Designing performance incentives, an international benchmark study in the water sector

Central European Journal of Operations Research

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 189-220

  de Witte, Kristof ^a,b   Marques, Rui C ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^b MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LISBON   (Portugal)

Author keywords

Bootstrapping; Data envelopment analysis; Efficiency measurement; Incentive scheme; Water industry

Indexed keywords

EID: 77953364023     PISSN: 1435246X     EISSN: 16139178     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10100-009-0108-0     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. ACT (1995) ACTEW benchmarked, Auditor General's Office. Australia Capital Territory (ACT) 7: 15.
2. Aida K, Cooper W, Pastor J, Sueyoshi T (1998) Evaluating water supply services in Japan with RAM: a range-adjusted measure of inefficiency. Omega 26(2): 207-232.
3. Alexander R, Haug A, Jafurullah M (2007) A two-stage double-bootstrap data envelopment analysis of efficiency differences of New Zealand secondary schools. Economics Discussion Paper of University of Otago, p 25.
4. Alsharif A, Feroz H, Klemer A, Raab R (2008) Water supply systems in the Palestinian territories: a data envelopment analysis approach to the management of water resources. J Environ Manage 87(1): 80-94.
5. Ancarani A (2000) Evolution of water firms performance in providing water services in Sicily. EIASM international conference on accounting, auditing & management in public sectors reform: proceedings. Saragoca, Spain, p 14.
6. Ancarani A, Gapaldo G, Raffa M (2000) A framework for evaluating quality level of standardised public services: an application to Italian water supply service. EIASM 10th workshop on quality management in services: designing system chain processes for high performance services: proceedings. Birmingham, UK, 17-19 May, p 20.
7. Andersen P, Petersen N (1993) A procedure for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis. Manage Sci 39(10): 1261-1264.
8. Andrews D, Pregibon D (1978) Finding the outliers that matter. J Royal Stat Soc 40(1): 85-93.
9. Anwandter L, Ozuna T (2002) Can public sector reforms improve the efficiency of public water utilities?. Environ Dev Econ 7(4): 687-700.
10. Banker R, Charnes A, Cooper W, Swarts J, Thomas D (1989) An introduction to data envelopment analysis with some of its models and their uses. Res Gov Nonprofit Account 5: 125-163.
11. Banker R, Charnes A, Cooper WW (1984) Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manage Sci 30: 1078-1092.
12. Berg S (2006) Survey of benchmarking methodologies in the water sector. PURC Working Paper, University of Florida, pp 1-17.
13. Bosworth D, Stoneman P, Thanassoulis E (1996) The measurement of comparative total efficiency in the sewerage and water industry: an exploratory study. Office of Water Services (Ofwat), Birmingham, pp 29.
14. Byrnes P (1986) Ownership and efficiency in the water supply industry: an application of the nonparametric programming approach on efficiency measurement. University Microfilms International, p 325.
15. Byrnes P, Grosskopf S, Hayes K (1986) Efficiency and ownership: further evidence. Rev Econ Stat 68(2): 337-341.
16. Cazals C, Florens J, Simar L (2002) Nonparametric frontier estimation: a robust approach. J Econ 106(1): 1-25.
17. Charnes A, Cooper W, Rhodes E (1978) Measuring efficiency of decision-making units. Eur J Oper Res 2(6): 428-449.
18. Charnes A, Cooper W, Golany B, Seiford L, Stutz J (1985) Foundations of data envelopment analysis for Pareto-Koopmans efficient empirical production functions. J Econ 30(1): 91-107.
19. Chavas JP, Petrie R, Roth M (2005) Farmhousehold production efficiency: evidence from the Gambia. Am J Agric Econ 87: 160-179.
20. Coelli TJ, Rahman S, Thirtle C (2002) Technical, allocative, cost and scale efficiencies in bangladesh rice cultivation: a non-parametric approach. J Agri Econ 33: 605-624.
21. Cubbin J, Tzanidakis G (1998) Regression versus data envelopment analysis for efficiency measurement: an application to the England and Wales regulated water industry. Utilities Policy 7(1): 75-85.
22. Daraio C, Simar L (2005) Introducing environmental variables in nonparametric frontier models: a probabilistic approach. J Productivity Anal 24(1): 93-121.
23. Daraio C, Simar L (2007) Advanced robust and nonparametric methods in efficiency analysis. Studies in productivity and efficiency. Springer, New York.
24. De Witte K (2006) Efficiëntieprikkels in de drinkwatersector. Economisch Statistische Berichten 91(4485): 201-204.
25. De Witte K, Dijkgraaf E (2007) Mean and bold? On seperating merger economies from structural efficiency gains in the water sector. Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper 092/3. J Oper Res Soc. doi: 10. 1057/jors. 2008. 140.
26. De Witte K, Marques R (2009) Capturing the environment, a metafrontier approach to the drinking water sector. CES Discussion Paper Series DPS 08. 04. Int Trans Oper Res 16: 257-271.
27. De Witte K, Marques R (2007) Detecting influential observations in frontier models, a robust approach. mimeo.
28. Dijkgraaf E, de Jong R, van de Mortel EG, Nentjes A, Varkevisser M, Wiersma D (1997) Mogelijkheden tot marktwerking in de Nederlandse watersector. Onderzoeksreeks directie marktwerking, Ministerie van Economische Zaken, The Hague, pp 1-93.
29. Efron B (1979) Bootstrap methods: another look at the jackknife. Ann Stat 7(1): 1-26.
