Decomposition of the environmental inefficiency of the meta-frontier with undesirable output

Energy Economics

Volumn 34, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 1392-1399

  Chiu, Ching Ren ^a   Liou, Je Liang ^b   Wu, Pei Ing ^c   Fang, Chen Ling ^d  

^a NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Taiwan)

^b CHUNG HUA INSTITUTION FOR ECONOMIC RESEARCH   (Taiwan)

^c NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^d NATIONAL TAIPEI UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Carbon dioxide emissions; Directional distance function; Environmental efficiency; Meta frontier inefficiency

Indexed keywords

CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS; DIRECTIONAL DISTANCE FUNCTION; EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFICIENCY; LABOR FORCE; META-FRONTIER INEFFICIENCY; PRODUCTION PROCESS; TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT; TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES;

CARBON DIOXIDE; COMPETITION; EFFICIENCY; FUNCTION EVALUATION; GLOBAL WARMING;

ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY;

ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY; CARBON DIOXIDE; CARBON EMISSION; COMPETITIVENESS; TECHNICAL EFFICIENCY;

EID: 84863469860     PISSN: 01409883     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2012.06.003     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Abbott M. The productivity and efficiency of the Australian electricity supply industry. Energy Econ. 2006, 28:444-454.
2. Arcelus F., Arocena P. Productivity differences across OECD countries in the presence of environmental constraints. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 2005, 56:1352-1362.
3. Barros C.P. Efficiency analysis of hydroelectric generating plants: a case study for Portugal. Energy Econ. 2008, 30:59-75.
4. Barros C.P., Peypoch N. Technical efficiency of thermoelectric power plants. Energy Econ. 2008, 30:3118-3127.
5. Battese G.E., Rao D.S.P. Technology gap, efficiency, and a stochastic metafrontier function. Int. J. Bus. Econ. 2002, 1:87-93.
6. Battese G.E., Rao D.S.P., O'Donnell C.J. A metafrontier production function for estimation of technical efficiencies and technology gaps for firms operating under different technologies. J. Product. Anal. 2004, 21:91-103.
7. Boyd G.A., Tolley G., Pang J. Plant level productivity, efficiency, and environmental performance of the container glass industry. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2002, 23:29-43.
8. Chung Y.H., Färe R., Grosskopf S. Productivity and undesirable outputs: a directional distance function approach. J. Environ. Manage. 1997, 51:229-240.
9. Cooper W.W., Seiford L.M., Tone K. Data envelopment analysis: a comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software 2000, Kluwer, Boston.
10. Färe R., Grosskopf S., Tyteca D. An activity analysis model of the environmental performance of firms-application to fossil-fuel-fired electric utilities. Ecol. Econ. 1996, 18:161-175.
11. Färe R., Grosskopf S., Noh D.W., Weber W. Characteristics of a polluting technology: theory and practice. J. Econ. 2005, 126:469-492.
12. Färe R., Grosskopf S., Weber W.L. Shadow prices and pollution costs in US agriculture. Ecol. Econ. 2006, 56:89-103.
13. Färe R., Grosskopf S., Margaritis D. Efficiency and productivity: Malmquist and more. The Measurement of Productive Efficiency and Productivity Growth 2008, Oxford University Press, Oxford. H.O. Fried, C.A.K. Lovell, S.S. Schmidt (Eds.).
14. 2 emissions, energy consumption, income and foreign trade in Turkey. Energy Policy 2009, 37:1156-1164.
15. Huang Y.J., Chen K.H., Yang C.H. Cost efficiency and optimal scale of electricity distribution firms in Taiwan: an application of metafrontier analysis. Energy Econ. 2010, 32:15-23.
16. Iyer K., Rambaldi A., Tang K.K. Globalisation and the Technology Gap: Regional and Time Evidence, Leading Economic and Managerial Issues Involving Globalisation 2006, 213-227. Nova Science New York, United States.
17. Kim, K., Kim, Y., in press. International comparison of industrial CO2 emission trends and the energy efficiency paradox utilizing production-based decomposition. Energy Econ.
