Framework of Study

  • Atanu Sengupta
  • Soumyendra Kishore Datta
  • Susanta Mondal
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Economics book series (BRIEFSECONOMICS)


In order to assess male female differential across different types of enterprises, we consider a simple production function of the type.


Production Function Female Labour Total Factor Productivity Growth Home Production Tourism Sector 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Abdulai A, Regmi PP (2000) Estimating labor supply of farm households under non-separability: empirical evidence from Nepal. Agr Econ 22(3):309–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahluwalia IJ (1991) Productivity and growth in Indian manufacturing. Oxford University Press, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  3. Banerjee AV, Duflo E (2011) Poor economics: a radical rethinking of the way to fight global poverty. Random House, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  4. Barua A, Leech D (1987) Factor substitution and returns to scale in Indian manufacturing: a cross-section analysis. Discussion paper, international trade and development division, school of international studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  5. Cainelli G (2008) Spatial agglomeration, technological innovations, and firm productivity: evidence from Italian industrial districts. Growth Change 39(3):414–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chattapadhyay M, Sharma CS (2001) Is labor homogeneous quantity in Indian agriculture. Mimeo, Indian Statistical Institute, KolkataGoogle Scholar
  7. Cobb CW, Douglas PH (1928) A theory of production. Am Econ Rev 18(1):139–165 MarchGoogle Scholar
  8. Denison EF (1962) The sources of economic growth in the United States and the alternatives before Us. Committee Econ Dev, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Deolalikar AB, Vijverberg WPM (1987) A Test of heterogeneity of family and hired labor in Asian agriculture. Oxford Bull Econ Stat 49(3):291–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dimitriu MC, Savu BM (2010) Econometric analysis of efficiency in the Indian manufacturing sector. Rom J Econ Forecast 1:182–197Google Scholar
  11. El-Moaty KA, El-Shawadfy M (2007) An Estimation of Cobb-Douglas production function in Egyptian Tourism Sector, Zagazig University. Source:
  12. Ghosh B, Neogi C (1996) Liberalisation in India: quality differentials between public and private employees. Dev Econ 34(1):61–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goldar BN (1997) Econometrics of Indian industry. In: Krishna KL (ed) Econometric applications in India. Oxford University Press, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  14. Hicks JR (1956) A revision of demand theory. Clarendon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  15. Jacoby HG (1992) Productivity of men and women and the sexual division of labor in peasant agriculture of the Peruvian Sierra. J Dev Econ 37:265–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jacoby HG (1993) Shadow wages and peasant family labor supply; an econometric application to the Peruvian Sierra. Rev Econ Stud 60:903–921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jorgenson DW (1963) Capital theory and investment behavior. Am Econ Rev 53(2):247–259Google Scholar
  18. Kathuria V, Natarajan RRS, Sen K (2010) Fluctuating productivity performance of unorganised manufacturing in the post 1990s. Indian J Labour Econ 53(2):285–303Google Scholar
  19. Park H, Sanidas E (2011) Korean augmented production function: the role of services and other factors in Korea’s economic growth of industries. J Econ Dev 36(1):59–85Google Scholar
  20. Rosenweig MR (1980) Neoclassical theory and the optimizing peasant: an econometric analysis of market family labour supply in a developing country. Q J Econ 94(1):31–55Google Scholar
  21. Rudra A (1982) Indian agricultural economics: myths and realities. Allied, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  22. Sen AK (1964) Size of holdings and productivity. The Economic Weekly 16 (5-7) Annual number, February: 323–326Google Scholar
  23. Skoufias E (1994) Using shadow wages to estimate labor supply of agricultural households. Am J Agric Econ 76(2):215–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Solow RM (1957) Technical change and the aggregate production function. Rev Econ Stat 39(3):312–320 AugustCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Zellner A (1962) An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regressions and tests for aggregate bias. J Am Stat Assoc 57(298):348–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Atanu Sengupta
    • 1
  • Soumyendra Kishore Datta
    • 1
  • Susanta Mondal
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsBurdwan UniversityBurdwanIndia

Personalised recommendations