Declining Energy Intensity in the U.S. Agricultural Sector: Implications for Factor Substitution and Technological Change
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methods
2.1. Translog Cost Model
2.2. Decomposition of Energy Intensity
3. Empirical Results
3.1. Data and Estimation Results
Regions | States |
---|---|
Northeast | Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, |
New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont | |
Lake States | Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin |
Corn Belt | Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, Ohio |
Northern Plains | Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota |
Appalachian | Kentucky, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia |
Southeast | Florida, Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina |
Delta States | Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi |
Southern Plains | Oklahoma, Texas |
Mountain | Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming |
Pacific | California, Oregon, Washington |
3.2. Factor Substitution
Equation 1 | Equation 2 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Variables | Parameters | Estimates | Parameters | Estimates |
Capital | 0.019 *** | −0.007 *** | ||
(0.003) | (0.002) | |||
Energy | −0.008 *** | −0.006 *** | ||
(0.002) | (0.002) | |||
Labor | −0.011 *** | 0.013 *** | ||
(0.003) | (0.001) | |||
Output | −0.007 *** | 0.004 *** | ||
(0.001) | (0.000) | |||
Technology | 0.002 *** | 0.001 *** | ||
(0.000) | (0.000) | |||
Structure | 0.029 *** | 0.003 *** | ||
(0.004) | (0.001) | |||
Northeast | 0.234 *** | −0.008 *** | ||
(0.012) | (0.004) | |||
Lake States | 0.281 *** | −0.011 *** | ||
(0.015) | (0.004) | |||
Corn Belt | 0.320 *** | −0.006 | ||
(0.015) | (0.004) | |||
Northern Plains | 0.309 *** | 0.018 *** | ||
(0.015) | (0.004) | |||
Appalachian | 0.245 *** | −0.009 ** | ||
(0.014) | (0.004) | |||
Southeast | 0.231 *** | 0.007 * | ||
(0.014) | (0.004) | |||
Delta States | 0.262 *** | 0.018 *** | ||
(0.014) | (0.004) | |||
Southern Plains | 0.258 *** | 0.010 ** | ||
(0.015) | (0.004) | |||
Mountain | 0.253 *** | 0.025 *** | ||
(0.013) | (0.004) | |||
Pacific | 0.217 *** | 0.006 | ||
(0.015) | (0.004) | |||
R-squared | 0.965 | 0.958 |
1960s | |||||||||
U.S. | −0.724 *** | −1.114 *** | −0.196 *** | −0.011 | 0.735 *** | −0.049 | 1.163 *** | 0.143 *** | 0.053 *** |
(0.022) | (0.041) | (0.004) | (0.011) | (0.020) | (0.048) | (0.025) | (0.004) | (0.001) | |
Northeast | −0.725 *** | −1.202 *** | −0.180 *** | −0.025 ** | 0.750 *** | − 0.156 ** | 1.358 *** | 0.140 *** | 0.040 *** |
(0.023) | (0.062) | (0.004) | (0.011) | (0.021) | (0.072) | (0.037) | (0.004) | (0.001) | |
Lake States | −0.721 *** | −1.185 *** | −0.197 *** | −0.019 * | 0.740 *** | −0.121 * | 1.307 *** | 0.154 *** | 0.042 *** |
(0.021) | (0.058) | (0.004) | (0.011) | (0.019) | (0.068) | (0.035) | (0.004) | (0.001) | |
Corn Belt | −0.717 *** | −1.127 *** | −0.214 *** | −0.008 | 0.726 *** | −0.043 | 1.170 *** | 0.163 *** | 0.051 *** |
(0.020) | (0.044) | (0.005) | (0.010) | (0.018) | (0.051) | (0.027) | (0.004) | (0.001) | |
Northern Plains | −0.696 *** | −1.051 *** | −0.274 *** | 0.019 ** | 0.678 *** | 0.076 ** | 0.975 *** | 0.203 *** | 0.071 *** |
