IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/106242.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Production and Scale Efficiency of South African Water Utilities: The Case of Water Boards

Author

Listed:
  • Ngobeni, Victor
  • Breitenbach, Marthinus C

Abstract

South Africa is a water scarce country with deteriorating water resources. Faced with tight fiscal and water resource constraints, water utilities would have to adopt technically efficient water management technologies to meet developmental socio-economic objectives of universal coverage, aligned to the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goal 6 (SDG 6). It is important to measure the technical efficiency of utilities as accurately as possible in order to inform policy. We do this by using a non-parametric method known as Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to determine, measure, analyse and benchmark the technical efficiency of all water boards in South Africa. Our contribution to the literature is twofold: This is the first paper to model technical efficiency of water boards as utility suppliers and guardians of water services in South Africa, and second, we address the over- and under estimation issues of technical efficiency measurement in the water sector. We do this by modelling one of the most pronounced negative externalities from water provision (water losses) as an undesirable output using the approach developed by You & Yan (2011). We find on average, technical efficiency of water boards is 49 per cent, with only three of the nine water boards technically efficient. Six of the smaller water boards showed high levels of inefficiency. Six water boards operate at increasing returns to scale (IRS) and two are scale efficient. Only Rand and Sedibeng water boards exhibited decreasing returns to scale (DRS). Therefore, redirecting potential efficiency savings to optimal uses could result in technical and scale efficiency for the sector. Scale efficiency results seems to support larger regional water boards as small to medium-sized water boards are scale inefficient with low technical efficiency. The ratio model with undesirable output outperforms previous methods to deal with undesirable (bad) outputs, which either provide an over- or underestimation of technical efficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Ngobeni, Victor & Breitenbach, Marthinus C, 2021. "Production and Scale Efficiency of South African Water Utilities: The Case of Water Boards," MPRA Paper 106242, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:106242
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/106242/1/MPRA_paper_106242.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lu, Wen-Min & Lo, Shih-Fang, 2007. "A closer look at the economic-environmental disparities for regional development in China," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 183(2), pages 882-894, December.
    2. Aude Le Lannier & Simon Porcher, 2014. "Efficiency in the public and private French water utilities: prospects for benchmarking," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(5), pages 556-572, February.
    3. Avkiran, Necmi K., 2001. "Investigating technical and scale efficiencies of Australian Universities through data envelopment analysis," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 57-80, March.
    4. Picazo-Tadeo, Andres J. & Saez-Fernandez, Francisco J. & Gonzalez-Gomez, Francisco, 2008. "Does service quality matter in measuring the performance of water utilities," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 30-38, March.
    5. Brenda Gannon, 2005. "Testing for Variation in Technical Efficiency of Hospitals in Ireland," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 36(3), pages 273-294.
    6. S You & H Yan, 2011. "A new approach in modelling undesirable output in DEA model☆," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(12), pages 2146-2156, December.
    7. Nara F Monkam, 2014. "Local municipality productive efficiency and its determinants in South Africa," Development Southern Africa, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(2), pages 275-298, March.
    8. Michael Zschille & Matthias Walter, 2012. "The performance of German water utilities: a (semi)-parametric analysis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(29), pages 3749-3764, October.
    9. Aristovnik, Aleksander, 2012. "The impact of ICT on educational performance and its efficiency in selected EU and OECD countries: a non-parametric analysis," MPRA Paper 39805, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Breitenbach, Marthinus C & Ngobeni, Victor & Aye, Goodness C, 2020. "Global Healthcare Resource Efficiency in the Management of COVID-19 Death and Infection Prevalence Rates," MPRA Paper 104814, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2007. "A mathematical programming approach to constructing composite indicators," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 291-297, April.
    12. Fare, Rolf, et al, 1989. "Multilateral Productivity Comparisons When Some Outputs Are Undesirable: A Nonparametric Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 71(1), pages 90-98, February.
    13. Golany, B & Roll, Y, 1989. "An application procedure for DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 237-250.
    14. S You & H Yan, 2011. "A new approach in modelling undesirable output in DEA model," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(12), pages 2146-2156, December.
    15. Jugal Mahabir, 2014. "Quantifying Inefficient Expenditure in Local Government: A Free Disposable Hull Analysis of a Sample of South African Municipalities," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 82(4), pages 493-517, December.
    16. Wade D. Cook & Joe Zhu, 2007. "Data Irregularities And Structural Complexities In Dea," Springer Books, in: Joe Zhu & Wade D. Cook (ed.), Modeling Data Irregularities and Structural Complexities in Data Envelopment Analysis, chapter 0, pages 1-11, Springer.
    17. Chih‐Ching Yang & Ching‐Kai Hsiao & Ming‐Miin Yu, 2008. "Technical efficiency and impact of environmental regulations in farrow‐to‐finish swine production in Taiwan," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 39(1), pages 51-61, July.
    18. Dyckhoff, H. & Allen, K., 2001. "Measuring ecological efficiency with data envelopment analysis (DEA)," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(2), pages 312-325, July.
    19. Timothy J. Coelli & D.S. Prasada Rao & Christopher J. O’Donnell & George E. Battese, 2005. "An Introduction to Efficiency and Productivity Analysis," Springer Books, Springer, edition 0, number 978-0-387-25895-9, December.
    20. Eric Wang & Eskander Alvi, 2011. "Relative Efficiency of Government Spending and Its Determinants: Evidence from East Asian Countries," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 1(1), pages 3-28, June.
    21. Ngobeni, Victor & Breitenbach, Marthinus C, 2020. "Technical Efficiency of Water Boards in South Africa: A Costing and Pricing Benchmarking Exercise," MPRA Paper 101501, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    22. Seiford, Lawrence M. & Zhu, Joe, 2002. "Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(1), pages 16-20, October.
    23. Andrés Ramírez Hassan, 2008. "Consequences of omitting relevant inputs on the quality of the data envelopment analysis under different input correlation structures," Documentos de Trabajo de Valor Público 10627, Universidad EAFIT.
    24. Zhongsheng Hua & Yiwen Bian, 2007. "DEA with Undesirable Factors," Springer Books, in: Joe Zhu & Wade D. Cook (ed.), Modeling Data Irregularities and Structural Complexities in Data Envelopment Analysis, chapter 0, pages 103-121, Springer.
    25. William W. Cooper & Lawrence M. Seiford & Kaoru Tone, 2007. "Data Envelopment Analysis," Springer Books, Springer, edition 0, number 978-0-387-45283-8, December.
    26. Genius Murwirapachena & Johane Dikgang & Jugal Mahabir & Richard Mulwa, 2019. "Efficiency in South African water utilities: a comparison of estimates from DEA, SFA and StoNED," Working Papers 780, Economic Research Southern Africa.
    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. Katerina Fotova Čiković & Ivana Martinčević & Joško Lozić, 2022. "Application of Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) in the Selection of Sustainable Suppliers: A Review and Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-30, May.

