DEA game cross-efficiency approach to Olympic rankings
A number of studies have used data envelopment analysis (DEA) to evaluate the performance of the countries in Olympic games. While competition exists among the countries in Olympic games/rankings, all these DEA studies do not model competition among peer decision making units (DMUs) or countries. These DEA studies find a set of weights/multipliers that keep the efficiency scores of all DMUs at or below unity. Although cross efficiency goes a further step by providing an efficiency measure in terms of the best multiplier bundle for the unit and all the other DMUs, it is not always unique. This paper presents a new and modified DEA game cross-efficiency model where each DMU is viewed as a competitor via non-cooperative game. For each competing DMU, a multiplier bundle is determined that optimizes the efficiency score for that DMU, with the additional constraint that the resulting score should be at or above that DMU 's estimated best performance. The problem, of course, arises that we will not know this best performance score for the DMU under evaluation until the best performances of all other DMUs are known. To combat this "chicken and egg" phenomenon, an iterative approach leading to the Nash equilibrium is presented. The current paper provides a modified variable returns to scale (VRS) model that yields non-negative cross-efficiency scores. The approach is applied to the last six Summer Olympic Games. Our results may indicate that our game cross-efficiency model implicitly incorporates the relative importance of gold, silver and bronze medals without the need for specifying the exact assurance regions.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 37 (2009)
Issue (Month): 4 (August)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Li, Yongjun & Liang, Liang & Chen, Yao & Morita, Hiroshi, 2008. "Models for measuring and benchmarking olympics achievements," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 933-940, December.
- Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
- Lins, Marcos P. Estellita & Gomes, Eliane G. & Soares de Mello, Joao Carlos C. B. & Soares de Mello, Adelino Jose R., 2003. "Olympic ranking based on a zero sum gains DEA model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 148(2), pages 312-322, July.
- R. D. Banker & A. Charnes & W. W. Cooper, 1984. "Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(9), pages 1078-1092, September.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:37:y:2009:i:4:p:909-918. 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)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.