{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017329910141206675, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0019255455712451862, 'mean_word_length': 5.6059322033898304, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Optimality of Used Equipment: Calculations for the Cotton Textile Industry

The implication of substituting labor for capital in manufacturing processes has been a major topic in the economic-development literature of the past 20 years, and growing urban unemployment in LDCs has led to a resurgence of interest in the question. Until recently there have been few microeconomic studies of empirical substitution possibilities, the discussion being concerned mainly with the relative desirability of labor and capitalintensive production methods, assuming a choice exists. For a variety of reasons, existing estimates of statistical production functions, though suggestive, are not well suited to resolving the issue. In particular, even relatively disaggregated studies, for example, at the three-digit level, may embody differences in product mix over time or across regions that mask the relevant production relations. Moreover, the competitive assumptions relied on in constant-elasticity-of-substitution estimation procedures are rarely approximated in LDCs.1 As most policy discussions focus on individual projects within a development plan, such relatively aggregative studies provide decision makers with insufficiently refined analyses. Thus it is necessary to undertake analyses with a different orientation, akin to that of process analysis, if empirical resolution of some of the outstanding issues is to be achieved. In the past few years a number of inquiries of this type have been conducted using data obtained primarily in LDCs from firms