IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v313y2024i3p1170-1179.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing eco-efficiency with productive efficiency: Addressing the dimensionality issue

Author

Listed:
  • Chen, Chien-Ming
  • Wang, Hui

Abstract

One important strategic question in sustainable operations is how explicitly internalizing the societal impact of undesirable outputs (UO) would affect a company's relative competitiveness: the discrepancy between eco-efficiency and productive efficiency. This paper presents a DEA approach to evaluating the impact of considering UO on productive efficiency. The main challenge to be overcome is that the two models have different dimensionalities: the eco-efficiency model additionally considers UO and thus is endowed with higher dimensionality. Prior research suggested that the added dimensionality alone can inflate the overall efficiency score. Thus, comparing the eco-efficiency directly with productive efficiency scores would create biased results. Moreover, the model should allow a firm's eco-efficiency to be higher or lower than its productive efficiency, depending on its relative UO performance. This paper proposes an approach to addressing these issues. More generally, our approach applies to studies that compare efficiency scores from models with different dimensions. We included several numerical examples for illustration.

Suggested Citation

  • Chen, Chien-Ming & Wang, Hui, 2024. "Comparing eco-efficiency with productive efficiency: Addressing the dimensionality issue," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 313(3), pages 1170-1179.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:313:y:2024:i:3:p:1170-1179
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2023.09.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221723007038
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2023.09.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:313:y:2024:i:3:p:1170-1179. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.