Alternative approaches to include exogenous variables in DEA measures: A comparison using Monte Carlo

Computers and Operations Research

Volumn 36, Issue 10, 2009, Pages 2699-2706

  Cordero, José Manuel ^a   Pedraja, Francisco ^a   Santín, Daniel ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EXTREMADURA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID   (Spain)

Author keywords

Data envelopment analysis; Efficiency; Non discretionary inputs; Simulation

Indexed keywords

LINEAR PROGRAMMING; MONTE CARLO METHODS;

ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES; BOOTSTRAP METHODS; EXOGENOUS VARIABLES; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS; MONTE CARLO; MULTI-STAGE MODELS; NON-DISCRETIONARY INPUTS; NON-DISCRETIONARY VARIABLES; SIMULATED DATUM; SIMULATION; TWO STAGES;

DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS;

EID: 62549159936     PISSN: 03050548     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cor.2008.11.019     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Ray S.C. Resource use efficiency in public schools: a study of connecticut data. Manage Sci 37 12 (1991) 1620-1628
2. Mccarty T., and Yaisawarng S. Technical efficiency in New Jersey school districts. In: Fried H., Lovell C.A.K., and Schmidt S. (Eds). The Measurement of Productive Efficiency: Techniques and Applications (1993), Oxford University Press, New York
3. Grosskopf S., and Valdmanis V. Measuring hospital performance: a non-parametric approach. J Health Econ 6 (1987) 89-107
4. Fried H.O., Lovell C.A.K., and Vanden Eeckaut P. Evaluating the performance of US credit unions. J Banking Finance 17 (1993) 251-265
5. Lozano-Vivas A., Pastor J.T., and Pastor J.M. An efficiency comparison of European banking systems operating under different environmental conditions. J Product Anal 18 1 (2002) 59-77
6. Fried H., Schmidt S., and Yaisawarng S. Incorporating the operating environment into a nonparametric measure of technical efficiency. J Product Anal 12 (1999) 249-267
7. Fizel J.L., and Nunnikhoven T.S. Technical efficiency of for-profit and non-profit nursing homes. Manage Dec Econ 13 5 (2006) 429-439
8. Fried H., Lambrinos J., and Tyner J. Evaluating the performance of professional golfers on the PGA, LPGA and SPGA tours. Eur J Oper Res 154 2 (2004) 548-561
9. Muñiz M. Separating managerial inefficiency and external conditions in data. Eur J Oper Res 143 3 (2002) 625-643
10. Rouse P, Putterill M, Ryan D. Methodologies for the treatment of environmental factors in DEA, Working Paper, Department of Accounting and Finance. New Zealand: University of Auckland; 1996.
11. Cordero J.M., Pedraja F., and Salinas J. Measuring efficiency in education: an analysis of different approaches for incorporating non-discretionary inputs. Appl Econ 40 10 (2008) 1323-1339
12. Yu C. The effects of exogenous variables in efficiency measurement. A Monte Carlo study. Eur J Oper Res 105 (1998) 569-580
13. Ruggiero J. Non-discretionary inputs in data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 111 (1998) 461-469
14. Syrjänen M.J. Non-discretionary and discretionary factors and scale in data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 158 (2004) 20-33
15. Muñiz M., Paradi J., Ruggiero J., and Yang Z. Evaluating alternative DEA models used to control for non-discretionary inputs. Comput Oper Res 33 (2006) 1173-1183
16. Christensen L.R., Jorgenson D.W., and Lau L.J. Conjugate duality and the transcendental logarithmic production function. Econometrica 39 (1971) 255-256
17. Simar L., and Wilson P.W. Estimation and inference in two-stage, semi parametric models of production processes. J Economet 136 (2007) 31-64
18. Charnes A., Cooper W.W., and Rhodes E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Oper Res 2 6 (1978) 429-444
19. Banker R.D., Charnes A., and Cooper W.W. Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manage Sci 30 (1984) 1078-1092
20. Cooper W., Seiford L., and Zhu J. Handbook on data envelopment analysis (2004), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA
21. Fried H.O., Lovell C.A.K., and Schmidt S. The measurement of productive efficiency and productivity growth (2008), Oxford University Press, New York
22. Banker R.D., and Morey R.C. Efficiency analysis for exogenously fixed inputs and outputs. Oper Res 34 4 (1986) 513-521
