IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Torstein Bye & Annegrete Bruvoll & Jan Larsson, 2006. "Capacity utilization in a generalized Malmquist index including environmental factors. A decomposition analysis," Discussion Papers 473, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
  • Handle: RePEc:ssb:dispap:473

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Diewert, Erwin, 2007. "Index Numbers," Economics working papers diewert-07-01-03-08-17-23, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 31 Jan 2007.
    2. Hailu, Atakelty & Veeman, Terrence S., 2001. "Alternative methods for environmentally adjusted productivity analysis," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 25(2-3), pages 211-218, September.
    3. 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.
    4. De Borger, Bruno & Kerstens, Kristiaan, 2000. " The Malmquist Productivity Index and Plant Capacity Utilization," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 102(2), pages 303-310, June.
    5. 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 374-380, May.
    6. 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 655-666, August.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    10. Pittman, Russell W, 1983. "Multilateral Productivity Comparisons with Undesirable Outputs," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 93(372), pages 883-891, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. repec:bla:pacecr:v:22:y:2017:i:4:p:720-739 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Giovanni Cesaroni & Kristiaan Kerstens & Ignace Van de Woestyne, 2017. "A New Input-Oriented Plant Capacity Notion: Definition and Empirical Comparison," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 720-739, October.
    3. Alfredsson, Eva & Månsson, Jonas & Vikström, Peter, 2016. "Internalising external environmental effects in efficiency analysis," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 22-31.
    4. Kakali Mukhopadhyay, 2008. "Air pollution and income distribution in India," Asia-Pacific Development Journal, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), vol. 15(1), pages 35-64, June.

    More about this item


    Emissions; Productivity change; Pulp and paper; Inorganic chemistry; Malmquist index; Frontier technology; Capacity utilization;

    JEL classification:

    • L73 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Primary Products and Construction - - - Forest Products
    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
    • O14 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Industrialization; Manufacturing and Service Industries; Choice of Technology
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O41 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - One, Two, and Multisector Growth Models
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy
    • R38 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Real Estate Markets, Spatial Production Analysis, and Firm Location - - - Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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: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: (L Maasø). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.