30. Estache A, Rossi MA, Ruzzier CA (2004) The case for international coordination of electricity regulation: evidence from the measurement of efficiency in South America. J Regul Econ 25(3): 271-295.
31. Farrell M (1957) The measurement of productive efficiency. J Royal Stat Soc 120(3): 253-290.
32. González-Gómez F, García-Rubio M (2008) Efficiency in the management of urban water services. What have we learned after four decades of research?. Revista de Economía Pública 185(2): 39-67.
33. Hicks J (1935) Annual survey of economic theory: the theory of monopoly. Econometrica 3(1): 1-20.
34. Jamasb T, Pollitt M (2001) Benchmarking and regulation: international electricity experience. Utilities Policy 9(3): 107-130.
35. Kittelsen S (1993) Stepwise DEA: choosing variables for measuring technical efficiency in Norwegian electricity distribution. University of Oslo, Department of Economics, p 37.
36. KS (2003), Konkurrenceredegorelse, Konkurrencestyrelsen (KS). Copenhagen, Denmark, p 451.
37. Kuks S (2001) The privatisation debate on water services in the Netherlands. An examination of the public duty of the Dutch water sector and the implications of market forces and water chain cooperation. In: Holzwarth F, Andreas Kraemer R (eds) Umweltaspekte einer Privatisierung der Wasserwirtschaft in Deutschland. Ecologic, Berlin, pp 81-112.
38. Laffont JJ, Tirole J (1993) A theory of incentives in procurement and regulation. MIT Press, Cambridge.
39. Lambert D, Dichev D, Raffiee K (1993) Ownership and sources of inefficiency in the provision of water services. Water Resour Res 29(6): 1573-1578.
40. Leibenstein H (1966) Allocative efficiency vs. 'X-efficiency'. Am Econ Rev 56(3): 392-415.
41. Liang T (2003) Empirical relative efficiency analysis of major Australian water service providers using DEA. Global developments in water industry performance benchmarking: proceedings, Perth, Western Australia, Australia, p 11.
42. Lobina E, Hall D (2001) UK water privatisation-a briefing. Public services international research unit, PSIRU, 1-27.
43. London Economics (1995) Benchmarking the economic performance of Australian urban water utilities. Urban water research association of Australia (UWRAA), Research Report 93: 66.
44. Mardia K, Kent J, Bibby J (1979) Multivariate analysis. Academic Press, New York.
45. Marques R (2006) A yardstick competition model for Portuguese water and sewerage services regulation. Utilities Policy 14(3): 175-184.
46. Marques R, Monteiro A (2003) Measuring productivity and efficiency of water and sewerage services-a case study in Portugal. Global developments in water industry performance benchmarking: proceedings. Perth, Western Australia, Australia, 29, p 18.
47. Marques R, Monteiro A (2005) Technical efficiency of the water and sewerage services. An empirical study. 3th international conference efficient use and management of water for urban supply: proceedings. Santiago (Chile): International Water Association (IWA), 14-18 March, p 8.
48. National Competition Policy (1998) Compendium of national competition policy agreements, second edition. National Competition Policy, Melbourne.
49. Norman M, Stoker B (1991) Data envelopment analysis: the assessment of performance. John Wiley & Sons Inc, New York, NY, USA.
50. Simar L (2003) Detecting outliers in frontier models: a simple approach. J Productivity Anal 20(3): 391-424.
51. Simar L, Wilson P (1998) Sensitivity analysis of efficiency scores: how to bootstrap in nonparametric frontier models. Manage Sci 44(1): 49-61.
52. Simar L, Wilson P (2000) Statistical inference in nonparametric frontier models: the state of the art. J Productivity Anal 13(1): 49-78.
53. Simar L, Wilson P (2007) Estimation and inference in two-stage, semi-parametric models of production processes. J Econ 136(1): 31-64.
54. Simar L, Wilson P (2008) Statistical inference in nonparametric frontier models: recent developments and perspectives. In: Fried H, Lovell CAK, Schmidt SS (eds) The measurement of productive efficiency, 2nd edn, chap 4. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
55. Thanassoulis E (2000a) DEA and its use in the regulation of water companies. Eur J Oper Res 127(1): 1-13.
56. Thanassoulis E (2000b) The use of data envelopment analysis in the regulation of UK water utilities: water distribution. Eur J Oper Res 126(2): 436-453.
57. Torgersen A, Forsund F, Kittelsen S (1996) Slack-adjusted efficiency measures and ranking of efficient units. J Productivity Anal 7(4): 379-398.
58. Tupper H, Resende M (2004) Efficiency and regulatory issues in the Brazilian water and sewage sector: an empirical study. Utilities Policy 12: 29-40.
59. Wilson P (1993) Detecting outliers in deterministic nonparametric frontier models with multiple outputs. J Bus Econ Stat 11(3): 319-323.
60. Wilson P (2005) FEAR 1. 0: A software package for frontier efficiency analysis with R. Working paper, University of Texas, Austin, Texas, p 13.
61. Wood D, Barrar P, Kodwani D (1997) Benchmarking water utilities' performance using data envelopment analysis. Fifth European Workshop on Efficiency and Productivity Analysis. Copenhagen, Denmark, 9-11 October, p 15.
62. Woodbury K, Dollery B (2003) Efficiency measurement in Australian local government: the case of NSW municipal water services. New South Wales, Australia: University of New England, Working paper 13: 40.
63. Zhang Y, Bartels R (1998) The effect of sample size on the mean efficiency in DEA with an application to electricity distribution in Australia, Sweden and New Zealand. J Productivity Anal 9(3): 187-204.