2020. Technological progress in the Brazilian agriculture. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 72(2): 100879.
Stevenson R, 1980. Measuring technological bias. The American Economic Review 70(1): 162-173. 
Vaseghi A, Azizi A and Zare Mehrjerdi M, 2018. Investigating the effect of technology change on the cost share of fertilizers and chemical pesticides in order to protect the environment (Case study: production of corn). Journal of Agricultural Economics Research 10(4): 215-226.
Yigezu YA, Foster KA and Lantz V, 2006. Production structure, technological change and scale economies in the saw and planning mills industry in New Brunswick, Canada. California: American Agricultural Economics Association.
Zarabi A, Babanasab R, Rahimichamchani A and Alizadehasl J, 2017. Spatial analysis and prioritization of Iran provinces for ICT planning and development. Geography and Planning 21(2): 197-220.