Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Finding Closest Targets in Non-Oriented DEA Models: The Case of Convex and Non-Convex Technologies

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

Abstract

This paper draws attention for the fact that traditional Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) models do not provide the closest possible targets (or peers) to inefficient units, and presents a procedure to obtain such targets.

It focuses on non-oriented efficiency measures (which assume that production units are able to control, and thus change, inputs and outputs simultaneously) both measured in relation to a Free Disposal Hull (FDH) technology and in relation to a convex technology. The approaches developed for finding close targets are applied to a sample of Portuguese bank branches.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

  • Ali, A. I. and L. M. Seiford. (1993). "The Mathematical Programming Approach to Efficiency Analysis." In H. O. Fried, C. A. K. Lovell and S. S. Schmidt (eds.), The Measurement of Productive Efficiency: Techniques and Applications. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 120-159.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Barber, C. B., D. P. Dobkin and H. Huhdanpaa. (1996). "The Quickhull Algorithm for Convex Hulls." ACM Transcations on Mathematical Software 22(4), 469-483. See also, http://www.geom.umn.edu/software/qhull (last visited in December 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bardhan, I.,W. F. Bowlin, W.W. Cooper and T. Sueyoshi. (1996). "Models and Measures for Efficiency Dominance in DEA. Part I: Additive Models and MED measures." Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan 39(3), 322-332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, A. N., D. Hancock and D. B. Humphrey. (1993). "Bank Efficiency Derived from the Profit Function." Journal of Banking and Finance 17, 314-347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borges, P. C. (2000). "CHESS: Changing Horizon Efficient Set Search. A Simple Principle for Multiobjective Optimisation." Journal of Heuristics 6, 405-418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briec, W. (1998). "Hölder Distance Function and Measurement of Technical Efficiency." Journal of Productivity Analysis 11(2), 111-131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockett, P. L., J. J. Rousseau, Y. Wang and L. Zhow. (1997). "Implementation of DEA Models Using GAMS." Research Report 765, University of Texas, Austin.

  • Chambers, R. G., Y. Chung and R. Färe. (1996). "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 Applications 98(2), 351-364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, R. G. and T. Mitchell. (2001). "Homotheticity and Non-Radial Changes." Journal of Productivity Analysis 15, 31-19.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Charnes, A., W. W. Cooper and E. Rhodes. (1978). "Measuring Efficiency of Decision Making Units." European Journal of Operational Research 2, 429-444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherchye, L., T. Kuosmanen and T. Post. (2001). "FDH Directional Distance Functions with an Aplication to European Commercial Banks." Journal of Productivity Analysis 15(3), 201-215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherchye, L. and T. V. Puyenbroeck. (2001a). "A Comment on Multi-Stage DEA Methodology." Operations Research Letters 28, 93-98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherchye, L. and T. V. Puyenbroeck. (2001b). "Product Mixes as Objects of Choice in Non-Parametric Efficiency Measurement." European Journal of Operational Research 132(2), 287-295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coelli, T. (1998). "A Multi-Stage Methodology for the Solution of Orientated DEA Models." Operations Research Letters 23, 143-149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colwell, R. J. and E. P. Davis. (1992). "Output and Productivity in Banking." Scandinavian Journal of Economics 94 ( Suppl), S111-S129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, W., K. S. Park and J. T. Pastor. (2001). "The Range Adjusted Measure (RAM) in DEA: A Response to the Comment by Steinmann and Zweifel." Journal of Productivity Analysis 15(2), 145-152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, W.W., K. S. Park and J. T. Pastor. (1999). "RAM: A Range Measure of Inefficiency for Use with Additive Models, and Relations to Other Models and Measures in DEA." Journal of Productivity Analysis 11, 5-42.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Borger, B. and K. Kerstens. (1996). "Radial and Nonradial Measures of Technical Efficiency: An Empirical Illustration for Belgium Local Governments Using an FDH Reference Technology." Journal of Productivity Analysis 7, 41-62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deprins, D., L. Simar and H. Tulkens. (1984). "Measuring Labour Efficiency in Post -Offices.” In M. Marchand, P. Pestieau and H. Tulkens (eds.), The Performance of Public Enterprises: Concepts and Measurement. Amsterdan, North Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., 243-267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dervaux, B., K. Kerstens and P. Vanden-Eeckaut. (1998). “Radial and Nonradial Static Efficiency Decompositions. A Focus on Congestion.” Transportation Research 32B(5), 299-312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, M. J. (1957). “The Measurement of Productive Efficiency.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, general 120(Part 3), 253-281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe, R., S. Grosskopf and C. A. K. Lovell. (1985). The Measurement of Efficiency of Production. Boston: Kluwer Nijhoff Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe, R. and C. A. K. Lovell. (1978). "Measuring the Technical Efficiency of Production." Journal of Economic Theory 19(1), 150-162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frei, F. X. and P.T. Harker. (1999). "Projections onto Efficient Frontiers: Theoretical and Computational Extensions to DEA." Journal of Productivity Analysis 11(3), 275-300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golany, B., F. Phillips and J. Rousseau. (1993). "Models for Improved Effectiveness Based on DEA Efficiency Results." IIE Transactions 25(6), 2-10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, R. H.,W. Cook and J. Doyle. (1997). "A Note on the Additive Data Envelopment Analysis Model." Journal of the Operational Research Society 48, 446-448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habenicht, W. (1982). "Quad Trees, A Datastructure for Discrete Vector Optimization Problems." Lecture Notes in Economics and Systems 209, 136-145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, Z., S. Li and J. Rousseau. (1997). "Determining Rates of Change in Data Envelopment Analysis." Journal of the Operational Research Society 48, 591-599.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerstens, K. and P. Vanden-Eeckaut. (1995) "Technical Efficiency Measures on DEA and FDH:AReconsideration of the Axiomatic Literature." CORE Discussion Paper 9513, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics, Universite Catholique de Louvain, Belgium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovell, C. A. K. (1993). "Production Frontiers and Productive Efficiency." In H. O. Fried, C. A. K. Lovell and S. S. Schmidt (eds.), The Measurement of Productive Efficiency: Techniques and Applications. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 3-67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovell, C. A. K. and P. Schmidt. (1988). “A Comparison of Alternative Approaches to the Measurement of Productive Efficiency.” In A. Dogramaci and R. Färe (eds.), Applications of Modern Production Theory: Efficiency and Productivity. Boston, Dordrecht, Lancaster: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 3-32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olesen, O. B. and N. C. Petersen. (1996). "Indicators of Ill-Conditioned Data Sets and Model Misspecification in Data Envelopment Analysis: An Extended Facet Approach." Management Science 42(2), 205-219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olesen, O. B. and N. C. Petersen. (2001). "Identification and Use of Efficient Faces and Facets inDEA." forthcoming in Journal of Productivity Analysis.

