Journal of Productivity Analysis

, Volume 9, Issue 3, pp 205–232 | Cite as

Marginal Rates and Two-dimensional Level Curves in DEA

  • Dan Rosen
  • Claire Schaffnit
  • Joseph C. Paradi
Article

Abstract

Of great importance to management, the computation of trade-offs presents particular difficulties within DEA since the piecewise linear nature of the envelopment surfaces does not allow for unique derivatives at every point. We present a comprehensive framework for analyzing marginal rates, and directional derivatives in general, on DEA frontiers. A useful characterization of these derivatives at given points can be provided in terms of the ranges they can take; equivalently, the bounds of these ranges correspond to derivatives “to the right”and “to the left” at these points. We present two approaches for their computation: first, the dual equivalents calculation of minimum and maximum multiplier ratios / finite differences, and then a modified simplex tableau method. The simplex tableau method provides a more general application of the method introduced by Hackman et al. (1994) to generate any two-dimensional section of the isoquant and is a practical tool to generate level plots of the frontier. By giving a complete picture of trade-offs and allowing a better visualization of high dimensional production possibility sets, these tools can be very useful for managerial applications.

Data Envelopment Analysis marginal rates trade-offs partial derivatives piecewise linear surfaces returns to scale 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ali, A. I., and L. M. Seiford. (1993). “The Mathematical Programming Approach to Efficiency Analysis.” In H. O. Fried, K. C. A. Lovell, and S. S. Schmidt (eds.), The Measurement of Productive Efficiency. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Ames, W. F. (1992). Numerical Methods for Partial Differential Equations, Third edition. New York: Academic Press Inc.Google Scholar
  3. Banker, R. D., A. Charnes, and W. W. Cooper. (1984). “Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Efficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis.” Management Science 30(9), 1078–1092.Google Scholar
  4. Banker, R. D., and R. M. Thrall. (1992). “Estimation of Returns to Scale using Data Envelopment Analysis.” European Journal of Operational Research 62, 74–84.Google Scholar
  5. Bessent, A., W. Bessent, J. Elam, and T. Clark. (1988). “Efficiency Frontier Determination by Constrained Facet Analysis.” Operations Research 36, 785–796.Google Scholar
  6. Charnes, A., W. W. Cooper, B. Golany, L. Seiford, and J. Stutz. (1985). “Foundations of Data Envelopment Analysis for Pareto-Koopmans Efficient Empirical Production Functions.” Journal of Econometrics 30, 91–107.Google Scholar
  7. Charnes, A., W. W. Cooper, A. Lewin, and L. M. Seiford. (1995). Data Envelopment Analysis: Theory, Methodology and Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  8. Charnes, A., W. W. Cooper, and E. Rhodes. (1978). “Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units.” European Journal of Operational Research 2(6), 429–444.Google Scholar
  9. Charnes, A., W. W. Cooper, and R. M. Thrall. (1991). “A Structure for Classifying and Characterizing Efficiency and Inefficiency in Data Envelopment Analysis.” Journal of Productivity Analysis 2, 197–237.Google Scholar
  10. Chilingerian, J. A. (1995). “Evaluating Physician Efficiency in Hospitals: A Multivariate Analysis of Best Practices.” European Journal of Operational Research 80, 548–574.Google Scholar
  11. Dennis, Jr., J. E. (1983). Numerical Methods for Unconstrained Optimization and Nonlinear Equations. Englewood, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  12. Fukuda, K. (1993). “cdd.c: C-Implementation of the Double Description Method for Computing All Vertices and Extremal Rays of a Convex Polyhedron given a System of Linear inequalities.” Dept. of Mathematics, Swiss Federal Inst. of Technology, Lausanne, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  13. Golany, B., and G. Yu.(1994). “Estimating Returns to Scale in DEA.” European Journal of Operational Research, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  14. Hackman, S. T., U. Passy, and L. K. Platzman. (1994). “Explicit Representation of the Two-Dimensional Section of a Prodcution Possibility Set.” Journal of Productivity Analysis 5, 161–170.Google Scholar
  15. Paradi, J. C., D. N. Reese, and D. Rosen. (1995). “Applications of DEA to Measure the Efficiency of Software Production at Two Large Canadian Banks.” Annals of Operations Research, in press.Google Scholar
  16. Schaffnit, C., D. Rosen, and J. C. Paradi. (1995). “Envisioning DEA.” Working paper, CMTE, University of Toronto presented at the INFORMS International Meeting, Singapore, June 25–28, 1995.Google Scholar
  17. Sherman, H. D. (1984). “Data Envelopment Analysis as a New Managerial Audit Methodology-Test and Evaluation.” Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 4, 33–35.Google Scholar
  18. Thanassoulis, E. (1993). “A Comparison of Regression Analysis and Data Envelopment Analysis as Alternative Methods of Performance Assessment.” J. Operational Research Society 44(11), 1129–1144.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dan Rosen
    • 1
  • Claire Schaffnit
    • 1
  • Joseph C. Paradi
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Management of Technology and Entrepreneurship, Dept. of Industrial EngineeringUniversity of TorontoTorontoCANADA

Personalised recommendations