(0.016) | (0.028) | (0.005) | (0.008) | (0.015) | (0.033) | (0.017) | (0.004) | (0.001) | |
Appalachian | −0.724 *** | −1.218 *** | −0.144 *** | −0.041 *** | 0.765 *** | −0.210 *** | 1.428 *** | 0.106 *** | 0.038 *** |
(0.029) | (0.066) | (0.004) | (0.015) | (0.027) | (0.077) | (0.040) | (0.004) | (0.001) | |
Southeast | −0.722 *** | −1.116 *** | −0.153 *** | −0.030 * | 0.752 *** | −0.094 * | 1.210 *** | 0.101 *** | 0.052 *** |
(0.030) | (0.042) | (0.004) | (0.016) | (0.028) | (0.049) | (0.025) | (0.004) | (0.001) | |
Delta States | −0.713 *** | −1.112 *** | −0.140 *** | −0.038 *** | 0.752 *** | −0.104 ** | 1.216 *** | 0.088 *** | 0.052 *** |
(0.035) | (0.041) | (0.004) | (0.018) | (0.032) | (0.048) | (0.025) | (0.004) | (0.001) | |
Southern Plains | −0.724 *** | −1.071 *** | −0.206 *** | −0.002 | 0.726 *** | −0.005 | 1.076 *** | 0.142 *** | 0.063 *** |
(0.022) | (0.032) | (0.005) | (0.011) | (0.020) | (0.038) | (0.019) | (0.004) | (0.001) | |
Mountain | −0.715 *** | −1.048 *** | −0.240 *** | 0.013 | 0.702 *** | 0.043 | 1.005 *** | 0.168 *** | 0.071 *** |
(0.019) | (0.028) | (0.005) | (0.010) | (0.017) | (0.033) | (0.017) | (0.004) | (0.001) | |
Pacific | −0.724 *** | −1.085 *** | −0.203 *** | −0.005 | 0.729 *** | −0.019 | 1.104 *** | 0.143 *** | 0.060 *** |
(0.022) | (0.035) | (0.005) | (0.011) | (0.020) | (0.041) | (0.021) | (0.004) | (0.001) | |
2000s | |||||||||
U.S. | −0.672 *** | −0.983 *** | −0.341 *** | 0.053 *** | 0.618 *** | 0.164 *** | 0.820 *** | 0.238 *** | 0.103 *** |
(0.014) | (0.018) | (0.005) | (0.007) | (0.013) | (0.021) | (0.011) | (0.005) | (0.001) | |
Northeast | −0.691 *** | −1.014 *** | −0.297 *** | 0.034 *** | 0.656 *** | 0.115 *** | 0.899 *** | 0.211 *** | 0.087 *** |
(0.015) | (0.022) | (0.005) | (0.008) | (0.014) | (0.026) | (0.013) | (0.005) | (0.001) | |
Lake States | −0.628 *** | −0.992 *** | −0.394 *** | 0.054 *** | 0.573 *** | 0.216 *** | 0.776 *** | 0.294 *** | 0.100 *** |
(0.011) | (0.019) | (0.006) | (0.006) | (0.010) | (0.023) | (0.012) | (0.005) | (0.002) | |
Corn Belt | −0.620 *** | −1.007 *** | −0.397 *** | 0.048 *** | 0.572 *** | 0.215 *** | 0.791 *** | 0.304 *** | 0.093 *** |
(0.011) | (0.021) | (0.006) | (0.006) | (0.010) | (0.025) | (0.013) | (0.005) | (0.002) | |
Northern Plains | −0.640 *** | −0.944 *** | −0.408 *** | 0.082 *** | 0.558 *** | 0.226 *** | 0.717 *** | 0.278 *** | 0.130 *** |
(0.012) | (0.014) | (0.006) | (0.006) | (0.011) | (0.016) | (0.008) | (0.005) | (0.002) | |
Appalachian | −0.671 *** | −1.025 *** | −0.322 *** | 0.033 *** | 0.637 *** | 0.136 *** | 0.889 *** | 0.240 *** | 0.082 *** |
(0.014) | (0.024) | (0.005) | (0.007) | (0.012) | (0.028) | (0.015) | (0.005) | (0.001) | |
Southeast | −0.684 *** | −0.981 *** | −0.324 *** | 0.053 *** | 0.632 *** | 0.147 *** | 0.833 *** | 0.220 *** | 0.104 *** |
(0.015) | (0.018) | (0.005) | (0.007) | (0.014) | (0.021) | (0.011) | (0.005) | (0.001) | |
Delta States | −0.655 *** | −0.946 *** | −0.387 *** | 0.079 *** | 0.576 *** | 0.206 *** | 0.740 *** | 0.260 *** | 0.127 *** |
(0.012) | (0.014) | (0.006) | (0.006) | (0.012) | (0.017) | (0.009) | (0.005) | (0.001) | |
Southern Plains | −0.691 *** | −1.001 *** | −0.303 *** | 0.040 *** | 0.651 *** | 0.124 *** | 0.877 *** | 0.210 *** | 0.093 *** |
(0.015) | (0.020) | (0.005) | (0.008) | (0.014) | (0.024) | (0.012) | (0.005) | (0.001) | |
