4.7 Article

Is the technical efficiency green? The environmental efficiency of agricultural production in the MENA region

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
卷 327, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116820

关键词

Directional distance function; Technical efficiency; Shadow price; Elasticity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study uses the directional distance function to measure environmentally-adjusted technical efficiency in agricultural production in six countries in the MENA region. The results show that all six countries have room to improve their environmental efficiency. It also finds a trade-off between agricultural emissions and production, which should be considered for enhancing sustainability in the region.
There is widespread recognition of the global environmental impact of agricultural production on greenhouse gas emissions, but evidence is sparse regarding the impact in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. In this study, we treat agricultural emissions as an undesirable output from agricultural production and apply the directional distance function to measure environmentally-adjusted technical efficiency, defined as environmental efficiency in agricultural production, in six countries in the MENA region (Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Morocco, Tunisia) during the period 1980-2016. The results show that all six countries have clear scope to improve their environmental efficiency. Agricultural production is greener in Jordan and Israel, while envi-ronmental efficiency is currently lowest in Egypt and Morocco. Estimated relative shadow price of agricultural emissions is-1.002, implying that the 'cost' of removing agricultural emissions is almost equal to the value of producing one unit of good output. These findings suggest there is a trade-off between agriculture emissions and production, which should be considered in efforts to enhance the sustainability of agricultural production in the MENA region.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据