Advertisement

Journal of Productivity Analysis

, Volume 44, Issue 3, pp 249–264 | Cite as

Measuring Japanese bank performance: a dynamic network DEA approach

  • Hirofumi Fukuyama
  • William L. Weber
Article

Abstract

A dynamic two-stage network model of production incorporating financial regulatory constraints is developed and estimated for Japanese commercial banks. In the first stage of production bank managers use three desirable inputs (labor, physical capital, and equity capital) to produce two intermediate outputs-deposits and other raised funds. The first stage is constrained by the level of non-performing loans produced in a preceding period. In the second stage, the bank managers use the first stage intermediate outputs to produce desirable outputs of loans and securities investments and an undesirable output of non-performing loans. The dynamic framework allows resources to be allocated over time to maximize the production of desirable outputs and simultaneously minimize the production of undesirable outputs.

Keywords

Data envelopment analysis Dynamic network model Two-stage system Japanese banks Carryover assets Efficiency Productivity Primal and dual forms 

JEL Classification

C44 D24 G21 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are grateful for the helpful and insightful suggestions of Rolf Färe, Robin Sickles and Kazuyuki Sekitani and two anonymous reviewers. We are also grateful to the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research from Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Grant Numbers 23510165 (C) and 25282090 (B).

References

  1. Akther S, Fukuyama H, Weber WL (2013) Estimating two-stage network slacks-based inefficiency: an application to Bangladesh banking. OMEGA 41(1):88–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Altunbas Y, Liu M, Molyneux P, Seth R (2000) Efficiency and risk in Japanese banking. J Bank Financ 58:826–839Google Scholar
  3. Avkiran NK (2009) Removing the impact of environment with units-invariant efficient frontier analysis: an illustrative case study with intertemporal panel data. OMEGA 37:535–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berger AN, Humphrey DB (1997) Efficiency of financial institutions: international survey and directions for future research. Eur J Oper Res 98:175–212MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berger AN, Hanweck GA, Humphrey DB (1987) Competitive viability in banking: scale, scope and product mix economies. J Monet Econ 20:501–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bogetoft P, Färe R, Grosskopf S, Hayes K, Taylor L (2009) Dynamic network DEA: an illustration. J Oper Res Soc Jpn 52(2):147–162MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Chambers RG, Chung Y, Färe R (1996) Benefit and distance functions. J Econ Theory 70:407–419MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chambers RG, Chung Y, Färe R (1998) Profit, directional distance functions and Nerlovian efficiency. J Optim Theory Appl 98(2):351–364MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E (1978) Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Oper Res 2:429–444MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen C-M, van Dalen J (2010) Measuring dynamic efficiency: theories and an integrated methodology. Eur J Oper Res 203:749–760MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chen Y, Zhu J (2004) Measuring information technology’s indirect impact on firm performance. Inf Technol Manag J 5(1–2):9–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chen Y, Cook WD, Zhu J (2010) Deriving the DEA frontier for two-stage processes. Eur J Oper Res 202:138–142MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cook WD, Liang L, Zhu J (2010) Measuring performance of two-stage network structures by DEA: a review and future perspective. Omega 38:423–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Drake L, Hall MJB (2003) Efficiency in Japanese banking: an empirical analysis. J Bank Financ 27:891–917Google Scholar
  15. Drake L, Hall MJB, Simper R (2009) Bank modelling methodologies: a comparative non-parametric analysis of efficiency in the Japanese banking sector. Int J Financ Mark Inst Money 19:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Emrouznejad A, Thanassoulis E (2005) A mathematical model for dynamic efficiency using data envelopment analysis. Appl Math Comput 160(2):363–378MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Färe R, Grosskopf S (1996) Intertemporal production frontiers: with dynamic DEA. Kluwer Academic Publishers, MassachusettsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Färe R, Grosskopf S, Weber WL (2004) The effect of risk-based capital standards on profit efficiency in banking. Appl Econ 36:1731–1743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Färe