IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

DEA Based Yardstick Competition in Natural Resource Management

  • Peter Bogetoft

    (Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Denmark)

  • Kurt Nielsen

    (Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Denmark)

In this paper, we discuss the pros and cons of using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to evaluate and enhance the efficiency of natural resource management. The need for a multi-dimensional production frontier approach is sketched, along with examples from other regulated multi-output industries. Also, reviews of the basic properties of DEA and DEA based yardstick competition are provided. Finally, we discuss the use of DEA based yardstick to evaluate bids in multi-dimensional procurement auctions.

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:
Our checks indicate that this address may not be valid because: 404 Not Found. If this is indeed the case, please notify (Thomas Hoffmann)

Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. Centre for Industrial Economics in its series CIE Discussion Papers with number 2002-04.

in new window

Length: 24 pages
Date of creation: Nov 2002
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:kud:kuieci:2002-04
Contact details of provider: Postal: Øster Farimagsgade 5, Building 26, DK-1353 Copenhagen K., Denmark
Phone: (0045) 35 32 30 54
Fax: +45 35 32 30 00
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

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.:

as in new window
  1. Simar, L. & Wilson, P.W., 1999. "Statistical Inference in Nonparametric Frontier Models: the State of the Art," Papers 9904, Catholique de Louvain - Institut de statistique.
  2. Laffont, Jean-Jacques, 1994. "The New Economics of Regulation Ten Years After," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(3), pages 507-37, May.
  3. Jean-Jaques Laffont & Jean Tirole, 1985. "Auctioning Incentive Contracts," Working papers 403, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
  4. Uwe Latacz-Lohmann & Carel Van der Hamsvoort, 1997. "Auctioning Conservation Contracts: A Theoretical Analysis and an Application," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(2), pages 407-418.
  5. Dalen, Dag Morten & Gomez-Lobo, Andres, 1997. "Estimating cost functions in regulated industries characterized by asymmetric information," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(3-5), pages 935-942, April.
  6. 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.
  7. Thanassoulis, Emmanuel, 2000. "DEA and its use in the regulation of water companies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 127(1), pages 1-13, November.
  8. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Tirole, Jean, 1986. "Using Cost Observation to Regulate Firms," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 614-41, June.
  9. Klemperer, Paul, 1999. "Auction Theory: a Guide to the Literature," CEPR Discussion Papers 2163, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  10. Førsund, Finn R. & Kittelsen, Sverre A. C., 1998. "Productivity development of Norwegian electricity distribution utilities," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 207-224, September.
  11. Resende, Marcelo, 2002. "Relative efficiency measurement and prospects for yardstick competition in Brazilian electricity distribution," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(8), pages 637-647, June.
  12. Bowlin, William F., 1997. "A Proposal for Designing Employment Contracts for Government Managers," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 205-216, September.
  13. McAfee, R Preston & McMillan, John, 1987. "Auctions and Bidding," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 25(2), pages 699-738, June.
  14. Peter Bogetoft, 2000. "DEA and Activity Planning under Asymmetric Information," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 7-48, January.
  15. Baumol,William J. & Oates,Wallace E., 1988. "The Theory of Environmental Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521311120.
  16. Banker, R. D. & Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Clarke, R., 1989. "Constrained game formulations and interpretations for data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 299-308, June.
  17. Banker, Rajiv D., 1980. "A game theoretic approach to measuring efficiency," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 262-266, October.
  18. Banker, Rajiv D., 1984. "Estimating most productive scale size using data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 35-44, July.
  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. Maskin, Eric S & Riley, John G, 1984. "Optimal Auctions with Risk Averse Buyers," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(6), pages 1473-1518, November.
  21. Tarja Joro & Pekka Korhonen & Jyrki Wallenius, 1998. "Structural Comparison of Data Envelopment Analysis and Multiple Objective Linear Programming," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(7), pages 962-970, July.
  22. Uwe Latacz-Lohmann & Carel P. C. M. Hamsvoort, 1998. "Auctions as a Means of Creating a Market for Public Goods from Agriculture," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 334-345.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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:kud:kuieci:2002-04. 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: (Thomas Hoffmann)

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.