Relation between the Efficiency of Public Forestry Firms and Subsidies: The Swiss Case

  • Bernur Açıkgçz Ersoy
  • J. Alexander K. Mack
Conference paper
Part of the Operations Research Proceedings book series (ORP)


This study is an empirical analysis of the productive efficiency of public forestry firms in Switzerland. Because of the available database, the period under examination extends from 1998 to 2006, and is based on a balanced panel of 100 firms. We inquire whether public subsidies exert any significant impact on the efficiency of these firms. In order to determine the productive efficiency, a nonparametric method (DEA) is applied. Panel unit root tests and panel cointegration technique are employed to establish the long-run relationship between efficiency and selected variables. Results show that subsidies had a positive influence on technical efficiency.


Data Envelopment Analysis Wood Production Unit Root Test Panel Unit Root Test Swiss Franc 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Aoyagi, S., Managi, S.: The Impact of Subsidies on Efficiency and Production: Empirical Test of Forestry in Japan. International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology 3(3/4), 216–230 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    BAFU: Jahrbuch Wald und Holz. Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN), Berne (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Rhodes, E.: Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units. European Journal of Operational Research 2, 429–444 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Choi, I.: Unit Root Tests for Panel Data. Journal of International Money and Finance 20, 249–272 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Farrell, J.: The Measurement of Productive Efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A 120(3), 253–281 (1957)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kumbhakar, S.C., Lien, G.: Impact of Subsidies on Farm Productivity and Efficiency. In: V.E. Ball et al. (eds.), The Economic Impact of Public Support to Agriculture, Studies in Productivity and Efficiency, Vol. 7, pp. 109-124. Springer, New York (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Levin, A., Lin, C.F., Chu, C.: Unit Root Tests in Panel Data: Asymptotic and Finite-Sample Properties. Journal of Econometrics 108(1), 1–24 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Maddala, G.S., Wu, S.: A Comparative Study of Unit Root Tests with Panel Data and a New Simple Test. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 61, Issue S1, 631–652 (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pedroni, P.: Critical Values for Cointegration Tests in Heterogeneous Panels with Multiple Regressors. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 61, Issue S1, 653–670 (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pedroni, P.: Fully Modified OLS for Heterogeneous Cointegrated Panels. In: B.H. Baltagi (ed.), Advances in Econometrics: Nonstationary Panels, Panel Cointegration, and Dynamic Panels, Vol. 15, pp. 93-130. JAI Press (Elsevier), Amsterdam (2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schoenenberger, A., Mack, A., von Gunten, F.: Efficacit´e technique des exploitations foresti`eres publiques en Suisse. Strukturberichterstattung, No. 42, State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO), Berne (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernur Açıkgçz Ersoy
    • 1
  • J. Alexander K. Mack
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Applied Sciences, International Trade DepartmentCelal Bayar UniversityManisaTurkey
  2. 2.Engineering and Information Technology, Mathematics, Natural Sciences and HumanitiesBern University of Applied SciencesBielSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations