Skip to main content
Log in

Accounting for Environmental Effects and Statistical Noise in Data Envelopment Analysis

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

Abstract

In this paper we propose a new technique for incorporating environmental effects and statistical noise into a producer performance evaluation based on data envelopment analysis (DEA). The technique involves a three-stage analysis. In the first stage, DEA is applied to outputs and inputs only, to obtain initial measures of producer performance. In the second stage, stochastic frontier analysis (SFA) is used to regress first stage performance measures against a set of environmental variables. This provides, for each input or output (depending on the orientation of the first stage DEA model), a three-way decomposition of the variation in performance into a part attributable to environmental effects, a part attributable to managerial inefficiency, and a part attributable to statistical noise. In the third stage, either inputs or outputs (again depending on the orientation of the first stage DEA model) are adjusted to account for the impact of the environmental effects and the statistical noise uncovered in the second stage, and DEA is used to re-evaluate producer performance. Throughout the analysis emphasis is placed on slacks, rather than on radial efficiency scores, as appropriate measures of producer performance. An application to nursing homes is provided to illustrate the power of the three-stage methodology.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adolphson, D. L., G. C. Cornia and L. C. Walters. (1991). “A Unified Framework for Classifying DEA Models.” Operational Research 90, 647-657.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aigner, D., C. A. K. Lovell and P. Schmidt. (1977). “Formulation and Estimation of Stochastic Frontier Production Function Models.” Journal of Econometrics 6(1), 21-37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banker, R. D., A. Charnes and W. W. Cooper. (1984). “Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis.” Management Science 30(9), 1078-1092.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banker, R. D. and R. C. Morey. (1986a). “Efficiency Analysis for Exogenously Fixed Inputs and Outputs.” Operations Research 34(4), 513-521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banker, R. D. and R. C. Morey. (1986b). “The Use of Categorical Variables in Data Envelopment Analysis.” Management Science 32(12), 1613-1627.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharyya, A., C. A. K. Lovell and P. Sahay. (1997). “The Impact of Liberalization on the Productive Efficiency of Indian Commercial Banks.” European Journal of Operational Research 98(2), 332-347.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Charnes, A.,W. W. Cooper and E. Rhodes. (1981). “Evaluating Program and Managerial Efficiency:AnApplication of Data Envelopment Analysis to Program Follow Through.” Management Science 27(6), 668-697.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fried, H. O., C. A. K. Lovell and P. Vanden Eeckaut. (1993). “Evaluating the Performance of U.S. Credit Unions.” Journal of Banking and Finance 17(2/3), 251-265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fried, H. O., S. S. Schmidt and S. Yaisawarng. (1999). “Incorporating the Operating Environment into a Nonparametric Measure of Technical Efficiency.” Journal of Productivity Analysis 12(3), 249-267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jondrow, J., I. Materov, C. A. K. Lovell and P. Schmidt. (1982). “On the Estimation of Technical Inefficiency in the Stochastic Frontier Production Model.” Journal of Econometrics 19(2/3), 233-238.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarty, T. and S. Yaisawarng. (1993). “Technical Efficiency in New Jersey School Districts.” In H. O. Fried, C. A K. Lovell and S. S. Schmidt (eds.), The Measurement of Productive Efficiency: Techniques and Applications. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meeusen, W. and J. van den Broeck. (1977). “Efficiency Estimation from Cobb-Douglas Production Functions with Composed Error.” International Economic Review 18(2), 435-444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olesen, O. B., N. C. Petersen and C. A. K. Lovell (eds.), (1996). “Efficiency and Frontier Analysis.” Journal of Productivity Analysis 7(2/3).

  • Pastor, J. T. (1995). “How to Account for Environmental Effects in DEA: An Application to Bank Branches.” Working Paper, Departamento de Estadistica e Investigacion Operativa. 03071 Alicante, SPAIN: Universidad de Alicante.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, P. and R. C. Sickles. (1984). “Production Frontiers and Panel Data.” Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 2(4), 367-374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simar, L. and P. W. Wilson. (2000). “Statistical Inference in Nonparametric Frontier Models: The State of the Art.” Journal of Productivity Analysis 13(1), 49-78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timmer, C. P. (1971). “Using a Probabilistic Frontier Production Function to Measure Technical Efficiency.” Journal of Political Economy 79(4), 776-794.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fried, H.O., Lovell, C.A.K., Schmidt, S.S. et al. Accounting for Environmental Effects and Statistical Noise in Data Envelopment Analysis. Journal of Productivity Analysis 17, 157–174 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013548723393

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013548723393

Navigation