The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Technical, Allocative, Cost and Scale Efficiencies in Bangladesh Rice Cultivation: A Non‐parametric Approach
Abstract
Applying programming techniques to detailed data for 406 rice farms in 21 villages, for 1997, produces inefficiency measures, which differ substantially from the results of simple yield and unit cost measures. For the Boro (dry) season, mean technical efficiency was 69.4 per cent, allocative efficiency was 81.3 per cent, cost efficiency was 56.2 per cent and scale efficiency 94.9 per cent. The Aman (wet) season results are similar, but a few points lower. Allocative inefficiency is due to overuse of labour, suggesting population pressure, and of fertiliser, where recommended rates may warrant revision. Second‐stage regressions show that large families are more inefficient, whereas farmers with better access to input markets, and those who do less off‐farm work, tend to be more efficient. The information on the sources of inter‐farm performance differentials could be used by the extension agents to help inefficient farmers. There is little excuse for such sub‐optimal use of survey data, which are often collected at substantial costs.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Measuring the efficiency of decision making units
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8 · Cited by 29,767
The Measurement of Productive Efficiency
Farrell, M. J. (1957) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General) · doi:10.2307/2343100 · Cited by 16,038
An Introduction to Efficiency and Productivity Analysis
(2005) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/b136381 · Cited by 6,909
An Introduction to Efficiency and Productivity Analysis
Coelli, T., Rao, D. S. P., & Battese, G. E. (1998) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-5493-6 · Cited by 4,521
Self-citationData Envelopment Analysis: Theory, Methodology, and Applications
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Lewin, A. Y., & Seiford, L. M. (1994) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-011-0637-5 · Cited by 2,871
The Measurement of Efficiency of Production
Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., & Lovell, C. A. K. (1985) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-015-7721-2 · Cited by 2,137
Efficiency Estimation of Production Functions
Afriat, S. N. (1972) · International Economic Review · doi:10.2307/2525845 · Cited by 1,241
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN FRONTIER MODELLING AND EFFICIENCY MEASUREMENT
Coelli, T. J. (1995) · Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8489.1995.tb00552.x · Cited by 769
Self-citationBattese, G. (1992) · Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1016/0169-5150(92)90049-5 · Cited by 670
Statistical yearbook of Bangladesh
Byuro, B. P. (1984) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 544
Metadata
- Authors
- Coelli, T., Rahman, S., & Thirtle, C.
- Venue
- Journal of Agricultural Economics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-11
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 607-626
- ISSN
- 0021-857X (ISSN-L)
- 1477-9552
- OpenAlex
- W2172139313
- Cited by
- 409
- References
- 18
- FWCI
- 7.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Technical, Allocative, Cost and Scale Efficiencies in Bangladesh Rice Cultivation: A Non‐parametric Approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2002.tb00040.x
- The paper
- Coelli, T., Rahman, S., & Thirtle, C. (2002). Technical, Allocative, Cost and Scale Efficiencies in Bangladesh Rice Cultivation: A Non‐parametric Approach. Journal of Agricultural Economics. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2002.tb00040.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.