Maritime Economics & Logistics

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 122–140 | Cite as

Efficiency in European Seaports with DEA: Evidence from Greece and Portugal

  • Carlos Pestana Barros
  • Manolis Athanassiou
Original Article

Abstract

In this paper, we compare the seaport efficiency of two European countries, Greece and Portugal, using data envelopment analysis (DEA). The international benchmarking procedure is implemented, in which the seaports in each country are compared against each other. The broader aim of this study is to seek out those best practices that will lead to improved performance in the context of European seaport policy. We rank the seaports according to their total productivity for the period 1998–2000. Economic implications arising from the study are considered.

Keywords

Sea ports efficiency Greece Portugal 

References

  1. Banker, RD . 1993: Maximum likelihood, consistency and data envelopment analysis. Management Science 39: 1265–1273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Banker, RD, Charnes, A and Cooper, WW . 1984: Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science 30: 1078–1092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baños Pino, J, Coto Millan, P and Rodriguez Alvarez, A . 1999: Allocative efficiency and over-capitalisation: An application. International Journal of Transport Economics 2: 181–199.Google Scholar
  4. Barros, CP . 2003a: Incentive regulation and efficiency of Portuguese port authorities. Maritime Economics & Logistics 5: 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barros, CP . 2003b: The measurement of efficiency of Portuguese sea port authorities with DEA. International Journal of Transport Economics 30: 335–354.Google Scholar
  6. Bessent, AM and Bessent, EW . 1980: Determining the comparative efficiency of schools through data envelopment analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly 16: 57–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bauer, PW, Berger, AN, Ferrier, G and Humphrey, DB . 1998: Consistency conditions for regulatory analysis of financial institutions: a comparison of frontier efficiency methods. Journal of Economics and Business 50: 85–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Charnes, A, Cooper, WW, Gollany, B, Seiford, L and Stutz, J . 1985: Foundations of data envelopment analysis for Pareto–Koopmans efficient empirical productions functions. Journal of Econometrics 30: 91–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Charnes, A, Cooper, WW and Huang, ZM . 1990: Polyhedral cone-ratio DEA with an illustrative application to large commercial banks. Journal of Econometrics 46: 73–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Charnes, A, Cooper, WW, Lewin, AY and Seiford, LM . 1995: Data envelopment analysis: theory, methodology and applications. Kluwer Academic Press: Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  11. Charnes, A, Cooper, WW and Rhodes, E . 1978: Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units. European Journal of Operations Research 2: 429–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Charnes, A, Cooper, WW, Seiford, L and Stutz, J . 1982: A multiplicative model of efficiency analysis. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 16: 223–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Coelli, TJ . 1996: A Guide to DEAP version 2.1: A Data Envelopment Analysis (Computer) Program. Working paper no. 8/96, Centre for Efficiency and Productivity Analysis. University of New England, Armidale, Australia.Google Scholar
  14. Coelli, TJ, Prasada, R and Battese, GE . 1998: An introduction to efficiency and productivity analysis. Kluwer Academic Press: Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Coto Millan, P, Baños Pino, J and Rodrigues Alvarez, A . 2000: Economic efficiency in Spanish ports: Some empirical evidence. Maritime Policy & Management 27: 169–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cullinane, KPB and Song DW . 2003: A Stochastic Frontier Model of the productive efficiency of Korean Container Terminals. Applied Economics 35: 251–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cullinane, KPB, Song, DW and Gray, R . 2002: A Stochastic Frontier Model of the efficiency of major container terminals in Asia: Assessing the influence of administrative and ownership structures. Transportation Research Part A 36: 734–762.Google Scholar
  18. Estache, A, Gonzaléz, M and Trujillo, L . 2001: Efficiency gains from port reforms and the potential for yardstick competition: Lessons from México. World Development 30: 545–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fare, RS, Grosskopf, S and Lovel, CAK . 1994: Production frontiers. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.Google Scholar
  20. Farrell, MJ . 1957: The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 120: 253–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Financial Times, 17 February 2003-Letter: Position on Port Services Directive, 12.Google Scholar
  22. Jensen, MC and Meckling, W . 1976: Theory of the firm: Managerial behaviour, agency costs and capital structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3: 305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jones, LP, Tandon, P and Vogelsang, I . 1990: Selling public enterprises: A cost-benefit methodology. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  24. Khumbhakar, SC . 1987: Production frontiers and panel data: an Application to U.S. Class 1 railroads. Journal of Business & Economics Statistics 5: 249–255.Google Scholar
  25. Leibenstein, H . 1966: Allocative efficiency vs. ‘X-efficiency’. American Economic Review 56: 392–414.Google Scholar
  26. Liu, Z . 1995: The comparative performance of public and private enterprises. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 29: 263–274.Google Scholar
  27. Martinez Budria, E, Diaz Armas, R, Navarro Ibáñez, M and Ravelo Mesa, T . 1999: A study of the efficiency of spanish port authorities using data envelopment analysis. International Journal of Transport Economics 2: 237–253.Google Scholar
  28. Olson, M . 1965: The logic of collective action: public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Pallis, A . 2002: The Common EU Maritime Transport Policy: Policy Europeanisation in the 1990s. Ashgate: Aldershot, UK.Google Scholar
  30. Pereira, M . 1999: International public transfers and convergence in the European union. Public Finance Review 27: 194–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Raab, R and Lichty, RW . 2002: Identifying subareas that comprise a greater metropolitain area. The criterion of county relative efficiency. Journal of Regional Science 42: 579–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Roll, Y and Hayuth, Y . 1993: Port performance comparison applying data envelopment analysis (DEA). Maritime Policy and Management 20: 153–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Seiford, L and Thrall, R . 1990: Recent developments in DEA: The mathematical programming approach to frontier analysis. Journal of Econometrics 46: 7–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Song, DW and Cullinane, KPB . 2001: Asian container ports and productivity: implication for the new Millenium. Singapore Maritime and Port Journal, Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore, 146–161.Google Scholar
  35. Thanassoulis, E . 2001: Introduction to the theory and application of data envelopment analysis: a foundation text with integrated software. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, Netherlands.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thompson, RG, Langemeier, LN, Lee, C and Thrall, RM . 1990: The role of multiplier bounds in efficiency analysis with application to Kansas farming. Journal of Econometrics 46: 93–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Thompson, RG, Singleton, FD, Thrall, RM and Smith, BA . 1986: Comparative site evaluation for locating a high-energy physics lab in Texas. Interfaces 16: 35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tongzon, J . 1995: Systematizing international benchmarking for ports. Maritime Policy and Management 2: 171–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tongzon, J . 2001: Efficiency measurement of selected Australian and other international ports using data envelopment analysis. Transportation Research, Part A 107–122.Google Scholar
  40. Valentine, VC and Gray, R . 2001: The measurement of port efficiency using data envelopment analysis. Proceedings of the Ninth World Conference on Transport Research, Seoul, 22–27 July.Google Scholar
  41. Williamson, OE . 1998: The institutions of governance. American Economic Review 88: 75–79.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan Ltd 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlos Pestana Barros
    • 1
  • Manolis Athanassiou
    • 2
  1. 1.Instituto de Economia e Gestao, Technical University of LisbonLisbonPortugal
  2. 2.Athens UniversityAthensGreece

Personalised recommendations