The assessment of cities’ livability integrating human wellbeing and environmental impact

Annals of Operations Research

Volumn 226, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 695-726

  Zanella, A ^a   Camanho, A S ^a   Dias, T G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PORTO   (Portugal)

Author keywords

Cities livability; Composite indicator; Data envelopment analysis; Directional distance function; Luenberger productivity indicator

Indexed keywords

EID: 84939888137     PISSN: 02545330     EISSN: 15729338     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10479-014-1666-7     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Allen, R., Athanassopoulos, A. D., Dyson, R. G., & Thanassoulis, E. (1997). Weights restrictions and value judgments in data envelopment analysis: Evolution, development and future directions. Annals of Operations Research, 73, 13–64.
2. Angulo-Meza, L., & Lins, M. E. (2002). Review of methods for increasing discrimination in data envelopment analysis. Annals of Operations Research, 116(1–4), 225–242.
3. Artemis Information Management. (2012). Final draft glossary on Urban Audit statistics. Technical report, Artemis Information Management SA: Luxembourg.
4. Australian Department of Infrastructure and Transport. (2010). State of Australian cities 2010. Technical report, Department of infrastructure and transport—Major cities unit, Canberra, Australia.
5. Australian Department of Infrastructure and Transport. (2012). State of Australian Cities 2012. Department of infrastructure and transport—Major cities unit, Canberra, Australia: Technical report.
6. Chambers, R. G. (1996). A new look at input, output, productivity and technical change measurement. Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station. University of Maryland, College Park.
7. Chambers, R. G., Chung, Y., & Fare, R. (1996). Benefit and distance functions. Journal of Economic Theory, 70(2), 407–419.
8. Cherchye, L., Moesen, W., Rogge, N., & Van Puyenbroeck, T. (2007). An introduction to benefit of the doubt composite indicators. Social Indicators Research, 82(1), 111–145.
9. Cherchye, L., Moesen, W., Rogge, N., Van Puyenbroeck, T., Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., et al. (2008). Creating composite indicators with DEA and robustness analysis: The case of the technology achievement index. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 59(2), 239–251.
10. Chung, Y., Fare, R., & Grosskopf, S. (1997). Productivity and undesirable outputs: A directional distance function approach. Journal of Environmental Management, 51(3), 229–240.
11. Cook, W. D., & Kress, M. (1990). A data envelopment model for aggregating preference rankings. Management Science, 36(11), 1302–1310.
12. Despotis, D. K. (2002). Improving the discriminating power of DEA: Focus on globally efficient units. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53(3), 314–323.
13. Despotis, D. K. (2004). A reassessment of the human development index via data envelopment analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 56(8), 969–980.
14. Despotis, D. K. (2005). Measuring human development via data envelopment analysis: The case of Asia and the Pacific. Omega, 33(5), 385–390.
15. Dyson, R. G., Allen, R., Camanho, A. S., Podinovski, V. V., Sarrico, C. S., & Shale, E. A. (2001). Pitfalls and protocols in DEA. European Journal of Operational Research, 132(2), 245–259.
16. English Department for Communities and Local Government. (2006). State of the english cities: Liveability in english cities. Technical report, Department for Communities and Local Government, London, England.
17. European Communities. (2004). Urban audit methodological handbook. Technical report: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
18. European Communities. (2014). Urban development, Urban Audit. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/activity/urban/audit/index_en.cfm. 21 April, 2014.
19. Fare, R., & Grosskopf, S. (2005). New directions: Efficiency and productivity (1st ed.). New York: Springer.
20. Fare, R., Grosskopf, S., Lovell, C. A. K., & Pasurka, C. (1989). Multilateral productivity comparisons when some outputs are undesirable: A nonparametric approach. Review of Economics and Statistics, 71(1), 90–98.
21. Fare, R., Grosskopf, S., Norris, M., & Zhang, Z. (1994). Productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change in industrialized countries. American Economic Review, 84(1), 66–83.
22. Fare, R., Grosskopf, S., & Pasurka, C. A, Jr. (2007). Environmental production functions and environmental directional distance functions. Energy, 32(7), 1055–1066.
