Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T04:33:01.844Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nonparametric Technical Efficiency with K Firms, N Inputs, and M Outputs: A Simulation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Loren W. Tauer  and
John J. Hanchar
Loren W. Tauer
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural, Resource, and Managerial Economics, Cornell University
John J. Hanchar
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural, Resource, and Managerial Economics, Cornell University
Get access

Abstract

Monte-Carlo simulation of nonparametric efficiency shows that even when the number of firms is large, defining ten or more inputs results in most firms being measured as efficient. Comparison of the simulated results with any empirical results may suggest that the dimension of the problem, rather than actual efficiencies, determines computed efficiencies.

Type
Articles
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , October 1995 , pp. 185 - 189
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Button, K.J. and Weyman-Jones, T.G. “Ownership Structure, Institutional Organization and Measured X-Efficiency.” American Economic Review 82 (1992): 439–45.Google Scholar
Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., and Rhodes, E. “Measuring Efficiency of Decision Making Units.” European Journal of Operations Research 6 (1978): 429–44.Google Scholar
Färe, R., Grosskopf, S. and Lovell, C.A.K. The Measurement of Efficiency of Production. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing, (1985).Google Scholar
Farrell, M.J. “The Measurement of Productive Efficiency.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 120 (1957): 253–81.Google Scholar
Grabowski, R., Kraft, S., Mehdian, S. and Pasurka, C. “Technical Change in Illinois Agriculture, 1982–1984.” Agricultural Economics 2 (1988): 303–18.Google Scholar
Leibenstein, H. and Maital, S. “Empirical Estimation and Partitioning of X-Inefficiency: A Data-Envelopment Approach.” The American Economic Review 82 (1992): 428–33.Google Scholar
Nunamaker, Thomas R. “Using Data Envelopment Analysis to Measure the Efficiency of Non-profit Organizations: A Critical Evaluation.” Managerial and Decision Economics 6 (1985): 50–8.Google Scholar
Sitoras, B. “Productive Efficiency and Redundant Factors of Production in Traditional Agriculture of Underdeveloped Countries.” Western Farm Economics Association Proceedings of 1966 39 (1966): 153–8.Google Scholar
Thomas, A.C. and Tauer, L.W. “Linear Input Aggregation Bias in Nonparametric Technical Efficiency Measurement.” Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 42 (1994): 77–86.Google Scholar
Thompson, R.G., Langemeier, L.N., Lee, C.T., Lee, E. and Thrall, R.M. “The Role of Multiplier Bounds in Efficiency Analysis with Application to Kansas Farming.” Journal of Econometrics 46 (1990): 93–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thrall, R.M. “Classification Transitions under Expansion of Inputs and Outputs in Data Envelopment Analysis.” Managerial and Decision Economics 10 (1989): 159–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weersink, A., Turney, C.G. and Godak, A. “Decomposition Measures of Technical Efficiency for Ontario Dairy Farms.” Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 38 (1990): 439–56.Google Scholar