IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/isochp/978-3-030-74051-1_16.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

The Relative Efficiencies of Higher Education in OECD Countries

In: Handbook of Operations Research and Management Science in Higher Education

Author

Listed:
  • Zilla Sinuany-Stern

    (Ben Gurion University of the Negev)

  • Arthur Hirsh

    (Webster Vienna Private University)

Abstract

Studies of productivity of systems of Higher Education (HE) on the national level are of interest for two main reasons: education is an important factor for productivity growth for the macro-economy, and the efficiency of spending public resources on HE is of key interest in the context of accountability specifically relative efficiency compared with other developed countries. The objective of this study is to evaluate the relative efficiency of HE in OECD countries from the public viewpoint; how well OECD countries utilize their public resources to achieve their outputs relative to each other. For this study, two inputs are chosen reflecting the public investment in HE. Six outputs are chosen reflecting the main outcomes of HE in terms of: accessibility of tertiary education, employment level, earnings level relative to secondary education, net financial returns from HE, internal rate of return, and research articles level. The data is taken, mostly, from the OECD report on education in 2019. Out of 37 OECD countries 29 are considered in this study. Due to missing data 8 countries are not included. The stress on efficiency from the public viewpoint is a strength of this study in relation to previous OECD efficiency studies. The original Data Envelopment Analyses (DEA) basic models are, which provide dichotomy of the countries into two groups: efficient and inefficient. Moreover, several efficiency rank-scaling methods based on DEA, and several multivariate statistic methods are utilized here. The use of a variety of efficiency rank-scaling methods, while choosing the robust one, is another strength of this research. The results indicate that the robust method is cross efficiency, as it is significantly correlated with each of the other efficiency methods, and it has the highest average correlation with other efficient methods. From the 29 studied OECD countries, the USA is found to be the most efficient in HE. However, when we use only the first input versus the six above outputs, Italy became the most efficient country. The USA is ranked third in this case, while Italy is ranked fourth in the original case.

Suggested Citation

  • Zilla Sinuany-Stern & Arthur Hirsh, 2021. "The Relative Efficiencies of Higher Education in OECD Countries," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Zilla Sinuany-Stern (ed.), Handbook of Operations Research and Management Science in Higher Education, chapter 0, pages 481-512, Springer.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:isochp:978-3-030-74051-1_16
    DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-74051-1_16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Sinuany-Stern, Zilla, 2023. "Foundations of operations research: From linear programming to data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(3), pages 1069-1080.
    2. See, Kok Fong & Ng, Ying Chu & Yu, Ming-Miin, 2022. "An alternative assessment approach to national higher education system evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    3. Yan Xia & Jianxin You & Xiumeng Feng & Yingjie Xu & Hui Feng, 2023. "Clustering Analysis of Classified Performance Evaluation of Higher Education in Shanghai Based on Topsis Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-18, April.

    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:spr:isochp:978-3-030-74051-1_16. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.