• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.51-79
• /
• 1990

Research on technical efficiency, an important dimension of market performance, had received little attention until recently by most industrial organization empiricists, the reason being that traditional microeconomic theory simply assumed away any form of inefficiency in production. Recently, however, an increasing number of research efforts have been conducted to answer questions such as: To what extent do technical ineffciencies exist in the production activities of firms and plants? What are the factors accounting for the level of inefficiency found and those explaining the interindustry difference in technical inefficiency? Are there any significant international differences in the levels of technical efficiency and, if so, how can we reconcile these results with the observed pattern of international trade, etc? As the first in a series of studies on the technical efficiency of Korea's manufacturing industries, this paper attempts to answer some of these questions. Since the estimation of technical efficiency requires the use of plant-level data for each of the five-digit KSIC industries available from the Census of Manufactures, one may consture the findings of this paper as empirical evidence of technical efficiency in Korea's manufacturing industries at the most disaggregated level. We start by clarifying the relationship among the various concepts of efficiency-allocative effciency, factor-price efficiency, technical efficiency, Leibenstein's X-efficiency, and scale efficiency. It then becomes clear that unless certain ceteris paribus assumptions are satisfied, our estimates of technical inefficiency are in fact related to factor price inefficiency as well. The empirical model employed is, what is called, a stochastic frontier production function which divides the stochastic term into two different components-one with a symmetric distribution for pure white noise and the other for technical inefficiency with an asymmetric distribution. A translog production function is assumed for the functional relationship between inputs and output, and was estimated by the corrected ordinary least squares method. The second and third sample moments of the regression residuals are then used to yield estimates of four different types of measures for technical (in) efficiency. The entire range of manufacturing industries can be divided into two groups, depending on whether or not the distribution of estimated regression residuals allows a successful estimation of technical efficiency. The regression equation employing value added as the dependent variable gives a greater number of "successful" industries than the one using gross output. The correlation among estimates of the different measures of efficiency appears to be high, while the estimates of efficiency based on different regression equations seem almost uncorrelated. Thus, in the subsequent analysis of the determinants of interindustry variations in technical efficiency, the choice of the regression equation in the previous stage will affect the outcome significantly.

• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.17
• /
• pp.145-178
• /
• 2001

Bourdieu is one of the few social science researchers who were interested in photography. Bourdieu's work on photography appears principally in two books: Un art moyen: Essai sur les usagrs sociaux de la photographie(1965) and La distinction(1979). In these books, Bourdieu analyzes the role of photography in the family life of peasants and small town and urban dwellers. He shows how different classes and groups express their esthetic worldview in response to different photographs and photographic styles. What Bourdieu analyzed is not just photography but ways of photographing and ways of looking at pictures. Through these analyses, Bourdieu explores the social definition of photography. Bourdieu's ideas on photographic practice in social life are as follows. First, the photography, especially family photography generally practiced, has the integrative function. It recreates the group by ritualizing and solemnizing the important moments of social life in which the group reaffirms its unity. Second, the photography as esthetic practice in search of legitimacy as a fine art becomes a means by which different classes are pitted against each other. Each of classes gives its own meaning to photographic practice. Despite its originality and persuasive power, Bourdieu's work on photography has its own limits. The data used by Bourdieu are 35 years old and relevant to European social life. Things has changed since. First, the technological improvement and innovation in photography was considerable. Cheap and good photographic materials, easy to operate, made photographic practice everybody's everyday activity. New media like camcorder and digital camera made photography one of the industrial discards like jukebox. It means that photography does not function as important means of distinction between classes any longer. The integrative function of the photography becomes more ambiguous too. Second, the esthetic status of the photography has changed. The family photography was already integraed into fine art. Photography is not a middle-brow art any more. Bourdieu's work on photography shows how photography was used by different social classes in European social life of the 1960's. His work is historically and geographically limited. Moreover, his work was ordered by the french affiliate of Eastman Kodak Company. And all along the analysis, Bourdieu didn't hide his intention of distinguishing his sociological method from the other methods, especially psychological one. These mean that Bourdieu's work was done in a specific context, for specific purposes. In this respect, Bourdieu's work on photography, like every sociological work, can not claim to be universal.