IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/empeco/v54y2018i1d10.1007_s00181-016-1204-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring inefficiency in the presence of bad outputs: Does the disposability assumption matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin Hampf

    (Darmstadt University of Technology)

Abstract

Multiple approaches to incorporate environmental pollution in production technologies have been proposed. In this paper, we analyze the consequences of these theoretical models for applied research. Our comparison focuses on alternative disposability assumptions imposed on bad outputs and their effects on the measurement of productive efficiency. Using empirical data on electricity generation in the US, we quantify and analyze differences among the theoretical models. Moreover, Monte Carlo simulations are conducted to evaluate the ability of the models to correctly estimate inefficiency given varying specifications of the pollution-generating process.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin Hampf, 2018. "Measuring inefficiency in the presence of bad outputs: Does the disposability assumption matter?," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 101-127, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:empeco:v:54:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s00181-016-1204-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s00181-016-1204-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00181-016-1204-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00181-016-1204-3?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. Fernandez C. & Koop G. & Steel M.F.J., 2002. "Multiple-Output Production With Undesirable Outputs: An Application to Nitrogen Surplus in Agriculture," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 97, pages 432-442, June.
    2. Hampf, Benjamin, 2015. "Estimating the Materials Balance Condition: A Stochastic Frontier Approach," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 72866, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    3. Krüger, Jens & Hampf, Benjamin, 2015. "Optimal Directions for Directional Distance Functions: An Exploration of Potential Reductions of Greenhouse Gases," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 77007, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    4. Hampf, Benjamin, 2015. "Estimating the Materials Balance Condition: A Stochastic Frontier Approach," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 79457, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    5. Benjamin Hampf & Jens J. Krüger, 2015. "Optimal Directions for Directional Distance Functions: An Exploration of Potential Reductions of Greenhouse Gases," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 97(3), pages 920-938.
    6. Benjamin Hampf, 2014. "Separating environmental efficiency into production and abatement efficiency: a nonparametric model with application to US power plants," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 457-473, June.
    7. Chien-Ming Chen & Magali A. Delmas, 2012. "Measuring Eco-Inefficiency: A New Frontier Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 60(5), pages 1064-1079, October.
    8. Knox Lovell, C. A. & Pastor, Jesus T. & Turner, Judi A., 1995. "Measuring macroeconomic performance in the OECD: A comparison of European and non-European countries," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 87(3), pages 507-518, December.
    9. Fare, Rolf & Grosskopf, Shawna, 2004. "Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation: Comment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 157(1), pages 242-245, August.
    10. Atakelty Hailu & Terrence S. Veeman, 2001. "Non-parametric Productivity Analysis with Undesirable Outputs: An Application to the Canadian Pulp and Paper Industry," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(3), pages 605-616.
    11. Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffe, Laure, 2016. "Modelling pollution-generating technologies in performance benchmarking: Recent developments, limits and future prospects in the nonparametric frameworkAuthor-Name: Dakpo, K. Hervé," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 347-359.
    12. Hampf, Benjamin, 2014. "Separating Environmental Efficiency into Production and Abatement Efficiency - A Nonparametric Model with Application to U.S. Power Plants," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 69997, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    13. Aparicio, Juan & Pastor, Jesus T. & Zofio, Jose L., 2013. "On the inconsistency of the Malmquist–Luenberger index," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(3), pages 738-742.
    14. Timo Kuosmanen, 2005. "Weak Disposability in Nonparametric Production Analysis with Undesirable Outputs," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(4), pages 1077-1082.
    15. Dakpo, K & Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffee, Laure, 2015. "Empirical comparison of pollution generating technologies in nonparametric modelling: The case of greenhouse gas emissions in French sheep meat farming," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211557, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Rolf Färe & Shawna Grosskopf, 2003. "Nonparametric Productivity Analysis with Undesirable Outputs: Comment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(4), pages 1070-1074.
    17. Mark Andor & Frederik Hesse, 2014. "The StoNED age: the departure into a new era of efficiency analysis? A monte carlo comparison of StoNED and the “oldies” (SFA and DEA)," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 85-109, February.
    18. Reinhard, Stijn & Knox Lovell, C. A. & Thijssen, Geert J., 2000. "Environmental efficiency with multiple environmentally detrimental variables; estimated with SFA and DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 287-303, March.
    19. 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.
    20. W. Liu & W. Meng & X. Li & D. Zhang, 2010. "DEA models with undesirable inputs and outputs," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 173(1), pages 177-194, January.
    21. Emir Malikov & Subal C. Kumbhakar & Mike G. Tsionas, 2016. "A Cost System Approach to the Stochastic Directional Technology Distance Function with Undesirable Outputs: The Case of us Banks in 2001–2010," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(7), pages 1407-1429, November.
    22. 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.
    23. 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.
    24. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    25. Hampf, Benjamin, 2015. "Estimating the materials balance condition: A stochastic frontier approach," Darmstadt Discussion Papers in Economics 226, Darmstadt University of Technology, Department of Law and Economics.
    26. Chambers, Robert G. & Chung, Yangho & Fare, Rolf, 1996. "Benefit and Distance Functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 407-419, August.
    27. Mekaroonreung, Maethee & Johnson, Andrew L., 2012. "Estimating the shadow prices of SO2 and NOx for U.S. coal power plants: A convex nonparametric least squares approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 723-732.
    28. Scheel, Holger, 2001. "Undesirable outputs in efficiency valuations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(2), pages 400-410, 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. Jean-Philippe Boussemart & Hervé Leleu & Zhiyang Shen & Vivian Valdmanis, 2020. "Performance analysis for three pillars of sustainability," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 305-320, June.
    2. repec:zbw:inwedp:752021 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Fang, Lei, 2020. "Opening the “black box” of environmental production technology in a nonparametric analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(2), pages 769-780.
    4. Andreas Eder, 2021. "Environmental efficiency measurement when producers control pollutants under heterogeneous conditions: a generalization of the materials balance approach," Working Papers 752021, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Institute for Sustainable Economic Development.
    5. Hampf, Benjamin & Rødseth, Kenneth Løvold, 2019. "Environmental efficiency measurement with heterogeneous input quality: A nonparametric analysis of U.S. power plants," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 610-625.

