IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Biases in technical efficiency scores caused by intra-input aggregation: mathematical analysis and a DEA application using simulated data

Listed author(s):
  • Darold Barnum
  • John Gleason
Registered author(s):

    In Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) applications involving multiple inputs and outputs, inputs are aggregated into the total amounts of each type of input. For example, if input types 'labour' and 'capital' are used to produce multiple outputs, the total amount of labour used to produce all outputs is treated as one aggregated input and the total amount of capital as another. Resources are not disaggregated into input variables measuring the amount of labour used to produce the first output, the amount of labour used to produce the second output, the amount of labour used to produce the third output and so on, for both labour and capital. It is shown that such intra-input aggregation causes downward bias in reported technical efficiency scores, with variations in bias unrelated to true technical efficiency. Therefore, with few exceptions, any technical efficiency comparisons among DMUs are invalid. The presence of intra-input aggregation bias is demonstrated mathematically, simulation is used to exhibit its severity, and the exceptions that permit intra-input aggregation without causing bias are identified. It is concluded that, for multiple-input, multiple-output DEA applications, inputs must be disaggregated into the amounts used to produce each output in order to validly report technical efficiency, unless one of the exceptions is present.

    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.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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.

    Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Applied Economics.

    Volume (Year): 38 (2006)
    Issue (Month): 14 ()
    Pages: 1593-1603

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:38:y:2006:i:14:p:1593-1603
    DOI: 10.1080/00036840500405714
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Web:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:38:y:2006:i:14:p:1593-1603. 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: (Michael McNulty)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.