Skip to main content
Log in

Efficiency Evaluations Based on Potential (Non-Proportional) Improvements

  • Published:
Journal of Productivity Analysis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Efficiency evaluation of a Decision Making Unit (DMU) involves two issues: 1) selection of an appropriate reference plan against which to evaluate the DMU and 2) measurement of performance slack. In the literature, these issues are mixed in one and the same operation but we argue that it has theoretical as well as practical advantages to separate them. We provide an axiomatic characterization of the implicit Farrell selection. This approach, ignores important aspects of the technology by focussing on proportional variations in inputs (or outputs). We propose a new approach where potential improvements are used to guide the selection of reference plans. A characterization of this approach is provided and an associated translation invariant, strictly monotonous and continuous efficiency index is suggested.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bogetoft, P. (1994a). “Incentive Efficient Production Frontiers: An Agency Perspective on DEA.” Management Science 40, 959–968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft, P. (1994b). Non-Cooperative Planning Theory. Springer-Verlag.

  • Bogetoft, P. (1995b). “Organizational Down-Sizing under Asymmetric Information.” Working Paper, Royal Agricultural University.

  • Bogetoft, P. (1997). “DEA-Based Yardstick Competition: The Optimality of Best Practice Regulation.” Annals of Operations Research 73, 277–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft, P., and P. Pruzan. (1991). Planning with Multiple Criteria. North-Holland.

  • Chambers, R. G., Y. Chung, and R. Färe. (1995). “Benefit and Distance Functions.” Journal of Economic Theory 70, 407–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, R. G., Y. Chung, and R. Färe. (1998). “Profit, Directional Distance Functions, and Nerlovian Efficiency.” Journal of Optimization Theory and Application 95, 351–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, R. G., and R. Färe. (1998). “Translation Homotheticity.” Economic Theory 11, 629–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, R. G., R. Färe, and S. Grosskopf. (1996). “Productivity Growth in APEC Countries.” Pacific Economic Review 1:3, 181–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luenberger, D. G. (1992). “Benefit Functions and Duality.” Journal of Mathematical Economics 21, 461–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, M. J. (1957). “The Measurement of Productive Efficiency.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A III, 253–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe, R., and C. A. K. Lovell. (1978). “Measuring the Technical Efficiency of Production.” Journal of Economic Theory 19, 150–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hougaard, J. L., and M. Tvede. (1999). “Benchmark Selection: An Axiomatic Approach.” Mimeo, Copenhagen Business School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalai, E., and M. Smorodinsky. (1975). “Other Solutions to Nash's Bargaining Problem.” Econometrica 43, 513–519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, F. R. (1979). Measurement Theory, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications. Addison-Wesley.

  • Thomson, W. (1980). “Two Characterizations of the Raiffa Solution.” Economics Letters 6, 225–231.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bogetoft, P., Hougaard, J.L. Efficiency Evaluations Based on Potential (Non-Proportional) Improvements. Journal of Productivity Analysis 12, 233–247 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007848222681

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007848222681

Navigation