| Title |
Technical efficiency in milk production in underdeveloped production environment of India*
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2193-1801-2-65 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dwaipayan Bardhan, Murari Lal Sharma |
| Abstract |
The study was undertaken in Kumaon division of Uttarakhand state of India with the objective of estimating technical efficiency in milk production across different herd-size category households and factors influencing it. Total of 60 farm households having representation from different herd-size categories drawn from six randomly selected villages of plain and hilly regions of the division constituted the ultimate sampling units of the study. Stochastic frontier production function analysis was used to estimate the technical efficiency in milk production. Multivariate regression equations were fitted taking technical efficiency index as the regressand to identify the factors significantly influencing technical efficiency in milk production. The study revealed that variation in output across farms in the study area was due to difference in their technical efficiency levels. However, it was interesting to note that smallholder producers were more technically efficient in milk production than their larger counterparts, especially in the plains. Apart from herd size, intensity of market participation had significant and positive impact on technical efficiency in the plains. This provides definite indication that increasing the level of commercialization of dairy farms would have beneficial impact on their production efficiency. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Ghana | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 38 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 28% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 25% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 35% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 13 | 33% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 February 2013.
All research outputs
#20,184,694
of 22,699,621 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,461
of 1,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,080
of 193,362 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#58
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,699,621 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,852 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 193,362 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 115 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.