Capacity utilization in a generalized Malmquist index including environmental factors. A decomposition analysis
Productivity measures ignoring environmental effects may give misleading information on total productivity growth. Further, business cycles in the form of capacity utilization may also significantly influence productivity measures. In this paper, we develop an overall Malmquist productivity index and decompose changing efficiency rates into a contribution from environmental factors, capacity utilization and other traditional factors. The capacity utilization element is a contribution to the literature in that it takes into account the capacity for producing negative externalities. We decompose the frontier movements into a contribution from traditional factors and environmental factors and apply the model to a micro data set for two Norwegian industries: the pulp and paper industry and the inorganic chemistry industry. We find frontier improvements over the period included in the analysis, while the distance to the frontier has increased. Capacity utilization increased over the period and contributed to an average approach to the frontier, while environmental indicators contributed negatively. Analysis of the two industries indicates that differences between the traditional and revised efficiency measures changes are ambiguous, except from the capacity utilization element. This indicates that the environment loses when business cycles improve.
|Date of creation:||Sep 2006|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: P.O.Box 8131 Dep, N-0033 Oslo, Norway|
Phone: (+47) 21 09 00 00
Fax: (+47) 21 09 49 73
Web page: http://www.ssb.no/en/
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.:
- Fare, Rolf, et al, 1993. "Derivation of Shadow Prices for Undesirable Outputs: A Distance Function Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 75(2), pages 374-80, May.
- Fare, Rolf & Grosskopf, Shawna & Kokkelenberg, Edward C, 1989. "Measuring Plant Capacity, Utilization and Technical Change: A Nonparametric Approach," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 30(3), pages 655-66, August.
- 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.
- De Borger, Bruno & Kerstens, Kristiaan, 2000.
" The Malmquist Productivity Index and Plant Capacity Utilization,"
Scandinavian Journal of Economics,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 102(2), pages 303-10, June.
- DE BORGER, Bruno & KERSTENS, Kristiaan, . "The Malmquist productivity index and plant capacity utilisation," Working Papers 2000020, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Applied Economics.
- Hailu, Atakelty & Veeman, Terrence S., 2001.
"Alternative methods for environmentally adjusted productivity analysis,"
Blackwell, vol. 25(2-3), pages 211-218, September.
- Hailu, Atakelty & Veeman, Terrence S., 2001. "Alternative methods for environmentally adjusted productivity analysis," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 25(2-3), September.
- Pittman, Russell W, 1983. "Multilateral Productivity Comparisons with Undesirable Outputs," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 93(372), pages 883-91, December.
- 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.
- Annegrete Bruvoll & Torstein Bye & Jan Larsson & Kjetil Telle, 2003. "Technological changes in the pulp and paper industry and the role of uniform versus selective environmental policy," Discussion Papers 357, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ssb:dispap:473. 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: (J Bruusgaard)
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.