Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Data Envelopment Analysis pp 151–182Cite as

Models with Restricted Multipliers

  • Chapter

  • 1047 Accesses

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   74.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. R.G. Thompson, F.D. Singleton, Jr., R.M. Thrall and B.A. Smith (1986) “Comparative Site Evaluations for Locating a High-Energy Physics Lab in Texas,” Interfaces, 16, pp. 35–49. See also R.G. Dyson and E. Thanassoulis (1988) “Reducing Weight Flexibility in Data Envelopment Analysis,” Journal of the Operational Research Society, 39, pp.563–576. Finally, see Notes and Selected Bibliography section in this chapter for references on use of DEA for site selection.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. A. Charnes, W.W. Cooper, Z.M. Huang and D.B. Sun (1990) “Polyhedral Cone-Ratio DEA Models with an Illustrative Application to Large Commercial Banks,” Journal of Econometrics, 46, pp.73–91. For a treatment that studies this approach as an alternative to the more rigid approach to risk evaluation under the “Basel Agreement” for controlling risks in bank portfolios see P.L. Brockett, A. Charnes, W.W. Cooper, Z.M. Huang and D.B. Sun, “Data Transformations in DEA Cone-Ratio Approaches for Monitoring Bank Performance,” European Journal of Operational Research, 98, 1997, pp.250–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Y. Roll, W.D. Cook and B. Golany (1991) “Controlling Factor Weights in Data Envelopment Analysis,” IIE Transactions, 23, pp.2–9.

    Google Scholar 

  4. P.L. Brockett, A. Charnes, W.W. Cooper, Z. Huang and D.B. Sun (1997) “Data Transformations in DEA Cone Ratio Envelopment Approaches for Monitoring Bank Performance,” European Journal of Operational Research, 98, pp.250–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. For detailed discussions see the references cited in Brockett et al. (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  6. In response to this trend, Barr, Seiford, and Siems with the federal Reserve Bank of Dallas developed a bank failure prediction model based on DEA which outperforms all other failure prediction models in the banking literature. See R.S. Barr, L.M. Seiford and T.F. Siems (1994) “Forcasting Bank Failure: A Non-Parametric Frontier Estimation Approach,” Recherches Economiques de Louvain 60, pp.417–429 and R.S. Barr, L.M. Seiford and T.F. Siems (1993) “An Envelopment-Analysis Approach to Measuring the Managerial Efficiency of Banks,” Annals of Operations Research, 45, pp. 1–19 for details.

    Google Scholar 

  7. R.M. Nun (1989) “Bank Failure: The Management Factor” (Austin, TX., Texas Department of Banking).

    Google Scholar 

  8. See A. Ben Israel and T.N. Greville, Generalized Inverses (New York, John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1974).

    Google Scholar 

  9. K. Tone (1999) “A Consensus Making Method for Group Decisions,” Proposal at the Committee Meeting, National Land Agency, Japan, (Feb. 2, 1999). The views expressed in this proposal are solely those of Tone and are not necessarily indicative of those of the Committee.

    Google Scholar 

  10. See T.L. Saaty, Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  11. See K. Tone (1989) “A Comparative Study on AHP and DEA,” International Journal on Policy and Information, 13, pp.57–63.

    Google Scholar 

  12. R.G. Thompson, L.N Langemeir, C. Lee, E. Lee and R.M. Thrall (1990) “The Role of Multiplier Bounds in Efficiency Analysis with Application to Kansas Farming,” Journal of Econometrics, 46, pp.93–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Y. Roll and B. Golany (1993) “Alternate Methods of Treating Factor Weights in DEA,” OMEGA, 21, pp.99–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. R.G. Dyson and E. Thanassoulis (1988) “Reducing Weight Flexibility in Data Envelopment Analysis,” Journal of the Operational Research Socity, 39, pp.563–576.

    Google Scholar 

  15. A.D. Athanassopoulos and J.E. Storbeck (1995) “Non-Parametric Models for Spatial Efficiency,” The Journal of Productivity Analysis, 6, pp.225–245.

    Google Scholar 

  16. A. Desai, K. Haynes and J.E. Storbeck “A Spatial Efficiency Framework for the Support of Locational Decisions,” in Data Envelopment Analysis: Theory, Methodology, and Applications, A. Charnes, W. W. Cooper, Arie Y. Lewin, and Lawrence M. Seiford (editors), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  17. D.B. Sun (1988) “Evaluation of Managerial Performance in Large Commercial Banks by Data Envelopment Analysis,” Ph.D. dissertation, Graduate School of Business, University of Texas, Austin, TX.

    Google Scholar 

  18. A. Charnes, W.W. Cooper, Q.L. Wei and Z.M. Huang (1989) “Cone Ratio Data Envelopment Analysis and Multi-objective Programming,” International Journal of Systems Science, 20, pp.1099–1118.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. K. Tone (1999) “On Returns to Scale under Weight Restrictions in Data Envelopment Analysis,” Research Report Series I-99-0003, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Kluwer Academic Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

(2002). Models with Restricted Multipliers. In: Data Envelopment Analysis. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47541-3_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47541-3_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-7923-8693-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-306-47541-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation