IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/qld/uqcepa/22.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Dual Measure of Economies of Scope

Author

Abstract

Information on the economies of scope (or cost complementarities) between two or more output variables is traditionally obtained from the second derivative properties of an econometrically estimated multi-output cost function. However, in some instances the econometric estimation of a cost function may not be viable, because cost or input price data are not readily available or because the assumption of cost minimising behaviour is not appropriate in the industry at hand, perhaps due to government ownership or regulatory controls. In this paper we address this issue by utilising the duality between the cost and input distance functions in deriving an expression for a measure of economies of scope in terms of the derivatives of an input distance function. We derive expressions for the special cases of the CES and translog functional forms, and then provide an empirical illustration using sample data on Australian aged care facilities, an industry which is currently undergoing a major pricing and regulatory review. Our empirical results indicate that there is some evidence for existence of economies of scope between high care and low care patients, a result which is of particular interest to policy makers in this industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Gholamreza Hajargasht & Tim Coelli & D. S. Prasada Rao, 2006. "A Dual Measure of Economies of Scope," CEPA Working Papers Series WP032006, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
  • Handle: RePEc:qld:uqcepa:22
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://economics.uq.edu.au/files/5076/WP032006.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Songqing Jin & Scott Rozelle & Julian Alston & Jikun Huang, 2005. "Economies Of Scale And Scope And The Economic Efficiency Of China'S Agricultural Research System," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 46(3), pages 1033-1057, August.
    2. Catherine J. Morrison Paul & Warren E. Johnston & Gerald A. G. Frengley, 2000. "Efficiency in New Zealand Sheep and Beef Farming: The Impacts of Regulatory Reform," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 82(2), pages 325-337, May.
    3. Charles Blackorby & R. Robert Russell, 1981. "The Morishima Elasticity of Substitution; Symmetry, Constancy, Separability, and its Relationship to the Hicks and Allen Elasticities," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 48(1), pages 147-158.
    4. Ivaldi, M & McCullough, G J, 2001. "Density and Integration Effects on Class I U.S. Freight Railroads," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 161-182, March.
    5. Blackorby, Charles & Russell, R Robert, 1989. "Will the Real Elasticity of Substitution Please Stand Up? (A Comparison of the Allen/Uzawa and Morishima Elasticities)," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(4), pages 882-888, September.
    6. Harry Bloch & Gary Madden & Scott Savage, 2001. "Economies of Scale and Scope in Australian Telecommunications," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 18(2), pages 219-227, March.
    7. Rezvanian, Rasoul & Mehdian, Seyed, 2002. "An examination of cost structure and production performance of commercial banks in Singapore," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 79-98, January.
    8. O'Donnell, Christopher J. & Coelli, Timothy J., 2005. "A Bayesian approach to imposing curvature on distance functions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 493-523, June.
    9. Atkinson, Scott E. & Primont, Daniel, 2002. "Stochastic estimation of firm technology, inefficiency, and productivity growth using shadow cost and distance functions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 203-225, June.
    10. Jim Griffin & Mark Steel, 2007. "Bayesian stochastic frontier analysis using WinBUGS," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 163-176, June.
    11. Takanori Ida & Tetsuya Kuwahara, 2004. "Yardstick Cost Comparison and Economies of Scale and Scope in Japan's Electric Power Industry," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 18(4), pages 423-438, December.
    12. Panzar, John C & Willig, Robert D, 1981. "Economies of Scope," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(2), pages 268-272, May.
    13. Coelli, Tim & Fleming, Euan, 2004. "Diversification economies and specialisation efficiencies in a mixed food and coffee smallholder farming system in Papua New Guinea," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 31(2-3), pages 229-239, December.
    14. Angus Deaton, 1979. "The Distance Function in Consumer Behaviour with Applications to Index Numbers and Optimal Taxation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 46(3), pages 391-405.
    15. David N. Laband & Bernard F. Lentz, 2003. "New Estimates of Economies of Scale and Scope in Higher Education," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 70(1), pages 172-183, July.
    16. Hanoch, Giora, 1975. "The Elasticity of Scale and the Shape of Average Costs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(3), pages 492-497, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Maria Olivares & Heike Wetzel, 2014. "Editor's Choice Competing in the Higher Education Market: Empirical Evidence for Economies of Scale and Scope in German Higher Education Institutions," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 60(4), pages 653-680.
    2. Nonthakot, Phanin & Fleming, Euan M. & Villano, Renato A., 2008. "An Assessment of the Impact of Strategic Alliances in Food Processing on the Technical Efficiency of Housewives Groups in Thailand," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44411, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Villano, Renato & Fleming, Euan & Fleming, Pauline, 2010. "Evidence of farm-level synergies in mixed-farming systems in the Australian Wheat-Sheep Zone," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(3), pages 146-152, March.
    4. Maria Olivares & Heike Wetzel, 2011. "Competing in the Higher Education Market: Empirical Evidence for Economies of Scale and Scope in German Higher Education Institutions," Economics of Education Working Paper Series 0070, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW).
    5. Singbo, Alphonse G. & Emvalomatis, Grigorios & Alfons, Oude Lansink, 2013. "Assessing the impact of crop specialization on farms’ performance in vegetables farming in Benin: a non-neutral stochastic frontier approach," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 149172, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Jiro Nemoto & Noriko Furumatsu, 2014. "Scale and scope economies of Japanese private universities revisited with an input distance function approach," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 213-226, April.
