Journal of Productivity Analysis

, Volume 34, Issue 2, pp 83–97 | Cite as

Estimates of technical inefficiency in stochastic frontier models with panel data: generalized panel jackknife estimation

  • Panutat Satchachai
  • Peter Schmidt


Estimates of technical inefficiency based on fixed effects estimation of the stochastic frontier model with panel data are biased upward. Previous work has attempted to correct this bias using the bootstrap, but in simulations the bootstrap corrects only part of the bias. The usual panel jackknife is based on the assumption that the bias is of order T −1 and is similar to the bootstrap. We show that when there is a tie or a near tie for the best firm, the bias is of order T −1/2, not T −1, and this calls for a different form of the jackknife. The generalized panel jackknife is quite successful in removing the bias. However, the resulting estimates have a large variance.


Technical inefficiency Stochastic frontier Panel data Jackknife Bootstrap 

JEL Classification

C10 C15 


  1. Adams JE, Gray HL, Watkins TA (1971) An asymptotic characterization of bias reduction by jackknifing. Ann Math Stat 42:1606–1612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Efron B (1979) Bootstrap methods: another look at the jackknife. Ann Stat 7:1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Efron B, Tibshirani RB (1993) An introduction to the bootstrap. Chapman and Hall, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Fernández-Val I, Vella F (2007) Bias corrections for two-step fixed effects panel data estimator. IZA Discussion Paper 2690, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA)Google Scholar
  5. Gray HL, Schucany WR (1972) The generalized jackknife statistic. Marcel Dekker Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Hahn J, Kuersteiner G (2007) Bias reduction for dynamic nonlinear panel models with fixed effects. Unpublished ManuscriptGoogle Scholar
  7. Hahn J, Newey W (2004) Jackknife and analytical bias reduction for nonlinear panel models. Econometrica 72:1295–1319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hall P, Härdle W, Simar L (1995) Iterated bootstrap with applications to frontier models. J Prod Anal 6:63–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kim M, Kim Y, Schmidt P (2007) On the accuracy of bootstrap confidence intervals for efficiency levels in stochastic frontier models with panel data. J Prod Anal 28:165–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Miller RG (1974) The jackknife—a review. Biometrika 61:1–15Google Scholar
  11. Park BU, Simar L (1994) Efficient semiparametric estimation in a stochastic frontier model. J Am Stat Assoc 89:929–936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pitt MM, Lee LF (1981) The measurement and sources of technical inefficiency in the Indonesian weaving industry. J Dev Econ 9:43–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Quenouille MH (1956) Note on bias in estimation. Biometrika 61:353–360Google Scholar
  14. Schmidt P, Sickles R (1984) Production frontiers and panel data. J Bus Econ Stat 2:367–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Schucany WR, Gray HL, Owen DB (1971) On bias reduction in estimation. J Am Stat Assoc 66:524–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tukey JW (1958) Bias and confidence in not quite large samples (Abstract). Ann Math Stat 18:614Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chulalongkorn UniversityBangkokThailand
  2. 2.Michigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA
  3. 3.Yonsei UniversitySeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations