Skip to main content

Table 6 Technical efficiency estimates across SPF models

From: Can producer groups improve technical efficiency among artisanal shrimpers in Nigeria? A study accounting for observed and unobserved selectivity

SPF model Pooled Members Nonmember Change (%) t-test of means
Mean Mean Mean
Unmatched conventional
Technical efficiency 0.817
(0.00)
0.848
(0.01)
0.803
(0.01)
5.60 4.83***
Metafrontier technical efficiency (MTE) 0.811
(0.00)
0.843
(0.01)
0.800
(0.01)
5.38 4.67***
Technological gap ratio (TGR)   0.994
(0.00)
0.996
(0.00)
  3.24***
Unmatched selection corrected
Technical efficiency 0.817
(0.00)
0.839
(0.01)
0.808
(0.00)
3.84 3.68***
Metafrontier technical efficiency (MTE) 0.813
(0.00)
0.834
(0.01)
0.805
(0.00)
3.60 3.48***
Technological gap ratio (TGR)   0.994
(0.00)
0.996
(0.00)
  3.66***
MTE difference (%) 0.25  − 1.08 0.62   
Matched conventional
Technical efficiency 0.813
(0.00)
0.842
(0.01)
0.803
(0.01)
4.86 4.05***
Metafrontier technical efficiency (MTE) 0.809
(0.00)
0.836
(0.01)
0.800
(0.01)
4.50 3.84***
Technological gap ratio (TGR)   0.994
(0.00)
0.996
(0.00)
  4.05***
Matched selection corrected
Technical efficiency 0.814
(0.00)
0.831
(0.01)
0.808
(0.00)
2.85 2.66***
Metafrontier technical efficiency (MTE) 0.810
(0.00)
0.826
(0.01)
0.805
(0.00)
2.61 2.39**
Technological gap ratio (TGR)   0.993
(0.00)
0.996
(0.00)
  5.00***
MTE difference (%) 0.12  − 1.21 0.62   
  1. ***p < 0.01, **p < 0.05, *p < 0.1
  2. Standard errors are presented in parenthesis
  3. Source: Authors’ calculation based on survey data