18. 2 emissions and economic growth: the case of Korea with nonlinear evidence. Energy Policy 2010, 38:5938-5946.
19. Kraft J., Kraft A. On the relationship between energy and GNP. J. Energy Dev. 1978, 3:401-403.
20. Kumar S. Environmentally sensitive productivity growth: a global analysis using Malmquist-Luenberger index. Ecol. Econ. 2006, 56:280-293.
21. Lee J.D., Park J.B., Kim T.Y. Estimation of the shadow prices of pollutants with production/environment inefficiency taken into account: a nonparametric directional distance function approach. J. Environ. Manage. 2002, 64:365-375.
22. 2 emissions. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 66:687-699.
23. Lozano S., Villa G., Brännlund R. Centralised reallocation of emission permits using DEA. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2009, 193:752-760.
24. Nag B. Estimation of carbon baselines for power generation in India: the supply side approach. Energy Policy 2006, 34:1399-1410.
25. O'Donnell C.J., Rao D.S.P., Battese G.E. Metafrontier frameworks for the study of firm-level efficiencies and technology ratios. Empir. Econ. 2008, 34:231-255.
26. Oh D.H. A global Malmquist-Luenberger productivity index. J. Product. Anal. 2010, 34:183-197.
27. Oh D.H. A metafrontier approach for measuring an environmentally sensitive productivity growth index. Energy Econ. 2010, 32:146-157.
28. Oh D.H., Lee J.D. A metafrontier approach for measuring Malmquist productivity index. Empir. Econ. 2010, 38:47-64.
29. Pasurka C.A. Decomposing electric power plant emissions within a joint production framework. Energy Econ. 2006, 28:26-43.
30. Picazo-Tadeo A.J., Reig-Martinez E., Hernandez-Sancho F. Directional distance functions and environmental regulation. Resour. Energy Econ. 2005, 27:131-142.
31. Pombo C., Taborda R. Performance and efficiency in Colombia's power distribution system: effects of the 1994 reform. Energy Econ. 2006, 28:339-369.
32. Ramos-Real F.J., Tovar B., Iootty M., De Almeida E.F., Pinto H.Q. The evolution and main determinants of productivity in Brazilian electricity distribution 1998-2005: an empirical analysis. Energy Econ. 2009, 31:298-305.
33. Sueyoshi T., Goto M. Should the US clean air act include CO2 emission control?: Examination by data envelopment analysis. Energy Policy 2010, 38:5902-5911.
34. Sueyoshi T., Goto M. Efficiency-based rank assessment for electric power industry: a combined use of Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and DEA-Discriminant Analysis (DA). Energy Econ. 2011, 34:634-644.
35. Sueyoshi T., Goto M., Ueno T. Performance analysis of US coal-fired power plants by measuring three DEA efficiencies. Energy Policy 2010, 38:1675-1688.
36. Vaninsky A. Efficiency of electric power generation in the United States: analysis and forecast based on data envelopment analysis. Energy Econ. 2006, 28:326-338.
37. World Economic Forum The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011 2010, World Economic Forum, Geneva, Switzerland.
38. World Resource Institute The Climate Analysis Indicator Tool Database 2011, http://cait.wri.org/.
39. Yörük B.K., Zaim O. Productivity growth in OECD countries: a comparison with Malmquist indices. J. Comp. Econ. 2005, 33:401-420.
40. Yu E.S.H., Choi J.Y. Causal relationship between energy and GNP: an international comparison. J. Energy Dev. 1985, 10:249-272.
41. Zaim O., Taskin F. A Kuznets curve in environmental efficiency: an application on OECD countries. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2000, 17:21-36.
42. 2 emissions: a production-theoretical approach. Energy Econ. 2008, 30:1054-1067.
43. Zhou P., Ang B., Poh K. Slacks-based efficiency measures for modeling environmental performance. Ecol. Econ. 2006, 60:111-118.
44. Zhou P., Ang B., Poh K. Measuring environmental performance under different environmental DEA technologies. Energy Econ. 2008, 30:1-14.
45. Zhou P., Ang B., Han J. Total factor carbon emission performance: a Malmquist index analysis. Energy Econ. 2010, 32:194-201.
46. 2 emissions from OECD industries. Resour. Energy Econ. 2001, 23:63-83.