IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jproda/v8y1997i2p151-165.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Weak Axiom of Cost Dominance: A Nonparametric Test of Cost Efficiency Without Input Quantity Data

Author

Listed:
  • Subhash Ray

Abstract

Varian's Weak Axiom of Cost Minimization provides a nonparametric test of cost minimization, which can be applied only when both input price and quantity data are available for individual firms. In this paper we propose a Weak Axiom of Cost Dominance (WACD), which serves as the basis of an alternative test of cost-minimization applicable in situations where input quantity data are missing. Unlike a previous test developed by Diewert and Parkan, the proposed test does identify individual firms that violate the assumption of cost-minimizing behavior. It also provides an upper bound of the cost-efficiency of any observed firm. The test procedure is shown to be equivalent to applying dominance analysis using normalized input prices with reference to the Cost-indirect technology. The proposed method is applied to Nerlove's electrical utility data. The nonparametric results are also compared with parametric efficiency levels computed from a stochastic frontier cost function. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Suggested Citation

  • Subhash Ray, 1997. "Weak Axiom of Cost Dominance: A Nonparametric Test of Cost Efficiency Without Input Quantity Data," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 151-165, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jproda:v:8:y:1997:i:2:p:151-165
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1007747407212
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1007747407212
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1007747407212?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Henry Tulkens, 2006. "On FDH Efficiency Analysis: Some Methodological Issues and Applications to Retail Banking, Courts and Urban Transit," Springer Books, in: Parkash Chander & Jacques Drèze & C. Knox Lovell & Jack Mintz (ed.), Public goods, environmental externalities and fiscal competition, chapter 0, pages 311-342, Springer.
    2. Henry Tulkens & Philippe Eeckaut, 2006. "Non-Frontier Measures of Efficiency, Progress and Regress for Time Series Data," Springer Books, in: Parkash Chander & Jacques Drèze & C. Knox Lovell & Jack Mintz (ed.), Public goods, environmental externalities and fiscal competition, chapter 0, pages 373-394, Springer.
    3. Hanoch, Giora & Rothschild, Michael, 1972. "Testing the Assumptions of Production Theory: A Nonparametric Approach," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 80(2), pages 256-275, March-Apr.
    4. Jondrow, James & Knox Lovell, C. A. & Materov, Ivan S. & Schmidt, Peter, 1982. "On the estimation of technical inefficiency in the stochastic frontier production function model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2-3), pages 233-238, August.
    5. Varian, Hal R, 1984. "The Nonparametric Approach to Production Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 579-597, May.
    6. Aigner, Dennis & Lovell, C. A. Knox & Schmidt, Peter, 1977. "Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 21-37, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Toshiyuki Sueyoshi, 1999. "DEA Duality on Returns to Scale (RTS) in Production and Cost Analyses: An Occurrence of Multiple Solutions and Differences Between Production-Based and Cost-Based RTS Estimates," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(11), pages 1593-1608, November.
    2. Kristiaan Kerstens & Ignace Van de Woestyne, 2021. "Cost functions are nonconvex in the outputs when the technology is nonconvex: convexification is not harmless," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 305(1), pages 81-106, October.
    3. KERSTENS , Kristiaan & VANDEN EECKAUT, Philippe, 1998. "Distinguishing technical and scale efficiency on non-convex and convex technologies: theoretical analysis and empirical illustrations," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 1998055, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    4. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Sekitani, Kazuyuki, 2007. "The measurement of returns to scale under a simultaneous occurrence of multiple solutions in a reference set and a supporting hyperplane," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(2), pages 549-570, September.
    5. W D A Bryant, 2009. "General Equilibrium:Theory and Evidence," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number 6875, January.
    6. Tom Kompas & Tuong Nhu Che, 2003. "Efficiency Gains and Cost Reductions from Individual Transferable Quotas: A Stochastic Cost Frontier for," International and Development Economics Working Papers idec03-6, International and Development Economics.