R, Grosskopf S, Margaritis D, Weber WL (2012) Technological change and timing the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. J Prod Anal 37:205–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Farrell MJ (1957) The measurement of production efficiency. J R Stat Soc Series B Gen 120(Part 3):253–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fukuyama H, Sekitani K (2012) Decomposing the efficient frontier of the DEA production possibility set into a smallest number of convex polyhedrons by mixed integer programming. Eur J Oper Res 221(1):165–174MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fukuyama H, Weber WL (2008) Estimating inefficiency, technological change and shadow prices of problem loans for regional banks and Shinkin banks in Japan. Open Manag J 1:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fukuyama H, Weber WL (2009) A directional slacks-based measure of technical inefficiency. Socio Econ Plan Sci 43(4):274–287Google Scholar
  24. Fukuyama H, Weber WL (2010) A slacks-based inefficiency measure for a two-stage system with bad outputs. Omega 38(5):239–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fukuyama H, Weber WL (2012) Estimating two-stage network technology inefficiency: an application to cooperative Shinkin banks in Japan. Int J Oper Res Inf Syst 3(2):1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fukuyama H, Weber WL (2013) A dynamic network DEA model with an application to Japanese cooperative Shinkin banks. Forthcoming in: Fotios Pasiouras (ed) Efficiency and productivity growth: modelling in the financial services industry. Wiley, London, Chapter 9Google Scholar
  27. Goddard JA, Molyneux P, Wilson JOS (2001) European banking: efficiency, technology, and growth. John Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Hori K (2004) An empirical investigation of cost efficiency in Japanese banking: a non-parametric approach. Rev Monet Financ Stud 21:45–67Google Scholar
  29. Kao C (2009) Efficiency measurement for parallel production systems. Eur J Oper Res 196:1107–1112MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kao C, Hwang SN (2008) Efficiency decomposition in two-stage data envelopment analysis: an application to non-life insurance companies in Taiwan. Eur J Oper Res 185(1):418–429MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lewis L, Sexton TR (2004) Network DEA: efficiency analysis of organizations with complex internal structure. Comput Oper Res 31(9):1365–1410Google Scholar
  32. Liang L, Cook WD, Zhu J (2008) DEA models for two-stage processes: game approach and efficiency decomposition. Nav Res Logist 55:643–653MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Liu J, Tone K (2008) A multistage method to measure efficiency and its application to Japanese banking. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 42(2):75–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Montgomery H, Shimizutani S (2009) The effectiveness of bank recapitalization policies in Japan. Jpn World Econ 21:1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nemoto J, Goto M (2003) Measurement of dynamic efficiency in production: an application of data envelopment analysis to Japanese electric utilities. J Prod Anal 19:191–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Paradi JC, Rouatt S, Zhu H (2011) Two-stage evaluation of bank branch efficiency using data envelopment analysis. Omega 39:99–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Park KH, Weber WL (2006) A note on efficiency and productivity growth in the Korean banking industry, 1992–2002. J Bank Financ 30:2371–2386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Saunders A, Cornett M (2011) Financial institutions management: a risk management approach, 7th edn. McGraw-Hill, IrwinGoogle Scholar
  39. Sealey C, Lindley J (1977) Inputs, outputs, and a theory of production and cost at depository financial institutions. J Financ 32:1251–1266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tone K, Tsutsui M (2009) Network DEA: a slacks-based measure approach. Eur J Oper Res 197:243–252Google Scholar
  41. Tone K, Tsutsui M (2010) Dynamic DEA: a slacks-based measure approach. OMEGA 38:145–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wang CH, Gopal RD, Zionts S (1997) Use of data envelopment analysis in assessing information technology impact on firm performance. Ann Oper Res 73:191–213MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Weber WL, Devaney M (1999) Bank efficiency, risk-based capital and real estate exposure: the credit crunch revisited. Real Estate Econ 27:1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of CommerceFukuoka UniversityFukuokaJapan
  2. 2.Department of Economics and FinanceSoutheast Missouri State UniversityCape GirardeauUSA

Personalised recommendations