Abstract
In a recent paper in Journal of Productivity Analysis, Seiford (1996) assessed some DEA publications as being the most influential by interviewing a sample of researchers “in an attempt to establish a consensus.” In this note I compare Seiford's ranking with an alternative bibliometric ranking based on the Social Science Citation Index. The alternative quantitative ranking is very different from Seiford's qualitative ranking.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Emrouznejad, A., and E. Thanassoulis. (1996a). “An Extensive Bibliography of Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), Volume 1: Working Papers.” Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry, England.
Emrouznejad, A., and E. Thanassoulis. (1996b). “An Extensive Bibliography of Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), Volume 2: Journal Papers,” Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry, England.
Sarafoglou, N., and K. E. Haynes. (1996). “University Productivity in Sweden: A Demonstration and Explanatory Analysis for Economics and Business Programs,” Annals of Regional Science 30(3), 285–304.
Seiford, L. M. (1996). “Data Envelopment Analysis: The Evolution of the State of the Art (1978–1995),” Journal of Productivity Analysis 7(2/3) July, 99–138.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sarafoglou, N. The Most Influential DEA Publications: A Comment on Seiford. Journal of Productivity Analysis 9, 279–281 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018343223145
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018343223145