Measuring the efficiency of decision making units

In management contexts, mathematical programming is usually used to evaluate a collection of possible alternative courses of action en route to selecting one which is best. In this capacity, mathematical programming serves as a planning aid to management. Data Envelopment Analysis reverses this role and employs mathematical programming to obtain ex post facto evaluations of the relative efficiency of management accomplishments, however they may have been planned or executed. Mathematical programming is thereby extended for use as a tool for control and evaluation of past accomplishments as well as a tool to aid in planning future activities. The CCR ratio form introduced by Charnes, Cooper and Rhodes, as part of their Data Envelopment Analysis approach, comprehends both technical and scale inefficiencies via the optimal value of the ratio form, as obtained directly from the data without requiring a priori specification of weights and/or explicit delineation of assumed functional forms of relations between inputs and outputs. A separation into technical and scale efficiencies is accomplished by the methods developed in this paper without altering the latter conditions for use of DEA directly on observational data. Technical inefficiencies are identified with failures to achieve best possible output levels and/or usage of excessive amounts of inputs. Methods for identifying and correcting the magnitudes of these inefficiencies, as supplied in prior work, are illustrated. In the present paper, a new separate variable is introduced which makes it possible to determine whether operations were conducted in regions of increasing, constant or decreasing returns to scale in multiple input and multiple output situations. The results are discussed and related not only to classical single output economics but also to more modern versions of economics which are identified with "contestable market theories."

http://www.utdallas.edu/~ryoung/phdseminar/BCC1984.pdf

Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis

Ever since Richard Stone (1954) first estimated a system of demand equations derived explicitly from consumer theory, there has been a continuing search for alternative specifications and functional forms. Many models have been proposed, but perhaps the most important in current use, apart from the original linear expenditure system, are the Rotterdam model (see Henri Theil, 1965, 1976; Anton Barten) and the translog model (see Laurits Christensen, Dale Jorgenson, and Lawrence Lau; Jorgenson and Lau). Both of these models have been extensively estimated and have, in addition, been used to test the homogeneity and symmetry restrictions of demand theory. In this paper, we propose and estimate a new model which is of comparable generality to the Rotterdam and translog models but which has considerable advantages over both. Our model, which we call the Almost Ideal Demand System (AIDS), gives an arbitrary first-order approximation to any demand system; it satisfies the axioms of choice exactly; it aggregates perfectly over consumers without invoking parallel linear Engel curves; it has a functional form which is consistent with known household-budget data; it is simple to estimate, largely avoiding the need for non-linear estimation; and it can be used to test the restrictions of homogeneity and symmetry through linear restrictions on fixed parameters. Although many of these desirable properties are possessed by one or other of the Rotterdam or translog models, neither possesses all of them simultaneously. In Section I of the paper, we discuss the theoretical specification of the AIDS and justify the claims in the previous paragraph. In Section II, the model is estimated on postwar British data and we use our results to test the homogeneity and symmetry restrictions. Our results are consistent with earlier findings in that both sets of restrictions are decisively rejected. We also find that imposition of homogeneity generates positive serial correlation in the errors of those equations which reject the restrictions most strongly; this suggests that the now standard rejection of homogeneity in demand analysis may be due to insufficient attention to the dynamic aspects of consumer behavior. Finally, in Section III, we offer a summary and conclusions. We believe that the results of this paper suggest that the AIDS is to be recommended as a vehicle for testing, extending, and improving conventional demand analysis. This does not imply that the system, particularly in its simple static form, is to be regarded as a fully satisfactory explanation of consumers' behavior. Indeed, by proposing a demand system which is superior to its predecessors, we hope to be able to reveal more clearly the problems and potential solutions associated with the usual approach.

/pdf/an-almost-ideal-demand-system-se3smx57kd.pdf

An Almost Ideal Demand System

This paper analyzes productivity growth in seventeen OECD countries over the period 1979-88. A nonparametric programming method (activity analysis) is used to compute Malmquist productivity indexes. These are decomposed into two component measures, namely, technical change and efficiency change. The authors find that U.S. productivity growth is slightly higher than average, all of which is due to technical change. Japan's productivity growth is the highest in the sample with almost half due to efficiency change. Copyright 1994 by American Economic Association.

Productivity growth, technical progress and efficiency change in industrial countries

This paper analyzes productivity growth in 17 OECD countries over the period 1979-1988. A nonparametric programming method (activity analysis) is used to compute Malmquist productivity indexes. These are decomposed into two component measures, namely, technical change and efficiency change. We find that U.S. productivity growth is slightly higher than average, all of which is due to technical change. Japan's productivity growth is the highest in the sample, with almost half due to efficiency change. (JEL C43, D24) In this paper we apply recently developed

Productivity Growth, Technical Progress, and Efficiency Change in Industrialized Countries

A sequel to his frequently cited Cost and Production Functions (1953), this book offers a unified, comprehensive treatment of these functions which underlie the economic theory of production.

	The approach is axiomatic for a definition of technology, by mappings of input vectors into subsets of output vectors that represent the unconstrained technical possibilities of production. To provide a completely general means of characterizing a technology, an alternative to the production function, called the Distance Function, is introduced.

	The duality between cost function and production function is developed by introducing a cost correspondence, showing that these two functions are given in terms of each other by dual minimum problems.

	The special class of production structures called Homothetic is given more general definition and extended to technologies with multiple outputs.

	Originally published in 1971.

	The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These paperback editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.

Theory of cost and production functions

Chapter 10. Cost and Benefit (Revenue) Functions for Production Correspondences, and the Related Cost, Benefit (Revenue), Cost-Limited-Output and Benefit (Revenue)-Afforded-Input Correspondences

Ronald William Shepherd

Papers

Theory of cost and production functions

Chapter 10. Cost and Benefit (Revenue) Functions for Production Correspondences, and the Related Cost, Benefit (Revenue), Cost-Limited-Output and Benefit (Revenue)-Afforded-Input Correspondences