Table 1: Goodness of fit and model selections of the best meat or poultry cost function
models.
Industry |
Model Number |
Description |
Test Variable |
Test |
Parameters |
Restric- |
G-J Value |
Model |
Meat |
J_____ |
P,LB1 |
- |
10_________ |
- |
186.6 |
- | |
II_________ |
(P,LB,S,T)2 |
Both (T,S) |
I vs II |
21_________ |
11 |
159.5 |
— — ,**⅛ 27.1 | |
III |
(P,LB,S) 3 |
Technology (T) |
II vs. III |
15__________ |
_6_______ |
171.5 |
12.0 | |
IV |
(P,LB,T) 4 |
Sanitation and Process Control (S) |
II vs. IV |
15 |
6 |
173.4 |
T _ * 13.9 | |
Meat Processing |
J_____ |
P,LB1 |
- |
10_________ |
- |
586.8 |
- | |
II_________ |
(P,LB,S,T)2 |
Both (T,S) |
I vs II |
21_________ |
11 |
555.9 |
— ʌ ʌ * * * 30.9 | |
III |
(P,LB,S) 3 ' |
Technology (T) |
II vs. III |
15__________ |
_6_______ |
563.8 |
7.9 | |
IV |
(P,LB,T) 4 |
Sanitation (S)_______ |
II vs. IV |
15__________ |
_6_______ |
574.2 |
18.3 | |
Poultry |
J_____ |
P,LB1 |
- |
10_________ |
- |
126.4 |
- | |
II_________ |
(P,LB,S,p2 |
Both (T,S) |
I vs II |
21_________ |
11 |
113.6 |
12.8 | |
III |
(P,LB,S) 3 ' |
Technology (T) |
II vs. III |
15__________ |
_6_______ |
121.1 |
7.5 | |
IV |
(P,LB,T) 4 |
Sanitation (S)_______ |
II vs. IV |
15__________ |
_6_______ |
119.1 |
5.5 | |
Regu- | ||||||||
Meat |
J_____ |
P,LB1 |
- |
10_________ |
- |
417.0 |
- | |
III |
(P,LB,R) 3 |
Sanitation (S)_______ |
I vs. III |
15__________ |
5 |
410.0 |
7.0 | |
Meat Processing |
J_____ |
P,LB1 |
- |
10_________ |
1,278 |
- | ||
III |
(P,LB,R) 3 |
Sanitation (S)_______ |
I vs. III |
15__________ |
5 |
1,228 |
_ ʌ ʌ * * * 50.0 | |
Chicken |
J_____ |
P,LB1 |
- |
10_________ |
348.3 |
- | ||
III |
(P,LB,R) 3 |
Sanitation (S)_______ |
I vs. III |
15__________ |
5 |
332.6 |
Σ _** 15.7 | |
* significant at the 90% level, ** significant at the 95% level, *** significant at the 99% level
1 Model I: base model consisting of prices (P) and pounds of output (LB) and denoted (P,LB).
2 Model II: Adds technology (T) and sanitation and process control (S) to (P,LB) to make
(P,LB,S,T).
3 Model III: Removes T from II to make (P,LB,S).
4 Model IV; Removes S from II to make (P,LB,T).
21
More intriguing information
1. Partner Selection Criteria in Strategic Alliances When to Ally with Weak Partners2. The name is absent
3. The name is absent
4. Menarchial Age of Secondary School Girls in Urban and Rural Areas of Rivers State, Nigeria
5. GROWTH, UNEMPLOYMENT AND THE WAGE SETTING PROCESS.
6. On the origin of the cumulative semantic inhibition effect
7. The migration of unskilled youth: Is there any wage gain?
8. The name is absent
9. Innovation in commercialization of pelagic fish: the example of "Srdela Snack" Franchise
10. The name is absent