Table 3 Result of Estimation (Regressions Relating to Bureaucrats’ Discretion)
|
Fiscal |
Share of households |
Average cost per bag |
Share of Jishu- ryutsu- |
Adjusted R |
|
year |
with full- time farmers |
of rice |
mai (High quality rice) |
Square (R2) |
|
(FTF) |
(COST) |
(JISHU) | ||
|
1980 |
0.10353(1.42346) |
0.49015**(2.54991) |
-0.14620**(-2.36458) |
0.319883 |
|
1981 |
0.06347(0.92714) |
0.49110* (1.82013) |
-0.13948**(-2.50822) |
0.233590 |
|
1982 |
0.06685(1.03292) |
0.52976**(2.65238) |
-0.11905**(-2.10339) |
0.296930 |
|
1983 |
0.09894(1.48625) |
0.66166***(3.08470) |
-0.14607**(-2.51483) |
0.357808 |
|
1984 |
0.15233**(2.46090) |
1.06927***(4.81020) |
-0.15546***(-3.02321) |
0.492769 |
|
**(2.10653) |
**(5.05181) |
**(-2.68382) | ||
|
1985 |
0.10389(1.49822) |
0.66808***(3.51768) |
-0.19554***(-3.50770) |
0.410533 |
|
1986 |
0.14011**(2.13317) |
1.11849***(4.63530) |
-0.14939***(-2.86602) |
0.498465 |
|
1987 |
0.12383**(2.52331) |
0.79062***(5.09708) |
-0.09852**(-2.49713) |
0.510986 |
|
1988 |
0.08896*(1.69799) |
0.70547***(3.41447) |
-0.12913**(-2.50536) |
0.378622 |
|
(1.49682) |
***(3.85892) |
*(-1.86693) | ||
|
1989 |
0.17634***(3.88629) |
1.02499***(5.61896) |
-0.29165**(-2.15429) |
0.487166 |
|
1990 |
0.14211***(3.41031) |
0.70068***(4.97968) |
-0.14433**(-2.68288) |
0.577618 |
|
1991 |
0.07639 (1.62473) |
0.33884**(2.45223) |
-0.26155***(-3.48585) |
0.365581 |
|
1992 |
0.08941 *(1.95487) |
0.81918***(4.86336) |
-0.29334***(-3.67120) |
0.498842 |
|
1993 |
0.16841***(3.19447) |
0.93959***(4.36878) |
-0.98989 (-1.11960) |
0.379464 |
|
1994 |
0.32378***(4.70731) |
1.55627***(5.34282) |
-0.32353**(-2.53926) |
0.566989 |
|
1995 |
0.19951***(3.40856) |
1.12118***(3.99142) |
-0.34262**(-2.17628) |
0.424676 |
|
1996 |
0.14880***(3.40450) |
0.99551***(5.15642) |
-0.27649**(-2.17636) |
0.507915 |
|
1997 |
0.17312***(3.52664) |
0.89649***(4.53426) |
-0.13040 (-1.14917) |
0.431648 |
|
1998 |
0.13678***(3.31782) |
0.77235***(4.41765) |
-0.09809 (-0.28284) |
0.452057 |
|
1999 |
0.12527***(3.12786) |
0.69758***(4.61436) |
0.04182 (0.16902) |
0.417774 |
|
2000 |
0.16717***(4.18409) |
0.92626***(6.15059) |
0.30184 (0.99480) |
0.520145 |
|
2001 |
0.12702***(3.78763) |
0.67454***(5.20378) |
0.04703 (0.23939) |
0.468927 |
Note: 1) Figures in the first and second columns are the scores of parameters’ coefficients. Those in
parentheses are scores of t-statistics.
2) *P<0.1, **P<0.05 and ***P<0.01
3) Figures on lower lines in 1984 and 1988 are t-statistics calculated from White hetero-skedasticity
consistent covariance.
4) Shaded figures showed different signs from the theoretically expected ones.
More intriguing information
1. Permanent and Transitory Policy Shocks in an Empirical Macro Model with Asymmetric Information2. The name is absent
3. Housing Market in Malaga: An Application of the Hedonic Methodology
4. An Intertemporal Benchmark Model for Turkey’s Current Account
5. The use of formal education in Denmark 1980-1992
6. The name is absent
7. The name is absent
8. The name is absent
9. Target Acquisition in Multiscale Electronic Worlds
10. Non-causality in Bivariate Binary Panel Data