صنایع معدنی استرالیا چگونه مقرون به صرفه است؟

This paper uses a stochastic translog cost frontier model and a panel data of five key mining industries in Australia over 1968–1969 to 1994–1995 to investigate the sources of output growth and the effects of cost inefficiency on total factor productivity (TFP) growth. The results indicate that mining output growth was largely input-driven rather than productivity-driven. Although there were some gains from technological progress and economies of scale in production, cost inefficiency which barely exceeded 1.1% since the mid-1970s in the mining industries was the main factor causing low TFP growth.

The mining sector is one of the most important industries in natural resource-rich Australia which is also one of the largest suppliers of minerals in the world. The Australian mining sector has become increasingly export-oriented as mineral exports have risen from approximately 24% of Australian commodity exports in the 1960s to 60% in 1994–1995. It is widely acknowledged in the literature that one way of securing continued export growth is to improve cost competitiveness via total factor productivity (TFP) growth.

This study overcomes the problems of the conventional growth accounting method used in previous studies by using the stochastic cost frontier model which allows output growth to be decomposed into not just input growth and TFP growth but further decomposes TFP growth to enable the study of the sources of TFP growth. Also, instead of using aggregate level data, here, industry-specific analysis is undertaken for each of Australia's five key mining industries using panel data from 1968–1969 to 1994–1995 (ABS, 1968/69–1975/76, ABS, 1976/77–1992/93 and ABS, 1993/94–1994/95). It was found that output growth in all mining industries was input-driven given the highly capital- and energy-intensive nature of mining industries. This allowed the industries to enjoy economies of scale in production and technological progress from the use of advanced technology embodied in capital. But the need for TFP growth for sustainable output growth cannot be overlooked given the limits of input growth due to diminishing returns to input use. In this regard, the low TFP growth which barely exceeded 1.1% since the mid-1970s is of great concern. The main cause of poor TFP growth was cost inefficiency which results from not using the least cost combination of inputs (i.e. allocative inefficiency) and existing excess capacity when inputs are not sufficiently or appropriately used to produce maximum potential output (i.e. technical inefficiency). Although an important exercise, it is, however, beyond the scope of this study to further investigate the factors that affect cost inefficiency in order to draw specific policy implications. This is, however, intended for future research to study the effect of factors such as world mineral demand, R&D expenditure, use of skilled labour, real interest rate, and government policies on efficiency. Arguably, the results for such an exercise would be more robust if firm level data were used.