    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. Abad, Arnaud & Briec, Walter, 2019. "On the axiomatic of pollution-generating technologies: Non-parametric production analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(1), pages 377-390.
    2. Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffe, Laure, 2016. "Modelling pollution-generating technologies in performance benchmarking: Recent developments, limits and future prospects in the nonparametric frameworkAuthor-Name: Dakpo, K. Hervé," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 347-359.
    3. George Halkos & George Papageorgiou, 2016. "Spatial environmental efficiency indicators in regional waste generation: a nonparametric approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(1), pages 62-78, January.
    4. Leleu, Hervé, 2013. "Shadow pricing of undesirable outputs in nonparametric analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(2), pages 474-480.
    5. Wang, Ke & Wei, Yi-Ming & Huang, Zhimin, 2018. "Environmental efficiency and abatement efficiency measurements of China's thermal power industry: A data envelopment analysis based materials balance approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(1), pages 35-50.
    6. Ke Wang & Yi-Ming Wei & Zhimin Huang, 2017. "Environmental efficiency and abatement efficiency measurements of China¡¯s thermal power industry: A data envelopment analysis based materials balance approach," CEEP-BIT Working Papers 108, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research (CEEP), Beijing Institute of Technology.
    7. Afzalinejad, Mohammad, 2020. "Reverse efficiency measures for environmental assessment in data envelopment analysis," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    8. Andreas Eder, 2021. "Environmental efficiency measurement when producers control pollutants under heterogeneous conditions: a generalization of the materials balance approach," Working Papers 752021, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Institute for Sustainable Economic Development.
    9. repec:zbw:inwedp:752021 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Barnabé Walheer, 2020. "Output, input, and undesirable output interconnections in data envelopment analysis: convexity and returns-to-scale," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 284(1), pages 447-467, January.
    11. Wang, Ke & Wei, Yi-Ming & Huang, Zhimin, 2016. "Potential gains from carbon emissions trading in China: A DEA based estimation on abatement cost savings," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 48-59.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Sahoo, Biresh K. & Luptacik, Mikulas & Mahlberg, Bernhard, 2011. "Alternative measures of environmental technology structure in DEA: An application," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 215(3), pages 750-762, December.
    15. Roshdi, Israfil & Hasannasab, Maryam & Margaritis, Dimitris & Rouse, Paul, 2018. "Generalised weak disposability and efficiency measurement in environmental technologies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 266(3), pages 1000-1012.
    16. Margaréta Halická & Mária Trnovská, 2018. "Negative features of hyperbolic and directional distance models for technologies with undesirable outputs," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 26(4), pages 887-907, December.
    17. Lee, Chia-Yen, 2018. "Mixed-strategy Nash equilibrium in data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 266(3), pages 1013-1024.
    18. Gurgul, Henryk & Lach, Łukasz, 2019. "Eco-efficiency analysis in generalized IO models: Methods and examples," MPRA Paper 96604, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Ke Wang & Zhifu Mi & Yi‐Ming Wei, 2019. "Will Pollution Taxes Improve Joint Ecological and Economic Efficiency of Thermal Power Industry in China?: A DEA‐Based Materials Balance Approach," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 23(2), pages 389-401, April.
    20. George Halkos & Nickolaos Tzeremes, 2014. "Measuring the effect of Kyoto protocol agreement on countries’ environmental efficiency in CO 2 emissions: an application of conditional full frontiers," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 367-382, June.
    21. Atkinson, Scott E. & Tsionas, Mike G., 2021. "Generalized estimation of productivity with multiple bad outputs: The importance of materials balance constraints," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(3), pages 1165-1186.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental pollution; Nonparametric efficiency analysis; Technology modeling; Disposability assumptions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling
    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity
    • C44 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Operations Research; Statistical Decision Theory
    • C51 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Construction and Estimation

    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:spr:empeco:v:54:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s00181-016-1204-3. 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: . General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

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