Efficiency potential and efficiency variation in Norwegian lower secondary schools

FinanzArchiv

Volumn 62, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 221-249

  Borge, Lars Erik ^a   Naper, Linn Renée ^b  

^a NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

^b NONE

Author keywords

DEA analysis; Determinants of efficiency; Educational efficiency; Political and budgetary institutions

Indexed keywords

EID: 34249109709     PISSN: 00152218     EISSN: 16140974     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1628/001522106X120677     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., and Cooper, W. W. (1984), Some Models for Estimating Technical Scale and Inefficiency in Data Envelopment Analysis, Management Science 30, 1078-1092.
2. Bessent, A., Bessent, W., Kennington, J., and Reagan, B. (1982), An Application of Mathematical Programming to Assess Productivity in the Houston Independent School Districts, Management Science 28, 1355-1367.
3. Bonesrønning, H., and Rattsø, J. (1994), Efficiency Variation among the Norwegian High Schools: Consequences of Equalization Policy, Economics of Education Review 13, 289-304.
4. Borge, L.-E. (2000), Charging for Public Services: The Case of Utilities in Norwegian Local Governments, Regional Science and Urban Economics 30, 703-718.
5. Borge, L.-E. (2005), Strong Politicians, Small Deficits: Evidence from Norwegian Local Governments, European Journal of Political Economy 21, 325-344.
6. Borge, L.-E., Falch, T., and Tovmo, P. (2005), Efficiency in Public Service Production: The Impact of Political and Budgetary Institutions, Mimeo, Department of Economics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
7. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., and Rhodes, E. (1978), Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units, European Journal of Operational Research 2, 429-444.
8. Coelli, T., Prasada Rao, D. S., and Battese, G. (1998), An Introduction to Efficiency and Productivity Analysis, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
9. De Borger, B., and Kerstens, K. (1996), Cost Efficiency of Belgian Local Governments: A Comparative Analysis of FDH, DEA and Econometric Approaches, Regional Science and Urban Economics 26, 145-170.
10. Duncombe, W., Miner, J., and Ruggiero, J. (1997), Empirical Evaluation of Bureaucratic Models of Inefficiency, Public Choice 93, 1-18.
11. Grosskopf, S., Hayes, K. J., Taylor, L. L., and Weber, W. L. (2001), On the Determinants of School District Efficiency: Competition and Monitoring, Journal of Urban Economics 49, 453-478.
12. Hanushek, E. (1986), The Economics of Schooling: Production and Efficiency in Public Schools, Journal of Economic Literature 24, 1141-1177.
13. Hanushek, E. (2002), Publicly Provided Education, Working Paper 8799, National Bureau of Economic Research.
14. Hjalmarsson, L., Kumbhakar, S. C., and Heshmati, A. (1996), DEA, DFA and SFA: A Comparison, Journal of Productivity Analysis 7, 303-327.
15. Hoxby, C. M. (2000), Does Competition Among Public Schools Benefit Students and Taxpayers?, American Economic Review 90, 1209-1238.
16. Hægeland, T., Raaum, O., and Salvanes, K. G. (2004), Pupil Achievement, School Resources and Family Background, Mimeo, Ragnar Frisch Centre for Economic Research and Statistics Norway.
17. Kalseth, J. (2003), Political Determinants of Efficiency Variation in Municipal Service Production: An Analysis of Long-Term Care in Norway, PhD thesis, Department of Economics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
18. Kalseth, J., and Rattsø, J. (1998), Political Control of Administrative Spending: The Case of Local Governments in Norway, Economics and Politics 10, 63-83.
19. Kirjavainen, T., and Loikkanen, H. A. (1998), Efficiency of Finnish Senior Secondary Schools: An Application of DEA and Tobit Analysis, Economics of Education Review 17, 377-394.
20. Ladd, H. F., and Fiske, E. B. (2003), Does Competition Generate Better Schools? Evidence from New Zealand, Working Paper SAN01-16, Terry Sanford Institute of Public Policy, Duke University.
21. Simar, L., and Wilson, P. W. (1998), Sensitivity Analysis of Efficiency Scores: How to Bootstrap in Nonparametric Frontier Models, Management Science 44, 49-61.
22. Simar, L., and Wilson, P. W. (2000), Statistical Inference in Nonparametric Frontier Models: The State of the Art, Journal of Productivity Analysis, 12, 49-78.
23. Simar, L., and Wilson, P. W. (2004), Performance of the Bootstrap for DEA Estimators and the Iterating Principle, in: Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., and Zhu, J. (eds.), Handbook on Data Envelopment Analysis, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 265-298.
24. Tovmo, P. (2006), Budgetary Procedures and Deficits in Norwegian Local Governments, Economics of Governance, forthcoming.
25. Worthington, A. C. (2001), An Empirical Survey of Frontier Efficiency Measurement Techniques in Education, Education Economics 9, 245-268.