  • Ruggiero, J. and S. Bretschneider. (1998). "The Weighted Russel Measure of Technical Efficiency." European Journal of Operational Research 108, 438-451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, R. R. (1985). "Measures of Technical Efficiency." Journal of Economic Theory 35(1), 109-126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinmann, L. and P. Zweifel. (2001). "The Range Adjusted Measure (RAM) in DEA: Comment." Journal of Productivity Analysis 15(2), 139-144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thanassoulis, E. and R. Dyson. (1992). "Estimating Preferred Input-Output Levels Using Data Envelopment Analysis." European Journal of the Operational Research Society 56, 80-97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tone, K. (1993). "An e-Free DEA and a New Measure of Efficiency." Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan 36(3), 167-174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tone, K. (2001). "A Slacks-Based Measure of Efficiency in Data Envelopment Analysis." European Journal of Operational Research 130, 498-509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu, G., Q. Wei, P. Brockett and L. Zhou. (1996). "Construction of all DEA Efficient Surfaces of the Production Possibility Set under the Generalized Data Envelopment Analysis Model." European Journal of Operational Research 95, 491-510.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zieschang, K. (1984). "An Extended Farrell Technical Efficiency Measure." Journal of Economic Theory 33, 387-396.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidade Católica Portuguesa and Aston Business School, Rua Diogo Botelho, 1327, 4169-005, Porto, Portugal

    Maria Conceição A. Silva Portela

  2. Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Rua Diogo Botelho, 1327, 4169-005, Porto, Portugal

    Pedro Castro Borges

  3. Aston Business School, Aston Triangle, B4 7ET, Birmingham, U.K

    Emmanuel Thanassoulis

Authors
  1. Maria Conceição A. Silva Portela
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pedro Castro Borges
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Emmanuel Thanassoulis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Silva Portela, M.C.A., Borges, P.C. & Thanassoulis, E. Finding Closest Targets in Non-Oriented DEA Models: The Case of Convex and Non-Convex Technologies. Journal of Productivity Analysis 19, 251–269 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022813702387

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022813702387

Search

Navigation