Technological Change and its Relationship with Total Factor Productivity in Iran's Petroleum Refineries

Document Type: Original Article

Authors

economics and energy management department, tehran faculty of petroleum university of technology

Abstract

Nowadays, using appropriate technologies in order to increase productivity of production factors can be resulted in optimal factors employment and production enhancement in factories. Technological change is considered as one of the main sources of productivity growth. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the various aspects of technological change and their relationship with total factor productivity in Iran’s petroleum refineries.
In order to achieve this goal, we used the econometric method to estimate the cost function. This method seems useful to estimate the structure of factors demand, considering changes in factors prices and technology status. We estimated a translog cost function as well as equations system of cost share, using Seemingly Unrelated Regressions (SUR) approach from 1982 to 2012.
The results show that the average rate of technological change was -0.482 percent over the study period. It means that over time, the cost growth rate of production units was decreased mainly due to technological change. Furthermore, the results indicate that technological change was biased towards the use of more labor and material, while it saved more capital and energy. Also, based on the estimation results, we decomposed total factor productivity growth rate into the contributions of technological change and economies of scale. Decomposition results show that the share of technological change in the productivity growth is greater than that of scale economies.

Keywords


  • Atkinson, Anthony, and J. E. Stiglitz. (1969). A New View of Tecnological Change, Economic Journal, 79, 573-578.
  • Baltagi, B. H. (2005). Econometrics Analysis of Panel Data. John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2005.
  • Baltagi, B. H. and J.M.Griffin. (1988). A General Index of Technical Change. Journal of Political Economy, 96:20_41.
  • Bhattacharyya, S.C. (2011). Energy Economics, Concepts, Issues, Markets and Governance. Springer-Verlag London.
  • Binswanger, H. P. (1974). A Microeconomic Approach to Induced Innovation. Economic Journal, 84, 940- 958.
  • Chambers, R. G. (1988). Applied Production Analysis: A Dual Approach. Cambridge University Press.
  • Chen, K. and Edouard Wemy, (2015). Investment-specific technological changes: The source of long-run TFP fluctuations, European Economic Review, 80, 230- 252.
  • Datta, A., & Christoffersen, S. (2004). Production Costs, Scale Economies and Technical Change in U.S. Textile and Apparel Industries. School of Business Administration,Philadelphia university.
  • Drandakis, E. M. and E. S. Phelps. (1966). A Model of Induced Invention, Growth and Distribution, Economic Journal. 76, 823-840.
  • Diewert, W. E. (1971). An Application of the Shephard Duality Theorem: A Generalized Leontief Production Function. The Journal of Political Economy, 79(3), 481-507.
  • Grebel, Thomas, (2009). Technological change: A microeconomic approach to the creation of knowledge, Structural change and Economic Dynamics, 20, 301-312.
  • Gujarati, Damodar N. (2004). Basic Econometrics (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
  • Hart, Rob, (2013). Directed technological change and factor shares, Economics Letters, 119, 77-80.
  • Hayami, Y., & Godo, Y. (2005). Development Economics. Oxford University Press.
  • Iranian statistical center. Iranian report on industrial workshops, various issues.
  • Intriligator, M. D. (1965). Embodied Technical Change and Productivity in the United States, 1929-1957. Review of Economics and Statistics, 47, 65-70.
  • Jorgenson, D. W. (1966). The Embodiment Hypothesis. Journal of Political Economy, 74, 1-17.
  • Kant, S., & Nautiyal, J. C. (1997). Production Structure, Factor Substitution, Technical Change, and Total Factor Productivity. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 27, 701-710.
  • Krysiak, Frank C., (2011). Environmental regulation, technological diversity, and the dynamics of technological change, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 35, 528-544.
  • Mattalia, Claudio, (2013). Embodied technological change and technological revolution: Which sectors matter? Journal of Macroeconomics, 37, 249-264.
  • McCarthy, M. D. (1965). Embodied and Disembodied Technical Progress in the Constant Elasticity of Substitution Production Function. Review of Economics and Statistics, 47, 71-75.
  • Napasintuwong, O., & Emerson, R. D. (2002). Induced Innovations and Foreign Workers in U.S. Agriculture. Selected paper prepared for presentation of the American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Califonia.
  • Napasintuwong, O., & Emerson, R. D. (2003). Farm Mechanization and the Farm Labor Market: A Socioeconomic Model of Induced Innovation. Selected paper prepared for presentation of the Southern Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting. Mobile, A Labama.
  • Nordhaus, William D. (1969). An Economic Theory of Technological Change, American Economic Review, 59, 18-28.Peretto, Pietro F., (1999). Industrial development, technological change, and long-run growth, Journal of Development Economics, 59, 389-417.
  • Rasmussen, S. (2000). Technological Change and Economies of Scale in Danish Agriculture. The Royal Eterinary and Agricultural University KVL, Copenhagen.
  • Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous Technological change. Journal of Politiocal Economy, 98, 71-102.
  • Roshef, Ariell, (2013). Is technological change biased towards the unskilled in services? An empirical investigation, Review of Economic Dynamics, 16, 312-331.
  • Salter Wilfred, E. J. (1960). Productivity and Technical Change, Cambridge University Press.
  • Schafer, Andreas, (2014). Technological change, population dynamics, and natural resource depletion, Mathematical Social Sciences, 71, 122-136.
  • Solow, R. M. (1957). Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Function. Review of Economics and Statistics, 39, 312-320.
  • Solow, R. M. (1962). Technical Progress, Capital Formation, and Economic Growth. American Economic Review, 52, 76-86.
  • Stevenson, R. (1980). Measuring Technological Bias. American Economic Review, 70, 162-173.