IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eok/journl/v3y2011i4p2-23.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are Private Providers more Productive and Efficient than Public Providers of International Education? Evidence from New Zealand

Author

Listed:
  • Dayal Talukder

    () (ICL Business School, Auckland, New Zealand)

Abstract

This study has investigated the productivity growth and efficiency of private and public providers of international education in New Zealand. It has used secondary data to calculate the DEA-based Malmquist productivity index for measuring Total Factor Productivity (TFP)-growth and efficiency of both public and private providers of international education during 1999-2010. The study has found that private providers experienced a larger TFP-growth than that of public providers during 1999-2004. However, they experienced a sharp decline in TFP-growth since 2005 through to 2010 and experienced a much smaller TFP-growth than that of public providers during this period. Conversely, public providers experienced a positive TFP-growth during 1999-2004 but they experienced a negative TFP-growth since 2005 through to 2010. Considering efficiency, both private and public providers experienced almost a constant Technical Efficiency Change (TEC) having a same level of efficiency of one. Both private and public providers exhibited a constant return to scale during 1999-2010. This study argues that on an average, private providers are more productive than public providers of international education. However, they are not more efficient than public providers as both types of providers exhibited a constant return to scale during 1999-2010. This study also argues that TFP-growth of New Zealand’s international education was determined by Technological Change (TC), not by TEC during this period.

Suggested Citation

  • Dayal Talukder, 2011. "Are Private Providers more Productive and Efficient than Public Providers of International Education? Evidence from New Zealand," Oeconomics of Knowledge, Saphira Publishing House, vol. 3(4), pages 2-23, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:eok:journl:v:3:y:2011:i:4:p:2-23
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://sites.google.com/site/oeconomicsofknowledge/v3_i4_4q_2011_dt.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chang, Tzu-Pu & Hu, Jin-Li, 2010. "Total-factor energy productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change: An empirical study of China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(10), pages 3262-3270, October.
    2. Windle, Robert J. & Dresner, Martin E., 1992. "Partial productivity measures and total factor productivity in the air transport industry: Limitations and uses," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 435-445, November.
    3. A. Steven Englander, 1988. "Tests of Total Factor Productivity Measurement," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 54, OECD Publishing.
    4. StevenN. Durlauf & Andros Kourtellos & ChihMing Tan, 2008. "Are Any Growth Theories Robust?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(527), pages 329-346, March.
    5. Barros, Carlos P. & Guironnet, Jean-Pascal & Peypoch, Nicolas, 2011. "Productivity growth and biased technical change in French higher education," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(1-2), pages 641-646, January.
    6. Krugman, Paul R., 2000. "Technology, trade and factor prices," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 51-71, February.
    7. Slade, Margaret E., 1986. "Total-factor-productivity measurement when equilibrium is temporary : A Monte Carlo assessment," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1-2), pages 75-95.
    8. Charles Gore, 2007. "Which Growth Theory is Good for the Poor?," The European Journal of Development Research, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 30-48.
    9. Sharma, Subhash C. & Sylwester, Kevin & Margono, Heru, 2007. "Decomposition of total factor productivity growth in U.S. states," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 215-241, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights

    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:eok:journl:v:3:y:2011:i:4:p:2-23. 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: (Felician ALECU). General contact details of provider: .

    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.