    7. Paul Oslington, 2012. "General Equilibrium: Theory and Evidence," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 88(282), pages 446-448, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Diewert, W. Erwin & Fox, Kevin J., 2017. "Decomposing productivity indexes into explanatory factors," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 256(1), pages 275-291.
    2. Barnabé Walheer, 2019. "Disaggregation for efficiency analysis," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 137-151, June.
    3. Almas Heshmati, 2003. "Productivity Growth, Efficiency and Outsourcing in Manufacturing and Service Industries," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(1), pages 79-112, February.
    4. W. Erwin Diewert & Kevin J. Fox, 2014. "Decomposing Bjurek Productivity Indexes into Explanatory Factors," Discussion Papers 2014-33, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
    5. Hailu, Getu & Goddard, Ellen W. & Jeffrey, Scott R., 2005. "Measuring Efficiency in Fruit and Vegetable Marketing Co-operatives with Heterogeneous Technologies in Canada," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19507, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. W. Erwin Diewert & Kevin J. Fox, 2021. "The Difference Approach to Productivity Measurement and Exact Indicators," Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics, in: Christopher F. Parmeter & Robin C. Sickles (ed.), Advances in Efficiency and Productivity Analysis, pages 9-40, Springer.
    7. C. Lovell & Shawna Grosskopf & Eduardo Ley & Jesús Pastor & Diego Prior & Philippe Eeckaut, 1994. "Linear programming approaches to the measurement and analysis of productive efficiency," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 2(2), pages 175-248, December.
    8. Geys, Benny & Moesen, Wim, 2008. "Exploring sources of local government technical inefficiency: evidence from Flemish municipalities [Ursachenforschung zur technischen Ineffizienz kommunaler Verwaltungen: Evidenz von flämischen Gem," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Processes and Governance SP II 2008-18, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    9. Walheer, Barnabé, 2018. "Disaggregation of the cost Malmquist productivity index with joint and output-specific inputs," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 1-12.
    10. Geys, Benny & Moesen, Wim, 2008. "Measuring local government technical (in)efficiency: An application and comparison of FDH, DEA and econometric approaches," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Processes and Governance SP II 2008-21, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    11. Delis, Manthos D & Koutsomanoli-Filippaki, Anastasia & Staikouras, Christos & Gerogiannaki, Katerina, 2008. "Evaluating cost and profit efficiency: a comparison of parametric and nonparametric methodologies," MPRA Paper 14039, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Sahoo, Biresh K. & Tone, Kaoru, 2013. "Non-parametric measurement of economies of scale and scope in non-competitive environment with price uncertainty," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 97-111.
    13. Luis R. Murillo‐Zamorano, 2004. "Economic Efficiency and Frontier Techniques," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 33-77, February.
    14. Keshvari, Abolfazl & Kuosmanen, Timo, 2013. "Stochastic non-convex envelopment of data: Applying isotonic regression to frontier estimation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(2), pages 481-491.
    15. Kuosmanen, Timo & Cherchye, Laurens & Sipilainen, Timo, 2006. "The law of one price in data envelopment analysis: Restricting weight flexibility across firms," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 170(3), pages 735-757, May.
    16. Subhash C. Ray, 2018. "Data Envelopment Analysis with Alternative Returns to Scale," Working papers 2018-20, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    17. Forsund, Finn R. & Sarafoglou, Nikias, 2005. "The tale of two research communities: The diffusion of research on productive efficiency," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 17-40, October.
    18. Mike G. Tsionas & Valentin Zelenyuk, 2022. "Testing for Optimization Behavior in Production when Data is with Measurement Errors: A Bayesian Approach," CEPA Working Papers Series WP012022, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    19. Cherchye, L. & Post, G.T., 2001. "Methodological Advances in Dea," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2001-53-F&A, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    20. W. Cooper & C. Lovell, 2011. "History lessons," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 193-200, October.

    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:kap:jproda:v:8:y:1997:i:2:p:151-165. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.