Mountain | −0.679 *** | −0.943 *** | −0.356 *** | 0.077 *** | 0.602 *** | 0.175 *** | 0.768 *** | 0.228 *** | 0.128 *** |
(0.014) | (0.014) | (0.006) | (0.007) | (0.013) | (0.016) | (0.008) | (0.005) | (0.001) | |
Pacific | −0.717 *** | −0.991 *** | −0.258 *** | 0.036 *** | 0.681 *** | 0.081 *** | 0.911 *** | 0.162 *** | 0.096 *** |
(0.020) | (0.019) | (0.005) | (0.010) | (0.018) | (0.022) | (0.012) | (0.004) | (0.001) |
3.3. Energy Intensity
Budget | Substitution | Output | Technology | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Capital | Energy | Labor | |||||
U.S. | −0.378 *** | −0.245 *** | −0.003 ** | 0.027 ** | 0.060 ** | −0.213 * | −0.005 ** |
(0.013) | (0.092) | (0.001) | (0.012) | (0.026) | (0.111) | (0.002) | |
Northeast | −0.412 *** | −0.262 *** | 0.002 * | 0.033 ** | 0.038 ** | −0.217 * | −0.005 ** |
(0.006) | (0.094) | (0.001) | (0.016) | (0.017) | (0.117) | (0.002) | |
Lake States | −0.315 *** | −0.235 *** | −0.009 ** | 0.025 ** | 0.130 ** | −0.221 * | −0.005 ** |
(0.032) | (0.089) | (0.005) | (0.011) | (0.055) | (0.115) | (0.002) | |
Corn Belt | −0.475 *** | −0.279 ** | 0.031 ** | 0.050 ** | −0.016 ** | −0.256 ** | −0.006 ** |
(0.008) | (0.112) | (0.015) | (0.022) | (0.006) | (0.127) | (0.002) | |
Northern Plains | −0.429 *** | −0.281 *** | 0.025 ** | 0.044 ** | 0.028 ** | −0.240 * | −0.006 ** |
(0.020) | (0.107) | (0.013) | (0.020) | (0.012) | (0.124) | (0.003) | |
Appalachian | −0.352 *** | −0.249 *** | −0.004 * | 0.024 ** | 0.097 ** | −0.216 * | −0.005 ** |
(0.020) | (0.088) | (0.002) | (0.012) | (0.043) | (0.118) | (0.002) | |
Southeast | −0.352 *** | −0.243 *** | −0.008 * | 0.023 ** | 0.086 ** | −0.206 * | −0.005 ** |
(0.017) | (0.087) | (0.004) | (0.011) | (0.038) | (0.111) | (0.002) | |
Delta States | −0.416 *** | −0.321 *** | 0.039 * | 0.056 ** | 0.076 ** | −0.259 * | −0.007 ** |
(0.034) | (0.106) | (0.021) | (0.027) | (0.036) | (0.147) | (0.003) | |
Southern Plains | −0.435 *** | −0.258 *** | 0.012 ** | 0.027 ** | 0.025 ** | −0.236 * | −0.005 ** |
(0.002) | (0.099) | (0.006) | (0.012) | (0.010) | (0.122) | (0.002) | |
Mountain | −0.246 *** | −0.158 *** | −0.071 * | −0.016 ** | 0.137 ** | −0.134 * | −0.003 ** |
(0.008) | (0.058) | (0.037) | (0.007) | (0.059) | (0.071) | (0.001) | |
Pacific | −0.408 *** | −0.247 ** | 0.006 ** | 0.026 ** | 0.035 ** | −0.223 ** | −0.005 ** |
(0.009) | (0.097) | (0.003) | (0.012) | (0.014) | (0.113) | (0.002) |
4. Summary and Discussion
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Wang, S.L.; Ball, E. Agricultural Productivity Growth in the United States: 1948–2011; United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Pelletier, N.; Audsley, E.; Brodt, S.; Garnett, T.; Henriksson, P.; Kendall, A.; Kramer, K.; Murphy, D.; Nemecek, T.; Troell, M. Energy Intensity of Agriculture and Food Systems. Ann. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2011, 36, 223–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sands, R.D.; Westcott, P.C.; Price, J.M.; Beckman, J.; Leibtag, E.; Lucier, G.; McBride, W.; McGranahan, D.; Morehart, M.; Roeger, E.; et al. Impacts of Higher Energy Prices on Agriculture and Rural Economies. 2011. Available online: http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/err-economic-research-report/err123.aspx (accessed on 20 January 2015). [Google Scholar]