23. Barr R. DEA software tools and technology. A state-of-the-art survey. In: Cooper W.W., Seiford L., and Zhu J. (Eds). Handbook on Data Envelopment Analysis (2004), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA
24. Hoff A. Second stage DEA: comparison of approaches for modelling the DEA score. Eur J Oper Res 181 (2007) 425-435
25. Camanho A.S., Portela M.C., and Vaz C.B. Performance evaluation accounting for non-discretionary factors: the assessment of retailing stores using data envelopment analysis. Comput Oper Res 36 (2009) 1591-1601
26. Xue M, Harker PT. Overcoming the inherent dependency of DEA efficiency scores: a bootstrap approach. Working Paper, Wharton Financial Institutions Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 1999.
27. Hirschberg J., and Lloyd P. Does the technology of foreign-invested enterprises spill over to other enterprises in China? An application of post-DEA bootstrap regression analysis. In: Lloyd P.J., and Zang X. (Eds). Modelling the Chinese Economy (2002), Edward Elgar Press, London
28. Simar L., and Wilson P.W. Some problems with the Ferrier/Hirschberg bootstrap idea. J Product Anal 11 (1999) 67-80
29. Simar L., and Wilson P.W. Of course we can bootstrap DEA scores! But does it mean anything? Logic trumps wishful thinking. J Product Anal 11 (1999) 93-97
30. Fried HO, Lovell CAK. Searching for the Zeds. Paper presented in II Georgia Productivity Workshop, 1996.
31. Fried H., Lovell C.A.K., Schmidt S., and Yaisawarng S. Accounting for environmental effects and statistical noise in data envelopment analysis. J Product Anal 17 1/2 (2002) 157-174
32. Afonso A., and Aubyn M.St. Cross-country efficiency of secondary education provision: a semi-parametric analysis with non-discretionary inputs. Econ Model 23 3 (2006) 476-491
33. Prado J.M., and García-Sánchez I.M. Efficiency evaluation in municipal services. An application to the street lighting service in Spain. J Product Anal 27 (2007) 149-162
34. Bowlin W., Charnes A., Cooper W.W., and Sherman H. Data envelopment analysis and regression approaches to efficiency estimation and evaluation. Ann Oper Res 2 (1985) 113-138
35. Banker R., Charnes A., Cooper W.W., and Maindiratta A. A comparison of data envelopment analysis and translog estimates of production frontiers using simulated observations from a known technology. In: Dogramaci A., and Fare R. (Eds). Applications in Modern Production Theory Inefficiency and Productivity (1987), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA 33-55
36. Gong B.H., and Sickles R. Finite sample evidence on the performance of stochastic frontiers and data envelopment analysis using panel data. J Economet 51 (1992) 259-284
37. Banker R., Gadh V., and Gorr W. A Monte Carlo comparison of two production frontier estimation methods: corrected ordinary least squares and data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 67 (1993) 332-343
38. Thanassoulis E. A comparison of regression analysis and data envelopment analysis as alternative methods for assessing performance. J Oper Res Soc 44 (1993) 1129-1145
39. Pedraja F., Salinas J., and Smith P. On the role of weight restrictions in data envelopment analysis. J Product Anal 8 (1997) 215-230
40. Zhang Y., and Bartels R. The effect of sample size on the mean efficiency in DEA with an application to electricity distribution in Australia, Sweden and New Zealand. J Product Anal 9 (1998) 187-204
41. Pedraja F., Salinas J., and Smith P. On the quality of the data envelopment analysis model. J Oper Res Soc 50 (1999) 636-644
42. Holland D.S., and Lee S.T. Impacts of random noise and specification on estimates of capacity derived from data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 137 (2002) 10-21
43. Steinmann L, Simar L. On the comparability of efficiency scores in nonparametric frontier models. Discussion Paper 0318, Institut de Statistique, Université Catholique de Louvain, Belgium, 2003.
44. Ruggiero J. On the measurement of technical efficiency in the public sector. Eur J Oper Res 90 3 (1996) 553-565
45. Yang Z, Paradi J. Cross firm bank branch benchmarking using "handicapped" data envelopment analysis to adjust for corporate strategic effects. In: Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Hawaii-IEEE, 2006.
46. Hanoch G. CRESH production functions. Econometrica 39 5 (1971) 695-712
47. Battese G., and Coelli T. A model for technical inefficiency effects in a stochastic frontier production function for panel data. Emp Econ 20 (1995) 325-332