IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i2p1424-d1032876.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

ESG-Based Performance Assessment of the Operation and Management of Industrial Parks in Taiwan

Author

Listed:
  • Li-Ling Kao

    (Department of Land Economics, National Chengchi University, Taipei City 11605, Taiwan)

Abstract

The development of industrial parks plays an important role in the economic development of developed and developing countries, but it has recently been affected by globalization and the rise of environmental protection awareness, as 2050 net-zero carbon emissions are being pursued by the world’s major economies. To make their development more sustainable, this study evaluates the operational management performance of industrial parks in Taiwan from the perspective of ESG, to inform future industrial development strategies and policy research. First, 61 industrial parks managed by the Taiwanese Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA) were selected and underwent a fuzzy Delphi expert questionnaire to screen the ESG-oriented performance indicators; performance was evaluated through the data envelopment analysis (DEA) undesirable outputs model and the window analysis method. The results indicate that the New Taipei Industrial Park performed best in terms of ESG, followed by the Feng-Shan and Anping industrial parks, with the worst performance from the Mei-Lun, Yun-Lin Island, and Hu-Pin industrial parks. Regarding factors affecting the performance of operation management, a Mann–Whitney U test showed that the northern industrial parks performed significantly better than those in the eastern region, those in the municipalities significantly outperformed the nonmunicipalities, and the industrial parks with more clustered industries and those in areas with convenient transportation performed substantially better. Finally, this study summarizes the important issues facing Taiwan’s industrial parks, and it makes policy recommendations, including promoting ESG sustainable development objectives in their operation and management, as well as increasing the investment of government resources and the clustering of industries and transportation.

Suggested Citation

  • Li-Ling Kao, 2023. "ESG-Based Performance Assessment of the Operation and Management of Industrial Parks in Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-27, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:2:p:1424-:d:1032876
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/2/1424/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/2/1424/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhang, Bing & Bi, Jun & Fan, Ziying & Yuan, Zengwei & Ge, Junjie, 2008. "Eco-efficiency analysis of industrial system in China: A data envelopment analysis approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 306-316, December.
    2. Zhang, Lin & Zhao, Linlin & Zha, Yong, 2021. "Efficiency evaluation of Chinese regional industrial systems using a dynamic two-stage DEA approach," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    3. Golany, B & Roll, Y, 1989. "An application procedure for DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 237-250.
    4. Ching-Cheng Chang, 1999. "The Nonparametric Risk-Adjusted Efficiency Measurement: An Application to Taiwan's Major Rural Financial Intermediaries," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(4), pages 902-913.
    5. R. D. Banker & A. Charnes & W. W. Cooper, 1984. "Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(9), pages 1078-1092, September.
    6. United Nations UN, 2015. "Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development," Working Papers id:7559, eSocialSciences.
    7. Fare, Rolf, 1989. "Multilateral Productivity Comparisons When Some Outputs Are Undesirable: A Nonparametric Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 71(1), pages 90-98, February.
    8. 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.
    9. Seiford, Lawrence M. & Zhu, Joe, 2002. "Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(1), pages 16-20, October.
    10. Arie Y. Lewin & John W. Minton, 1986. "Determining Organizational Effectiveness: Another Look, and an Agenda for Research," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 514-538, May.
    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. Hsio-Yi Lin & Bin-Wei Hsu, 2023. "Empirical Study of ESG Score Prediction through Machine Learning—A Case of Non-Financial Companies in Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-19, September.

    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. Zanella, Andreia & Camanho, Ana S. & Dias, Teresa G., 2015. "Undesirable outputs and weighting schemes in composite indicators based on data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(2), pages 517-530.
    2. Hsiao-Yen Mao & Wen-Min Lu & Hsin-Yen Shieh, 2023. "Exploring the Influence of Environmental Investment on Multinational Enterprises’ Performance from the Sustainability and Marketability Efficiency Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-23, May.
    3. Jie Wu & Qingyuan Zhu & Pengzhen Yin & Malin Song, 2017. "Measuring energy and environmental performance for regions in China by using DEA-based Malmquist indices," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 715-735, October.
    4. W. Liu & W. Meng & X. Li & D. Zhang, 2010. "DEA models with undesirable inputs and outputs," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 173(1), pages 177-194, January.
    5. Zou, Bo & Kafle, Nabin & Chang, Young-Tae & Park, Kevin, 2015. "US airport financial reform and its implications for airport efficiency: An exploratory investigation," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 66-78.
    6. OA Carboni & P. Russu, 2014. "Measuring Environmental and Economic Efficiency in Italy: an Application of the Malmquist-DEA and Grey Forecasting Model," Working Paper CRENoS 201401, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    7. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2008. "A survey of data envelopment analysis in energy and environmental studies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(1), pages 1-18, August.
    8. Beltrán-Esteve, Mercedes & Picazo-Tadeo, Andrés J., 2017. "Assessing environmental performance in the European Union: Eco-innovation versus catching-up," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 240-252.
    9. Shih-Heng Yu, 2019. "Benchmarking and Performance Evaluation Towards the Sustainable Development of Regions in Taiwan: A Minimum Distance-Based Measure with Undesirable Outputs in Additive DEA," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 144(3), pages 1323-1348, August.
    10. Bian, Yiwen & Yang, Feng, 2010. "Resource and environment efficiency analysis of provinces in China: A DEA approach based on Shannon's entropy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 1909-1917, April.
    11. Chang, Young-Tae & Zhang, Ning & Danao, Denise & Zhang, Nan, 2013. "Environmental efficiency analysis of transportation system in China: A non-radial DEA approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 277-283.
    12. Wu, Jie & Zhu, Qingyuan & Liang, Liang, 2016. "CO2 emissions and energy intensity reduction allocation over provincial industrial sectors in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 282-291.
    13. Pyoungsoo Lee & You-Jin Park, 2017. "Eco-Efficiency Evaluation Considering Environmental Stringency," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-18, April.
    14. Atkinson, Scott E. & Tsionas, Mike G., 2021. "Generalized estimation of productivity with multiple bad outputs: The importance of materials balance constraints," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(3), pages 1165-1186.
    15. Richard Simper & Maximilian J.B. Hall & Wenbin B. Liu & Valentin Zelenyuk & Zhongbao Zhou, 2014. "How Relevant is the Choice of Risk Management Control Variable to Non-parametric Bank Profit Efficiency Analysis?," CEPA Working Papers Series WP122014, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    16. Trinks, Arjan & Mulder, Machiel & Scholtens, Bert, 2020. "An Efficiency Perspective on Carbon Emissions and Financial Performance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    17. César Salazar & Roberto Cárdenas-Retamal & Marcela Jaime, 2023. "Environmental efficiency in the salmon industry—an exploratory analysis around the 2007 ISA virus outbreak and subsequent regulations in Chile," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(8), pages 8107-8135, August.
    18. Chu, Junfei & Hou, Tianteng & Li, Feng & Yuan, Zhe, 2024. "Dynamic bargaining game DEA carbon emissions abatement allocation and the Nash equilibrium," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    19. George Halkos & George Papageorgiou, 2016. "Spatial environmental efficiency indicators in regional waste generation: a nonparametric approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(1), pages 62-78, January.
    20. Toloo, Mehdi & Hančlová, Jana, 2020. "Multi-valued measures in DEA in the presence of undesirable outputs," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:2:p:1424-:d:1032876. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.