Technical Efficiency of China’s Agriculture and Output Elasticity of Factors Based on Water Resources Utilization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A stochastic frontier approach (SFA) model of translog production function was constructed to analyze the growth effect of agricultural production factors on grain production in China. Under the condition of unchanged cultivated land, the agricultural labor, capital, and water were regarded as input elements of the agricultural production function. The maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) method was used to analyze the technical efficiency, output elasticity, substitution elasticity, and relative variability of grain production in China from 2004 to 2018. The results showed that: (1) For the technical efficiency and output elasticity of the input factors of grain production, there were significant differences in different provinces. For example, the water resource was insufficient in Beijing and Shanghai, but the output elasticity of water was high. Heilongjiang was rich in water and had high technical efficiency. For Xinjiang, water was sufficient, but its output elasticity was deficient and the technical efficiency didn’t increase. (2) The overall technical efficiency level was relatively low and was still declining year by year; the output elasticity of water was much greater than that of capital. There was still great potential for grain growth. (3) Optimizing resource allocation and controlling the appropriate ratio of input factors to develop grain production could achieve the maximum benefits. Finally, according to the empirical results, this paper put forward some practical policy suggestions for optimizing the allocation of input factors, especially water and capital, which can ultimately improve agricultural productivity by improving technical efficiency.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".