23. Fried, H. O., Lovell, C. A. K., & Schmidt, S. S. (Eds.). (2008). The measurement of poductive efficiency and productivit growth. USA: Oxford University Press.
24. Hashimoto, A. (1996). A DEA selection system for selective examinations. Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan, 39(4), 475–485.
25. Hollingsworth, B., & Smith, P. (2003). Use of ratios in data envelopment analysis. Applied Economics Letters, 10(11), 733–735.
26. Koopmans, T. (1951). Analysis of production as an efficient combination of activities. In T. C. Koopmans (Ed.), Activity analysis of production and allocation (pp. 33–97). New York: Wiley.
27. Kuosmanen, T., & Matin, R. K. (2011). Duality of weakly disposable technology. Omega, 39(5), 504–512.
28. Liu, W. B., Meng, W., Li, X. X., & Zhang, D. Q. (2009). DEA models with undesirable inputs and outputs. Annals of Operations Research, 173(1), 177–194.
29. Lovell, C. A. K. (1995). Measuring the macroeconomic performance of the taiwanese economy. International Journal of Production Economics, 39(1–2), 165–178.
30. Lovell, C. A. K., Pastor, J. T., & Turner, J. A. (1995). Measuring macroeconomic performance in the OECD: A comparison of european and non-european countries. European Journal of Operational Research, 87(3), 507–518.
31. Macpherson, A. J., Principe, P. P., & Smith, E. R. (2010). A directional distance function approach to regional environmental-economic assessments. Ecological Economics, 69(10), 1918–1925.
32. Mahlberg, B., & Obersteiner, M. (2001). Remeasuring the HDI by data envelopment analysis. Technical report, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.
33. Merriam-Webster. (2013). Livability. http://www.merriam-webster.com. 19 July 2013.
34. Morais, P., & Camanho, A. S. (2011). Evaluation of performance of European cities with the aim to promote quality of life improvements. Omega, 39(4), 398–409.
35. Newman, P. W. G. (1999). Sustainability and cities: Extending the metabolism model. Landscape and Urban Planning, 44(4), 219–226.
36. Newman, P. W. G., Birrell, B., Holmes, D., Mathers, C., Newton, P., Oakley, G., et al. (1996). Human settlements: Australia state of the environmental 1996. Technical report, Collingwood, Australia: CSIRO Publishing.
37. Newton, P., Baum, S., Bhatia, K., Brown, S., Cameron, S., Foran, B., Grant, T., Mak, S., Memmott, P., Mitchell, G., Neate, K., Smith, N., Stimson, R., Pears, A., Tucker, S., & Yencken, E. (2001). Human settlements: Australia state of the environment 2001. Technical report, CSIRO Publishing on behalf of the Department of the Environment and Heritage, Canberra.
38. Oregon Department of Transportation. (2011). Livability and quality of life indicators. Technical report, Oregon Department of Transportation. http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP/docs/LCP/Livability.pdf?ga=t.
39. Picazo-Tadeo, A. J., Reig-Martinez, E., & Hernandez-Sancho, F. (2005). Directional distance functions and environmental regulation. Resource and Energy Economics, 27(2), 131–142.
40. Pichardo-Muiz, A. (2011). The role of diseconomies of transportation and public safety problems in the measurement of urban quality of life. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 6(4), 363–386.
41. Sahoo, B. K., & Acharya, D. (2010). An alternative approach to monetary aggregation in DEA. European Journal of Operational Research, 204(3), 672–682.
42. Sahoo, B. K., & Acharya, D. (2012). Constructing macroeconomic performance index of indian states using DEA. Journal of Economic Studies, 39(1), 63–83.
43. Sahoo, B. K., Luptacik, M., & Mahlberg, B. (2011). Alternative measures of environmental technology structure in DEA: An application. European Journal of Operational Research, 215(3), 750–762.
44. Scheel, H. (2001). Undesirable outputs in efficiency valuations. European Journal of Operational Research, 132(2), 400–410.
45. Thanassoulis, E., Portela, M. C., & Allen, R. (2004). Incorporating value judgments in DEA. In W. W. Cooper, L. M. Seiford & J. Zhu (Eds.), Handbook on data envelopment analysis. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
46. Urban Audit. (2010). Urban audit glossary. Technical report, Urban Audit, Luxembourg.
47. Wong, Y. H. B., & Beasley, J. E. (1990). Restricting weight flexibility in data envelopment analysis. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 41(9), 829–835.
48. Zhou, P., Ang, B., & Poh, K. (2007). A mathematical programming approach to constructing composite indicators. Ecological Economics, 62(2), 291–297.