Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The relative efficiency of public versus private municipal bus firms: An application of data envelopment analysis

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

Abstract

This article has employed the data envelopment analysis method to evaluate the efficiency of the five bus firms in Taipei city. When vehicle kilometers (revenue or the measure combining vehicle kilometers, revenue and the number of traffic trips on routes) was used as the output measure, it concluded that the publicly owned Taipei Municipal Bus had increased (not increased) its technical efficiency after the government liberalized the urban bus market. This article also found that in both the one output (vehicle kilometers) and three outputs cases, Taipei Municipal Bus had, on an average, lower efficiency scores than the private firms, and that while each firm usually employed a linear production technology for several, consecutive years the private firms were more flexible in adopting different technologies.

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

  • Alchian, A. (1965). “Some economics of property rights.” Politico 30, pp. 816–829.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, S.E., and R. Halvorsen. (1986). “The relative efficiency of public and private firms in a regulated environment: The case of U.S. electric utilities.” Journal of Public Economics 29, pp. 291–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berechman, J. (1983). “Costs, economies of scale and factor demand in bus transport.” Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 17, pp. 7–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bessent, A., W. Bessent, J. Elam, and T. Clark. (1988). “Efficiency frontier determination by constrained facet analysis.” Operations Research 36, pp. 785–796.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boardman, A. and A. Vining. (1989). Ownership and performance in competitive environments: a comparison of the performance of private, mixed and state-owned enterprises. Journal of Law and Economics 32, pp. 1–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruggink, T.H. (1982). “Public versus regulated private enterprise in the municipal water industry: a comparison of operating costs.” Quarterly Review of Economics and Business 22, pp. 111–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrnes, P., S. Grosskopf, and K. Hayes. (1986). “Efficiency and ownership: further evidence.” Review of Economics and Statistics 68, pp. 337–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caves, D.W. and L. R. Christensen. (1980). “The relative efficiency of public and private firms in a competitive environment: the case of Canadian railroads.” Journal of Political Economy 88, pp. 958–976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caves, D.W., L.R. Christensen, and W.E. Diewert. (1982). “The economic theory of index numbers and the measurement of input, output, and productivity.” Econometrica 50, pp. 1393–1414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, K.P. (1987). “Productivity changes in the petroleum and natural gas industry: an international comparison.” Paper presented at 9th Conference of the International Association of Energy Economists, Calgary, Canada.

  • Chang, K.P., and Y.Y. Guh. (1991). “Linear production functions and the data envelopment analysis.” European Journal of Operational Research 52, pp. 215–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, K.P. and Y.Y. Guh. (1988). “Functional forms in data envelopment analysis.” Paper presented at the EURO IX and TIMS XXVIII Joint International Conference, Paris, France

  • Charnes, A., W.W. Cooper, and E. Rhodes. (1978). “Measuring the efficiency of decision making units.” European Journal of Operational Research 2, pp. 429–444.

