IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/applec/v57y2025i31p4472-4485.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benchmarking South African water utilities using three efficiency analysis methods

Author

Listed:
  • Genius Murwirapachena
  • Johane Dikgang
  • Richard Mulwa

Abstract

This paper compares efficiency scores from the data envelopment analysis (DEA), stochastic frontier analysis (SFA), and stochastic non-parametric envelopment of data (StoNED) methods in the context of regulating South African water utilities. We estimate cost efficiency based on cross-sectional data from 102 South African water utilities in the period 2013/14. We compare the impact of methodological choices on the efficiency scores. For StoNED, we compare scores from two different estimation techniques (method of moments and pseudolikelihood). We also use the naïve method of averaging (NMA) and compare its results to those generated by the other methods. Results show that the choice of method has an impact on efficiency estimates and monetary cost reduction targets. When water sector regulators in the developing countries intend to benchmark utilities based on each of these methods, heterogeneity and the operating environments of utilities should be considered before deciding on the estimation method.

Suggested Citation

  • Genius Murwirapachena & Johane Dikgang & Richard Mulwa, 2025. "Benchmarking South African water utilities using three efficiency analysis methods," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(31), pages 4472-4485, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:57:y:2025:i:31:p:4472-4485
    DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2024.2364074
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00036846.2024.2364074
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00036846.2024.2364074?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

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    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:taf:applec:v:57:y:2025:i:31:p:4472-4485. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20 .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.