    7. Swetlana Renner & Thomas Glauben & Heinrich Hockmann, 2014. "Measurement and decomposition of flexibility of multi-output firms," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 41(5), pages 745-773.
    8. A. Wondemu Kifle, 2016. "Working Paper 237 - Decomposing Sources of Productivity Change in Small-Scale Farming in Ethiopia," Working Paper Series 2332, African Development Bank.
    9. Roberto Mosheim & Robin C. Sickles, 2021. "Spatial effects of nutrient pollution on drinking water production," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 60(6), pages 2741-2764, June.
    10. Färe, Rolf & Karagiannis, Giannis, 2018. "Inferring scope economies from the input distance function," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 40-42.
    11. Robertson R.B. Khataza & Atakelty Hailu & Graeme J. Doole & Marit E. Kragt & Arega D. Alene, 2019. "Examining the relationship between farm size and productive efficiency: a Bayesian directional distance function approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 50(2), pages 237-246, March.
    12. Ofori-Bah, Adeline & Asafu-Adjaye, John, 2011. "Scope economies and technical efficiency of cocoa agroforesty systems in Ghana," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1508-1518, June.
    13. Wimmer, Stefan G. & Sauer, Johannes, 2017. "The Economic Benefits of Farm Diversification: An Empirical Analysis of Economies of Scope Using the Dual Approach," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258465, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Renner, Swetlana & Hockmann, Heinrich & Glauben, Thomas, 2011. "Measuring flexibility of multi-output firms: a primal and a dual measure," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114797, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Swetlana Renner & Thomas Glauben & Heinrich Hockmann & Pierre Ouellette, 2015. "Primal and dual multi-output flexibility measures," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 127-136, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Richard Nehring & Jorge Fernandez-Cornejo & David Banker, 2005. "Off-farm labour and the structure of US agriculture: the case of corn/soybean farms," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(6), pages 633-649.
    2. Dawei Zhang & Zhuo (June) Cheng & Hasan A. Qurban H. Mohammad & Barrie R. Nault, 2015. "Research Commentary—Information Technology Substitution Revisited," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 480-495, September.
    3. Thomas P. Triebs & David S. Saal & Pablo Arocena & Subal C. Kumbhakar, 2016. "Estimating economies of scale and scope with flexible technology," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 173-186, April.
    4. Nguyen, Huy, 2014. "Crop diversification, economic performance and household’s behaviours Evidence from Vietnam," MPRA Paper 59168, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 05 Oct 2014.
    5. Wimmer, Stefan G. & Sauer, Johannes, 2017. "The Economic Benefits of Farm Diversification: An Empirical Analysis of Economies of Scope Using the Dual Approach," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258465, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Anthony J. Glass & Amangeldi Kenjegaliev & Karligash Kenjegalieva, 2022. "Comparisons of deposit types and implications of the financial crisis: Evidence for U.S. banks," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(1), pages 641-664, January.
    7. Valentin Zelenyuk, 2011. "A Note on Equivalences in Measuring Returns to Scale in Multi-output-multi-input Technologies," CEPA Working Papers Series WP052011, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    8. Takeshima, Hiroyuki & Hatzenbuehler, Patrick L. & Edeh, Hyacinth O., 2020. "Effects of agricultural mechanization on economies of scope in crop production in Nigeria," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    9. Bonilla, Jorge & Coria, Jessica & Sterner, Thomas, 2012. "Synergies and Trade-offs between Climate and Local Air Pollution: Policies in Sweden," Working Papers in Economics 529, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    10. Stern, David I., 2010. "Derivation of the Hicks, or direct, elasticity of substitution using the input distance function," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 108(3), pages 349-351, September.
    11. Marta Arbelo-Pérez & Pilar Pérez-Gómez & Antonio Arbelo, 2023. "Profit efficiency and its determinants in the agricultural sector: A Bayesian approach," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 69(11), pages 436-445.
    12. Jin, Man, 2018. "Measuring substitution in China's monetary-assets demand system," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 117-132.
    13. Cullmann, Astrid & Zloczysti, Petra, 2013. "Towards an Efficient Use of R&D ? Accounting for Heterogeneity in the OECD," CEPR Discussion Papers 9345, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Tagashira, Takumi & Minami, Chieko, 2019. "The Effect of Cross-Channel Integration on Cost Efficiency," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 68-83.
    15. Napasintuwong, Orachos & Emerson, Robert D., 2004. "Labor Substitutability In Labor Intensive Agriculture And Technological Change In The Presence Of Foreign Labor," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20048, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    16. Ogundari, K. & Brümmer, Bernhard, 2011. "Estimating Technical Efficiency, Input substitution and complementary effects using Output Distance Function: A study of Cassava production in Nigeria," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 12(2).
    17. Douglas Fisher & Adrian R. Fleissig & Apostolos Serletis, 2006. "An Empirical Comparison of Flexible Demand System Functional Forms," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Money And The Economy, chapter 13, pages 247-277, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    18. Russell Pittman, 2001. "Vertical Restructuring of the Infrastructure Sectors of Transition Economies," Industrial Organization 0111002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Kellermann, Magnus A., 2015. "Total Factor Productivity Decomposition and Unobserved Heterogeneity in Stochastic Frontier Models," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 44(1), pages 1-25, April.
    20. Daniel J. Henderson, 2009. "A Non‐parametric Examination of Capital–Skill Complementarity," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 71(4), pages 519-538, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:qld:uqcepa:22. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SOE IT (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/decuqau.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.