IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/npf/wpaper/04-17.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Resource use efficiency of US electricity generating plants during the SO2 trading regime: A distance function approach

Author

Listed:
  • Kumar, Surender

    (National Institute of Public Finance and Policy)

  • Gupta, Sreekant

    (National Institute of Public Finance and Policy)

Abstract

This paper measures resource use efficiency of electricity generating plants in the United States under the SO2 trading regime. Resource use efficiency is defined as the product of technical efficiency and environmental efficiency, where the latter is the ratio of good output (electricity) to bad output (SO2) with reference to the best practice firm, i.e., one that is producing an optimal mix of good and bad outputs. This concept of environmental efficiency is similar to that of output oriented allocative efficiency. Using output distance functions we compare three methods for the calculation of resource use efficiency, namely, stochastic frontier analysis (SFA), deterministic parametric programming and nonparametric linear programming. This paper reveals the strengths and weaknesses of these methods for estimating efficiency. Both SFA and linear programming approaches can estimate the efficiency scores. For plants in the dataset the overall geometric mean of the three methods for technical efficiency, environmental efficiency and resource use efficiency is 0.737, 0.335 and 0.248, respectively. The rank correlation coefficient between technical efficiency, environmental efficiency and resource use efficiency is 0.213, 0.617 and 0.877, respectively. The regression analyses of performance across plants shows units in phase I of the SO2 trading programme are negatively related to measures of economic and environmental performance. This suggests that the market for SO2 allowances, per se, may not be minimizing compliance cost. We also find that a decrease in SO2 emission rates not only increases environmental efficiency but also leads to an increase in resource use efficiency. This finding concurs with the hypothesis that enhancement in the environmental performance of a firm leads to an increase in its overall efficiency of resource use as well.

Suggested Citation

  • Kumar, Surender & Gupta, Sreekant, 2004. "Resource use efficiency of US electricity generating plants during the SO2 trading regime: A distance function approach," Working Papers 04/17, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy.
    • Handle: RePEc:npf:wpaper:04/17
    Note: Working Paper 17, 2004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nipfp.org.in/working_paper/wp04_nipfp_017.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Palm, F. & Zellner, A., 1991. "To combine or not to combine? issues of combining forecasts," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 1991022, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    2. Murty, Sushama & Russell, R. Robert, 2010. "On modeling pollution-generating technologies," Economic Research Papers 271176, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    3. John Swinton, 2004. "Phase I Completed: An Empirical Assessment of the 1990 CAAA," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 27(3), pages 227-246, March.
    4. Coggins, Jay S. & Swinton, John R., 1996. "The Price of Pollution: A Dual Approach to Valuing SO2Allowances," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 58-72, January.
    5. repec:ind:iegddp:25 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Fried, Harold O. & Lovell, C. A. Knox & Schmidt, Shelton S. (ed.), 1993. "The Measurement of Productive Efficiency: Techniques and Applications," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195072181.
    7. Curtis Carlson & Dallas Burtraw & Maureen Cropper & Karen L. Palmer, 2000. "Sulfur Dioxide Control by Electric Utilities: What Are the Gains from Trade?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(6), pages 1292-1326, December.
    8. Shawna Grosskopf & Kathy J. Hayes & Lori L. Taylor & William L. Weber, 1997. "Budget-Constrained Frontier Measures Of Fiscal Equality And Efficiency In Schooling," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(1), pages 116-124, February.
    9. Drake, Leigh & Simper, R., 2003. "The measurement of English and Welsh police force efficiency: A comparison of distance function models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(1), pages 165-186, May.
    10. John R. Swinton, 2002. "The Potential for Cost Savings in the Sulfur Dioxide Allowance Market: Empirical Evidence from Florida," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(3), pages 390-404.
    11. Osman Zaim & Fatma Taskin, 2000. "A Kuznets Curve in Environmental Efficiency: An Application on OECD Countries," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 17(1), pages 21-36, September.
    12. Murty, M.N. & Kumar, Surender, 2002. "Measuring the cost of environmentally sustainable industrial development in India: a distance function approach," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 467-486, July.
    13. 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.
    14. Stijn Reinhard & C.A. Knox Lovell & Geert Thijssen, 1999. "Econometric Estimation of Technical and Environmental Efficiency: An Application to Dutch Dairy Farms," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(1), pages 44-60.
    15. Daniel Tyteca, 1997. "Linear Programming Models for the Measurement of Environmental Performance of Firms—Concepts and Empirical Results," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 183-197, May.
    16. Aigner, Dennis & Lovell, C. A. Knox & Schmidt, Peter, 1977. "Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 21-37, 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. Sahba Fatima, 2016. "Performance Evaluation of Thermal Power Generation: Non-Parametric Frontier Approach," Bulletin of Energy Economics (BEE), The Economics and Social Development Organization (TESDO), vol. 4(1), pages 81-92, March.
    2. Kakali Mukhopadhyay & Souvik Bhattacharya, 2006. "Estimation of Marginal Abatement Cost of Air Pollution in Durgapur City of West Bengal," Working Papers 2006-013, Madras School of Economics,Chennai,India.
    3. M. Murty & Surender Kumar & Kishore Dhavala, 2007. "Measuring environmental efficiency of industry: a case study of thermal power generation in India," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(1), pages 31-50, September.

    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. repec:npf:wpaper:17 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:ind:nipfwp:17 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Cuesta, Rafael A. & Lovell, C.A. Knox & Zofío, José L., 2009. "Environmental efficiency measurement with translog distance functions: A parametric approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2232-2242, June.
    4. M. Murty & Surender Kumar & Kishore Dhavala, 2007. "Measuring environmental efficiency of industry: a case study of thermal power generation in India," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(1), pages 31-50, September.
    5. Sushama Murty, 2015. "On the properties of an emission-generating technology and its parametric representation," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 60(2), pages 243-282, October.
    6. Anthony Glass & Karligash Kenjegalieva & Robin Sickles, 2013. "How efficiently do U.S. cities manage roadway congestion?," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 407-428, December.
    7. Zuoxiang Zhao, 2017. "Measurement of production efficiency and environmental efficiency in China’s province-level: a by-production approach," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 19(4), pages 735-759, October.
    8. Soledad Moya & Jordi Perramon & Anselm Constans, 2005. "IFRS Adoption in Europe: The Case of Germany," Working Papers 0501, Departament Empresa, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, revised Feb 2005.
    9. Magambo, Isaiah & Dikgang, Johane & Gelo, Dambala & Tregenna, Fiona, 2021. "Environmental and Technical Efficiency in Large Gold Mines in Developing Countries," MPRA Paper 108068, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Galdeano-Gomez, Emilio & Cespedes-Lorente, Jose & Rodriguez-Rodriguez, Manuel, 2006. "Productivity and Environmental Performance in Marketing Cooperatives: Incentive Schemes on the Horticultural Sector," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25738, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. repec:ipg:wpaper:2014-479 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Surender Kumar & Rakesh Kumar Jain, 2021. "Cost of CO2 emission mitigation and its decomposition: evidence from coal-fired thermal power sector in India," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 693-717, August.
    13. Kumar, Surender, 2003. "Productivity and profitability changes in the U.S. electric power plants during SO2 trading regime," Working Papers 03/3, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy.
    14. Lee, Sang-choon & Oh, Dong-hyun & Lee, Jeong-dong, 2014. "A new approach to measuring shadow price: Reconciling engineering and economic perspectives," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 66-77.
    15. OA Carboni & P. Russu, 2014. "Measuring Environmental and Economic Efficiency in Italy: an Application of the Malmquist-DEA and Grey Forecasting Model," Working Paper CRENoS 201401, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    16. Sushama Murty, 2012. "On the properties of an emission-generating technology and its parametric representation," Discussion Papers 1202, University of Exeter, Department of Economics.
    17. Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo & Diego Prior, 2005. "Efficiency and Environmental Regulation: A "Complex Situation"," Working Papers 0502, Departament Empresa, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, revised Feb 2005.
    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. 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.
    20. Bokusheva, Raushan & Kumbhakar, Subal C., 2014. "A Distance Function Model with Good and Bad Outputs," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182765, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    21. Murty, Sushama & Robert Russell, R. & Levkoff, Steven B., 2012. "On modeling pollution-generating technologies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 117-135.
    22. repec:npf:wpaper:03 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. 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.
    24. Madhu Khanna & Surender Kumar, 2011. "Corporate Environmental Management and Environmental Efficiency," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(2), pages 227-242, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Technical efficiency ; Environmental efficiency ; Resource-use efficiency ; Distance functions ; SO2 allowance program;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L94 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Electric Utilities
    • Q40 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - General

    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:npf:wpaper:04/17. 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.

    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: S.Siva Chidambaram (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nipfp.org.in .

    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.