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. DISCUSSION: ASSESSING STRUCTURAL CHANGE IN THE DEMAND FOR FOOD COMMODITIES2. The Role of State Trading Enterprises and Their Impact on Agricultural Development and Economic Growth in Developing Countries
3. Reversal of Fortune: Macroeconomic Policy, International Finance, and Banking in Japan
4. The name is absent
5. ALTERNATIVE TRADE POLICIES
6. The name is absent
7. How we might be able to understand the brain
8. The name is absent
9. The name is absent
10. The name is absent