- Beckman, J.; Borchers, A.; Jones, C. Agriculture’s Supply and Demand for Energy and Energy Products. 2013. Available online: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2267323 (accessed on 20 January 2015).
- Welsch, H.; Ochsen, C. The Determinants of Aggregate Energy Use in West Germany: Factor Substitution, Technological Change and Trade. Energy Econ. 2005, 27, 93–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wing, I.S. Explaining the Declining Energy Intensity of the U.S. Economy. Resour. Energy Econ. 2008, 30, 21–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Canning, P.; Charles, A.; Huang, S.; Polenske, K.R.; Waters, A. Energy Use in the U.S. Food System; United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, S.L.; McPhail, L. Impacts of Energy Shocks on U.S. Agricultural Productivity Growth and Commodity Prices—A Structural VAR Analysis. Energy Econ. 2014, 46, 435–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Q.; Zhou, P.; Zhao, Z.; Shen, N. Energy Efficiency and Energy Saving Potential in China: A Directional Meta-Frontier DEA Approach. Sustainability 2014, 6, 5476–5492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ball, V.E.; Färe, R.; Grosskopf, S.; Margaritisd, D. The Role of Energy Productivity in U.S. Agriculture. Energy Econ. 2015, 49, 460–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Apostolakis, B.E. Energy-Capital Substitutability/Complementarity: The Dichotomy. Energy Econ. 1990, 12, 48–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thompson, P.; Taylor, T.G. The Capital-Energy Substitutability Debate: A New Look. Rev. Econ. Stat. 1995, 77, 565–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berndt, E.R.; Wood, D.O. Technology, Prices, and Derived Demand for Energy. Rev. Econ. Stat. 1975, 57, 259–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Griffin, J.M.; Gregory, P.R. An Intercountry Translog Model of Energy Substitution Responses. Am. Econ. Rev. 1976, 66, 845–857. [Google Scholar]
- Özatalay, S.; Grubaugh, S.; Long, T.V. Energy Substitution and National Energy Policy. Am. Econ. Rev. 1979, 69, 369–371. [Google Scholar]
- Berndt, E.R.; Wood, D.O. Engineering Econometric Interpretation of Energy-Capital Complementary. Am. Econ. Rev. 1979, 69, 342–354. [Google Scholar]
- Pindyck, R. Interfuel Substitution and the Industrial Demand for Energy: An International Comparison. Rev. Econ. Stat. 1979, 61, 169–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ray, S.C. A Translog Cost Function Analysis of U.S. Agriculture, 1939-77. Ame. J. Agric. Econ. 1982, 64, 490–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frondel, M.; Schimdt, C.M. The Capital-Energy: An Artifact of Cost Shares? Energy J. 2002, 23, 53–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roy, J.; Sanstad, A.H.; Sathaye, J.A.; Khaddaria, R. Substitution and Price Elasticity Estimates using Inter-Country Pooled Data in a Translog Cost Model. Energy Econ. 2006, 28, 706–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koetse, M.J.; de Groot, H.L.; Florax, R.J. Capital-Energy Substitution and Shift in Factor Demand: A Meta-Analysis. Energy Econ. 2008, 30, 2236–2251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, J.; Heo, E. Asymmetric