    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. Breitenbach, Marthinus C & Ngobeni, Victor & Aye, Goodness C, 2020. "Global Healthcare Resource Efficiency in the Management of COVID-19 Death and Infection Prevalence Rates," MPRA Paper 104814, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Ngobeni, Victor & Breitenbach, Marthinus C, 2020. "Technical Efficiency of Water Boards in South Africa: A Costing and Pricing Benchmarking Exercise," MPRA Paper 101501, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Cordero, José Manuel & Alonso-Morán, Edurne & Nuño-Solinis, Roberto & Orueta, Juan F. & Arce, Regina Sauto, 2015. "Efficiency assessment of primary care providers: A conditional nonparametric approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(1), pages 235-244.
    4. Tavana, Madjid & Ebrahimnejad, Ali & Santos-Arteaga, Francisco J. & Mansourzadeh, Seyed Mehdi & Matin, Reza Kazemi, 2018. "A hybrid DEA-MOLP model for public school assessment and closure decision in the City of Philadelphia," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 70-89.
    5. Marthinus C. Breitenbach & Victor Ngobeni & Goodness C. Aye, 2021. "Efficiency of Healthcare Systems in the First Wave of COVID-19 – A Technical Efficiency Analysis," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 3-21.
    6. Cordero Ferrera, Jose Manuel & Alonso Morán, Edurne & Nuño Solís, Roberto & Orueta, Juan F. & Souto Arce, Regina, 2013. "Efficiency assessment of primary care providers: A conditional nonparametric approach," MPRA Paper 51926, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Yuan, Yan & Goto, Mika, 2017. "A literature study for DEA applied to energy and environment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 104-124.
    8. Breitenbach, Marthinus C & Ngobeni, Victor & Ayte, Goodness, 2020. "The first 100 days of COVID-19 coronavirus – How efficient did country health systems perform to flatten the curve in the first wave?," MPRA Paper 8872, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Victor Ngobeni & Marthinus C. Breitenbach & Goodness C. Aye, 2020. "Technical Efficiency of Provincial Public Healthcare in South Africa," Working Papers 202013, University of Pretoria, Department of Economics.
    10. Song, Malin & Song, Yaqing & An, Qingxian & Yu, Huayin, 2013. "Review of environmental efficiency and its influencing factors in China: 1998–2009," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 8-14.
    11. Cherchye, Laurens & Rock, Bram De & Walheer, Barnabé, 2015. "Multi-output efficiency with good and bad outputs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(3), pages 872-881.
    12. Ma-Lin Song & Ron Fisher & Jian-Lin Wang & Lian-Biao Cui, 2018. "Environmental performance evaluation with big data: theories and methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 270(1), pages 459-472, November.
    13. Chien-Ming Chen & Magali A. Delmas, 2012. "Measuring Eco-Inefficiency: A New Frontier Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 60(5), pages 1064-1079, October.
    14. Halkos, George & Petrou, Kleoniki Natalia, 2019. "Treating undesirable outputs in DEA: A critical review," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 97-104.
    15. Ma-Lin Song & Yuan-Xiang Zhou & Rong-Rong Zhang & Ron Fisher, 2017. "Environmental efficiency evaluation with left–right fuzzy numbers," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 697-714, October.
    16. Jie Wu & Qingyuan Zhu & Pengzhen Yin & Malin Song, 2017. "Measuring energy and environmental performance for regions in China by using DEA-based Malmquist indices," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 715-735, October.
    17. Halkos, George & Petrou, Kleoniki Natalia, 2018. "A critical review of the main methods to treat undesirable outputs in DEA," MPRA Paper 90374, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Afzalinejad, Mohammad, 2020. "Reverse efficiency measures for environmental assessment in data envelopment analysis," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    19. S You & H Yan, 2011. "A new approach in modelling undesirable output in DEA model," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(12), pages 2146-2156, December.
    20. César Salazar & Roberto Cárdenas-Retamal & Marcela Jaime, 2023. "Environmental efficiency in the salmon industry—an exploratory analysis around the 2007 ISA virus outbreak and subsequent regulations in Chile," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(8), pages 8107-8135, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Water Boards; Water Losses; Data Envelopment Analysis; Volumes; Tariffs; Expenditure; Technical Efficiency.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C4 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics
    • C6 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling
    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pra:mprapa:106242. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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.