    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, pp. 91–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crain, W.M. and A. Zardkoohi. (1978). “A test of the property rights theory of the firm: water utilities in the United States.” Journal of Law and Economics 21, pp. 395–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crain, W.M. and A. Zardkoohi. (1980). “Public sector expansion: stagnant technology or attenuated property rights?” Southern Economic Journal 46, pp. 1069–1082.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, D. (1971). “The efficiency of public versus private firms: the case of Australia's two airlines.” Journal of Law and Economics 14, pp. 149–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, D. (1977). “Property rights and economic efficiency: the Australian airlines revisited.” Journal of Law and Economics 20, pp. 223–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Alessi, L. (1974). “An economic analysis of government ownership and regulation: theory and the evidence from the electric power industry.” Public Choice 19, pp. 1–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Alessi, L. (1977). “Ownership and peak-load pricing in the electric power industry.” Quarterly Review of Economics and Business 17, pp. 7–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diewert, W.E. (1976). “Exact and superlative index numbers.” Journal of Econometrics 4, pp. 115–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diewert, W.E. and C. Parkan. (1983). “Linear programming tests of regularity conditions for production functions.” In W. Eichhorn, R. Henn, K. Neumann, and R.W. Shephard (eds.) Quantitative Studies on Production and Prices. Würzburg: Physica Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe, R., R. Grabowski, and S. Grosskopf. (1985). “Technical efficiency of Philippine agriculture.” Applied Economics 17, pp. 205–214.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe, R., S. Grosskopf, and J. Logan. (1985). “The relative performance of publicly-owned and privately-owned electric utilities.” Journal of Public Economics 26, pp. 89–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe, R. and W. Hunsaker. (1986). “Notions of efficiency and their reference sets.” Management Science 32, pp. 237–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe, R. and C.A.K. Lovell. (1978). “Measuring the technical efficiency in production.” Journal of Economic Theory 19, pp. 150–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe, R. and D. Njinkeu. (1989). “Computing returns to scale under alternative models.” Economics Letters 30, pp. 55–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, M.J. (1957). “The measurement of productive efficiency.” Journal of Royal Statistical Society 120, series A, part 3, pp. 253–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feigenbaum, S. and R. Teeples. (1983). “Public versus private water delivery: a hedonic cost approach.” Review of Economics and Statistics 65, pp. 672–678.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, W.A. (1982). “Performance of North American and Australian airlines.” In W. Stanbury and F. Thompson (eds.) Managing Public Enterprises. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorgensen, D.W. and Z. Griliches. (1972). “Issues in growth accounting: a reply to Edward F. Denison.” Survey of Current Business 52, part 2, pp. 65–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Junker, J.A. (1975). “Economic performance of public and private utilities: the case of U.S. electric utilities.” Journal of Economics and Business 28, pp. 60–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, A. and R. Morey. (1981). “Measuring the relative efficiency and output potential for public sector organization: an application of data envelopment analysis.” International Journal of Policy Analysis and Information Systems 5, pp. 267–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, H.C. (1986). Costs, Returns to Scale and Productivity: A Case of Taipei Bus System. unpublished M.S. thesis, Department of Economics, National Taiwan Unviersity, Taiwan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, H.S. (1986). Scale Economies of Urban Bus Service. unpublished M.S. thesis, Department of Transportation and Communication Management, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, R.A. and T.N. Van Cott. (1984). “Public versus private economic activity.” Public Choice 43, pp. 25–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann, P.C. and J.L. Mikesell. (1971). “Tax payments and electric utility prices.” Southern Economic Journal 38, pp. 69–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, R.A. (1975). “Publicly owned versus privately owned utilities: a policy choice..” Review of Economics and Statistics 57, pp. 391–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millward, R. (1986). “The comparative performance of public and private ownership.” In J. Kay, C. Mayer, and D. Thompson (eds.) Privatisation and Regulation—the UK Experience. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuberg, L.G. (1977). “Two issues in the municipal ownership of electric power distribution systems.” Bell Journal of Economics 8, pp. 303–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obeng, K. (1985). “Bus transit cost, productivity, and factor substitution.” Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 19, pp. 183–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pashigian, B.P. (1976). “Consequences and causes of public ownership of urban transit facilities.” Journal of Political Economy 84, pp. 1239–1260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peltzman, S. (1971). “Pricing in public and private enterprises: electric utilities in the United States.” Journal of Law and Economics 14, pp. 109–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pescatrice, D.R. and J.M. Trapani, III. (1980). “The performance and objectives of public and private utilities operating in the United States.” Journal of Public Economics 13, pp. 259–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pryke, R. (1986). “The comparative performance of public and private enterprise.” In J. Kay, C. Mayer, and D. Thompson (eds.) Privatisation and Regulation—the UK Experience. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, R.R. (1990). “Continuity of measures of technical efficiency.” Journal of Economic Theory 51, pp. 255–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, S. and N.J. Castellan, Jr. (1988). Nonparametric Statistics: For the Behavioral Sciences. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spady R. and A. Friedlaender. (1978). “Hedonic cost functions for the regulated trucking industry.” Bell Journal of Economics 9, pp. 159–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steuer, R.E. (1989). ADBASE operating manual, Department of Management Science and Technology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, U.S.A.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, R.G., L.N. Langemeier, C.T. Lee, E. Lee, and R.M. Thrall. (1990). “The role of multiplier bounds in efficiency analysis with application to Kansas farming.” Journal of Econometrics 46, pp. 93–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, M. and A. Dalal. (1981) “Estimation of the elasticities of factor substitution in urban bus transportation: a cost function approach.” Journal of Regional Science 21, pp. 263–275.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, National Tsing Hua University, Kuang Fu Rd., 300, Hsinchu, Taiwan, R.O.C.

    Kuo-Ping Chang & Pei-Hua Kao

Authors
  1. Kuo-Ping Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pei-Hua Kao
    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

Chang, KP., Kao, PH. The relative efficiency of public versus private municipal bus firms: An application of data envelopment analysis. J Prod Anal 3, 67–84 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00158769

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00158769

Keywords

Search

Navigation