Substitutability between Energy and Capital: Evidence from the Manufacturing Sectors in 10 OECD Countries. Energy Econ. 2013, 40, 81–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tovar, M.A.; Iglesias, E.M. Capital-Energy Relationships: An Analysis when Disaggregating by Industry and Different Types of Capital. Energy J. 2013, 34, 129–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fuss, M. The Demand for Energy in Canadian Manufacturing: An Example of the Estimation of Production Function with Many Inputs. J. Econ. 1977, 5, 89–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Christensen, L.R.; Jorgenson, D.W.; Lau, L.J. Transcendental Logarithmic Production Frontiers. Rev. Econ. Stat. 1973, 55, 28–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kratena, K. Technical Change, Investment and Energy Intensity. Econ. Syst. Res. 2007, 19, 295–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, H.; Oxley, L.; Gibson, J.; Kim, B. China’s Energy Economy: Technical Change, Factor Demand and Interfactor/Interfuel Substitution. Energy Econ. 2008, 30, 2167–2183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, H.; Oxley, L.; Gibson, J. Substitution Possibilities and Determinants of Energy Intensity for China. Energy Policy 2009, 37, 1793–1804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, H.; Oxley, L.; Gibson, J.; Kim, B. Modeling China’s Energy Consumption Behavior and Changes in Energy Intensity. Environ. Model. Softw. 2009, 24, 1293–1301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zha, D.; Zhou, D.; Ding, N. The Determinants of Aggregated Electricity Intensity in China. Appl. Energy 2012, 97, 150–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- USDA Economic Research Service (USDA-ERS). Agricultural Productivity in the U.S. 2015. Available online: http://www.ers.usda.gov/ data-products/agricultural-productivity-in-the-us.aspx (accessed on 20 January 2015). [Google Scholar]
- Barton, G.T. Changing Geographic Location of Agricultural Production. Increasing Understanding of Public Problems and Policies; United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USA, 1961. [Google Scholar]
- Pindyck, R.S.; Rotemberg, J.J. Dynamic Factor Demands and the Effects of Energy Price Shocks. Am. Econ. Rev. 1983, 73, 1066–1079. [Google Scholar]
- Debertin, D.L.; Pagoulatos, A.; Aoun, A. Impacts of Technological Change on Factor Substitution between Energy and Other Inputs within U.S. Agriculture, 1950-79. Energy Econ. 1990, 12, 2–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
© 2015 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Suh, D.H. Declining Energy Intensity in the U.S. Agricultural Sector: Implications for Factor Substitution and Technological Change. Sustainability 2015, 7, 13192-13205. https://doi.org/10.3390/su71013192
Suh DH. Declining Energy Intensity in the U.S. Agricultural Sector: Implications for Factor Substitution and Technological Change. Sustainability. 2015; 7(10):13192-13205. https://doi.org/10.3390/su71013192
Chicago/Turabian StyleSuh, Dong Hee. 2015. "Declining Energy Intensity in the U.S. Agricultural Sector: Implications for Factor Substitution and Technological Change" Sustainability 7, no. 10: 13192-13205. https://doi.org/10.3390/su71013192