Abstract
Zhang and Bartels (1998) show formallyhow DEA efficiency scores are affected by sample size. They demonstratethat comparing measures of structural inefficiency between samplesof different sizes leads to biased results. This note arguesthat this type of sample size bias has much wider implicationsthan suggested by their example. Models which implicitly restrictthe comparison set like some models for non-discretionary variableslead to biased efficiency scores as well. A reanalysis of theBanker and Morey (1986b) data shows that the efficiency scoresderived there are significantly influenced by the variation insample size implicit in their model.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Banker, R. D. (1998). “Hypothesis Tests Using Data Envelopment Analysis.” Journal of Productivity Analysis 7, 139–159.
Banker, R. D., A. Charnes, and W. Cooper. (1984). “Models for Estimation of Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis.” Management Science 30, 1078–1092.
Banker, R. D., and R. C. Morey. (1986a). “Efficiency Analysis for Exogenously Fixed Inputs and Outputs.” Operations Research 34(4), 513–21.
Banker, R. D., and R. C. Morey. (1986b). “The Use of Categorical Variables in Data Envelopment Analysis.” Management Science 32, 1613–1627.
Charnes, A., W. Cooper, A. Y. Lewin, and E. Rhodes. (1981). “Evaluation of Programme and Managerial Efficiency: An Application of Data Envelopment Analysis to Programme Follow Through.” Management Science 27, 668–697.
Cook, W. D., D. Chai, J. Doyle, and R. Green. (1998). “Hierarchies and Groups in DEA.” Journal of Productivity Analysis 10, 177–198.
Fried, H. O., C. A. K. Lovell, and P. Van den Eeckhaut. (1993). “Evaluating the Performance of US Credit Unions.” Journal of Banking and Finance 17, 251–265.
Lovell, K. (1994). “Linear Programming Approaches to the Measurement of Productive Efficiency.” Top 2, 174–248.
Ray, S. (1988). “Data Envelopment Analysis, Nondiscretionary Inputs and Efficiency: An Alternative Interpretation.” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 22, 167–176.
Ray, S. (1991). “Resource-Use Efficiency in Public Schools: A Study of Connecticut Data.” Management Science 37, 1620–1628.
Ruggiero, J. (1996). “On the Measurement of Technical Efficiency in the Public Sector.” European Journal of Operations Research 90, 553–565.
Yu, C. (1998). “The Effects of Exogenous Variables on Efficiency Measurement--A Monte Carlo study.” European Journal of Operations Research 92, 569-580.
Zhang, Y., and R. Bartels. (1998). “The Effect of Sample Size on Mean Efficiency in DEA with an Application to Electricity Distribution in Australia, Sweden and New Zealand.” Journal of Productivity Analysis 9, 187–204.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
About this article
Cite this article
Staat, M. The Effect of Sample Size on the Mean Efficiency in DEA: Comment. Journal of Productivity Analysis 15, 129–137 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007826405826
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007826405826