IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v132y2001i2p287-295.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Product mixes as objects of choice in non-parametric efficiency measurement

Author

Listed:
  • Cherchye, Laurens
  • Van Puyenbroeck, Tom

Abstract

Non-radial measures of technical efficiency essentially differ from their radial counterparts in that the product mix of the efficient reference is allowed to be different from the product mix of the evaluated observation. Whereas existing non-radial measures are still based on the product mix of the evaluated, i.e. possibly inefficient observation, we change the perspective and propose a measure based on the mix properties of the efficient reference. The resulting `inverse' measure can be considered as complementary to the Färe-Lovell (or ``Russell'') efficiency measure.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Cherchye, Laurens & Van Puyenbroeck, Tom, 2001. "Product mixes as objects of choice in non-parametric efficiency measurement," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(2), pages 287-295, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:132:y:2001:i:2:p:287-295
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377-2217(00)00152-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zieschang, Kimberly D., 1984. "An extended farrell technical efficiency measure," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 387-396, August.
    2. Russell, R. Robert, 1985. "On the Axiomatic Approach to the Measurement of Technical Efficiency," Working Papers 85-33, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    3. KERSTENs, Kris & VANDEN EECKAUT, Philippe, 1995. "Technical Efficiency Measures on DEA and FDH : A Reconsideration of the Axiomatic Literature," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 1995013, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    4. Henry Tulkens, 2006. "On FDH Efficiency Analysis: Some Methodological Issues and Applications to Retail Banking, Courts and Urban Transit," Springer Books, in: Parkash Chander & Jacques Drèze & C. Knox Lovell & Jack Mintz (ed.), Public goods, environmental externalities and fiscal competition, chapter 0, pages 311-342, Springer.
    5. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    6. Robert Russell, R., 1985. "Measures of technical efficiency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 109-126, February.
    7. Fare, Rolf & Knox Lovell, C. A., 1978. "Measuring the technical efficiency of production," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 150-162, October.
    8. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1979. "Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 339-338, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Laurens Cherchye & Tom Van Puyenbroeck, 1999. "A Shadow Price Approach to Technical Efficiency Measurement," Public Economics Working Paper Series ces9924, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën, Working Group Public Economics.
    2. J. Vakili & R. Sadighi Dizaji, 2021. "The closest strong efficient targets in the FDH technology: an enumeration method," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 91-105, April.
    3. Javad Vakili & Hanieh Amirmoshiri & Rashed Khanjani Shiraz & Hirofumi Fukuyama, 2020. "A modified distance friction minimization approach in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 288(2), pages 789-804, May.
    4. Cherchye, Laurens & Van Puyenbroeck, Tom, 2009. "Semi-radial technical efficiency measurement," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 193(2), pages 616-625, March.
    5. Halická, Margaréta & Trnovská, Mária, 2018. "The Russell measure model: Computational aspects, duality, and profit efficiency," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(1), pages 386-397.
    6. Hirofumi Fukuyama & Hiroya Masaki & Kazuyuki Sekitani & Jianming Shi, 2014. "Distance optimization approach to ratio-form efficiency measures in data envelopment analysis," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 175-186, October.
    7. Maria Silva Portela & Pedro Borges & Emmanuel Thanassoulis, 2003. "Finding Closest Targets in Non-Oriented DEA Models: The Case of Convex and Non-Convex Technologies," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 251-269, April.
    8. Laurens Cherchye & Tom Van Puyenbroeck, 2001. "Technical Efficiency Evaluation: Naturally Dual!," Public Economics Working Paper Series wptchff, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën, Working Group Public Economics.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Walter Briec & Laurent Cavaignac & Kristiaan Kerstens, 2020. "Input Efficiency Measures: A Generalized, Encompassing Formulation," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 68(6), pages 1836-1849, November.
    2. Borger, Bruno De & Ferrier, Gary D. & Kerstens, Kristiaan, 1998. "The choice of a technical efficiency measure on the free disposal hull reference technology: A comparison using US banking data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 105(3), pages 427-446, March.
    3. R. Russell & William Schworm, 2009. "Axiomatic foundations of efficiency measurement on data-generated technologies," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 77-86, April.
    4. Peter Bogetoft & Joseph M. Tama & Jørgen Tind, 2000. "Convex Input and Output Projections of Nonconvex Production Possibility Sets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(6), pages 858-869, June.
    5. Ray, Subhash C. & Jeon, Yongil, 2008. "Reputation and efficiency: A non-parametric assessment of America's top-rated MBA programs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(1), pages 245-268, August.
    6. Färe, Rolf & Fukuyama, Hirofumi & Grosskopf, Shawna & Zelenyuk, Valentin, 2016. "Cost decompositions and the efficient subset," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 123-130.
    7. Maria Silva Portela & Pedro Borges & Emmanuel Thanassoulis, 2003. "Finding Closest Targets in Non-Oriented DEA Models: The Case of Convex and Non-Convex Technologies," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 251-269, April.
    8. Rolf Färe & Xinju He & Sungko Li & Valentin Zelenyuk, 2019. "A Unifying Framework for Farrell Profit Efficiency Measurement," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(1), pages 183-197, January.
    9. Gerami, Javad & Mozaffari, Mohammad Reza & Wanke, Peter F. & Correa, Henrique L., 2022. "Improving information reliability of non-radial value efficiency analysis: An additive slacks based measure approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(3), pages 967-978.
    10. William Cooper & Kyung Park & Jesus Pastor, 1999. "RAM: A Range Adjusted Measure of Inefficiency for Use with Additive Models, and Relations to Other Models and Measures in DEA," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 5-42, February.
    11. Meng, Fanyi & Su, Bin & Thomson, Elspeth & Zhou, Dequn & Zhou, P., 2016. "Measuring China’s regional energy and carbon emission efficiency with DEA models: A survey," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 1-21.
    12. Briec, W., 2000. "An extended Fare-Lovell technical efficiency measure," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 191-199, April.
    13. Mehdiloo, Mahmood & Podinovski, Victor V., 2021. "Strong, weak and Farrell efficient frontiers of technologies satisfying different production assumptions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 295-311.
    14. Yossi Hadad & Lea Friedman & Victoria Rybalkin & Zilla Sinuany-Stern, 2013. "The relationship between DEA efficiency and the type of production function, the degree of homogeneity, and error variability," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 21(3), pages 595-607, September.
    15. Gonzalez, Eduardo & Alvarez, Antonio, 2001. "From efficiency measurement to efficiency improvement: The choice of a relevant benchmark," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(3), pages 512-520, September.
    16. M C A S Portela & E Thanassoulis, 2007. "Developing a decomposable measure of profit efficiency using DEA," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(4), pages 481-490, April.
    17. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Sekitani, Kazuyuki, 2007. "Computational strategy for Russell measure in DEA: Second-order cone programming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 180(1), pages 459-471, July.
    18. Juo, Jia-Ching & Fu, Tsu-Tan & Yu, Ming-Miin, 2012. "Non-oriented slack-based decompositions of profit change with an application to Taiwanese banking," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 550-561.
    19. Aparicio, Juan & Borras, Fernando & Pastor, Jesus T. & Vidal, Fernando, 2015. "Measuring and decomposing firm׳s revenue and cost efficiency: The Russell measures revisited," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 19-28.
    20. Ravelojaona, Paola, 2019. "On constant elasticity of substitution – Constant elasticity of transformation Directional Distance Functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(2), pages 780-791.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:132:y:2001:i:2:p:287-295. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.