IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eneeco/v34y2012i3p645-662.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Returns to scale and damages to scale under natural and managerial disposability: Strategy, efficiency and competitiveness of petroleum firms

Author

Listed:
  • Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki
  • Goto, Mika

Abstract

Environmental assessment recently becomes a major policy issue all over the world. This study discusses how to use Data Environment Analysis (DEA) for environmental assessment for planning corporate strategy and international competitiveness. An important feature of DEA environmental assessment is that it classifies outputs into desirable (good) and undesirable (bad) outputs because all private and public entities produce not only desirable outputs but also undesirable outputs as a result of their production activities. This study proposes the two types of output unification for DEA environmental assessment by using a non-radial model. One of the two output unifications is that it considers a decrease in an input vector along with a decrease in the vector of undesirable outputs. This type of unification is referred to as “natural disposability”. The other unification considers an increase in an input vector but a decrease in the vector of undesirable outputs. This type of strategy is referred to as “managerial disposability”. Both unifications increase the vector of desirable outputs. After developing the two concepts on disposability, this study theoretically explores how to measure Returns to Scale (RTS) under natural disposability and Damages to Scale (DTS) under managerial disposability. To document the practicality of the proposed approach, this study applies it to compare the performance of national oil firms with that of international oil companies. This study identifies four important findings on the petroleum industry. First, national oil companies outperform international oil companies in the unified efficiency under natural disposability. Second, international oil companies outperform national oil companies in the unified efficiency under managerial disposability. Third, national oil firms exhibit a mixed result on RTS, while international oil firms exhibit decreasing RTS. Finally, both national and international oil companies exhibit increasing DTS, implying that all oil firms need to decrease their operational sizes for improving their environmental performance on CO2 emission. As an alternative strategy, the result suggests that they need to introduce technology innovation (e.g. clean air technology) into their business operations. The technology based strategy has more practicality than the size reduction in their operations.

Suggested Citation

  • Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2012. "Returns to scale and damages to scale under natural and managerial disposability: Strategy, efficiency and competitiveness of petroleum firms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 645-662.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:34:y:2012:i:3:p:645-662
    DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2011.07.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988311001332
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Sekitani, Kazuyuki, 2009. "An occurrence of multiple projections in DEA-based measurement of technical efficiency: Theoretical comparison among DEA models from desirable properties," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(2), pages 764-794, July.
    2. Zaim, Osman, 2004. "Measuring environmental performance of state manufacturing through changes in pollution intensities: a DEA framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 37-47, January.
    3. 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.
    4. Kumar, Surender, 2006. "Environmentally sensitive productivity growth: A global analysis using Malmquist-Luenberger index," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 280-293, February.
    5. Arnoud W. A. Boot & Radhakrishnan Gopalan & Anjan V. Thakor, 2006. "The Entrepreneur's Choice between Private and Public Ownership," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(2), pages 803-836, April.
    6. 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.
    7. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2010. "Should the US clean air act include CO2 emission control?: Examination by data envelopment analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5902-5911, October.
    8. Triantis, Konstantinos & Otis, Paul, 2004. "Dominance-based measurement of productive and environmental performance for manufacturing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(2), pages 447-464, April.
    9. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W., 2008. "Linear programming models for measuring economy-wide energy efficiency performance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 2901-2906, August.
    10. Picazo-Tadeo, Andres J. & Reig-Martinez, Ernest & Hernandez-Sancho, Francesc, 2005. "Directional distance functions and environmental regulation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 131-142, June.
    11. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2008. "A survey of data envelopment analysis in energy and environmental studies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(1), pages 1-18, August.
    12. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika & Ueno, Takahiro, 2010. "Performance analysis of US coal-fired power plants by measuring three DEA efficiencies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 1675-1688, April.
    13. 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.
    14. Glover, Fred & Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki, 2009. "Contributions of Professor William W. Cooper in Operations Research and Management Science," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(1), pages 1-16, August.
    15. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2011. "Measurement of Returns to Scale and Damages to Scale for DEA-based operational and environmental assessment: How to manage desirable (good) and undesirable (bad) outputs?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 211(1), pages 76-89, May.
    16. Fare, R. & Grosskopf, S. & Pasurka, C., 1986. "Effects on relative efficiency in electric power generation due to environmental controls," Resources and Energy, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 167-184, June.
    17. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2011. "DEA approach for unified efficiency measurement: Assessment of Japanese fossil fuel power generation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 292-303, March.
    18. Emrouznejad, Ali & Parker, Barnett R. & Tavares, Gabriel, 2008. "Evaluation of research in efficiency and productivity: A survey and analysis of the first 30 years of scholarly literature in DEA," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 151-157, September.
    19. Korhonen, Pekka J. & Luptacik, Mikulas, 2004. "Eco-efficiency analysis of power plants: An extension of data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(2), pages 437-446, April.
    20. Pasurka, Carl Jr., 2006. "Decomposing electric power plant emissions within a joint production framework," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 26-43, January.
    21. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2011. "Methodological comparison between two unified (operational and environmental) efficiency measurements for environmental assessment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 210(3), pages 684-693, May.
    22. Fare, Rolf, et al, 1993. "Derivation of Shadow Prices for Undesirable Outputs: A Distance Function Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 75(2), pages 374-380, May.
    23. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Aoki, Shingo, 2001. "A use of a nonparametric statistic for DEA frontier shift: the Kruskal and Wallis rank test," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-18, February.
    24. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Sekitani, Kazuyuki, 2009. "DEA congestion and returns to scale under an occurrence of multiple optimal projections," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(2), pages 592-607, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Petroleum industry; Data envelopment analysis; Environmental assessment;

    JEL classification:

    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • C67 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Input-Output Models
    • Q43 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Energy and the Macroeconomy
    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General

    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:eee:eneeco:v:34:y:2012:i:3:p:645-662. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eneco .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.