Performance Assessment in the Public Sector

  • C. A. Knox Lovell
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Productivity and Efficiency book series (SIPE, volume 1)

Abstract

Economists, management scientists and public administration scholars have long been interested in the assessment of the performance of the public sector, and in the identification of the likely determinants of performance variation, both across jurisdictions and through time. Their interest is well placed, and motivated by a number of factors.

Keywords

Public Sector Performance Assessment Shadow Prex Data Constraint Resource Price 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alchian, A. A. (1965), “Some Economics of Property Rights,” Ll Politico 30:4 (December), 21–37.Google Scholar
  2. Bogetoft, P. (2000), “DEA and Activity Planning Under Asymmetric Information,” Journal of Productivity Analysis 13:1 (February), 7–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bös, D. (1991), Privatization: A Theoretical Treatment. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bureau of Industry Economics (1995), Overview 1995. International Benchmarking. Canberra: AGPS.Google Scholar
  5. Caves, D. W., L. R. Christensen and J. A. Swanson (1980), “Productivity in U.S. Railroads, 1951–1974,” Bell Journal of Economics 11: I (Spring), 166–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Coelli, T. (2001), “A Comparison of Alternative Productivity Growth Measures: With Application to Electricity Generation,” this volume.Google Scholar
  7. de Alessi, L. (1969), “Implications of Property Rights for Government Investment Decisions,” American Economic Review 59:1 (March), 13–24.Google Scholar
  8. Diewert, W. E., and D. A. Lawrence (2001), “The Deadweight Costs of Capital Taxation in Australia,” this volume.Google Scholar
  9. Eriandsen, E., and F. R. Førsund (2001), “Efficiency in the Provision of Municipal Nursing-and Home-Care Services,” this volume.Google Scholar
  10. Färe, R., S. Grosskopf and C. A. K. Lovell (1988), “An Indirect Efficiency Approach to the Evaluation of Producer Performance,” Journal of Public Economics 37:1 (October), 71–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Färe, R., S. Grosskopf and P. Roos (2001), “Integrating Consumer Satisfaction into Productivity Indexes,” this volume.Google Scholar
  12. Fox, K. J. (1999), “Efficiency at Different Levels of Aggregation: Public vs. Private Sector Firms,” Economics Letters 65:2, 173–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fried, H. O., C. A. K. Lovell and S. S. Schmidt, eds. (1993), The Measurement of Productive Efficiency: Techniques and Applications. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Grafton, R. Q., and D. Squires (2001), “A Property-Rights Perspective on Efficiency: Privatising the Commons,” this volume.Google Scholar
  15. Griliches, Z. (1994), “Productivity, R&D, and the Data Constraint,” American Economic Review 84:1 (March), 1–23.Google Scholar
  16. Grosskopf, S., D. Margaritas and V. Valdmanis (1995), “Estimating Output Substitutability of Hospital Services: A Distance Function Approach,” European Journal of Operational Research 80:3 (February 2), 575–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Grosskopf, S., K. J. Hayes, L. L. Taylor and W. L. Weber (1997), “Budget-Constrained Frontier Measures of Fiscal Equality and Efficiency in Schooling,” Review of Economics and Statistics 79:1 (February), 116–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Han, S.-H., and A. Hughes (1999), “Profit Composition Analysis: A Technique for Linking Productivity Measurement and Financial Performance,” Working Paper TWP 99–4, New South Wales Treasury, Governor Macquarie Tower, I Farrer Place, Sydney NSW 2000, Australia.Google Scholar
  19. Hicks, J. R. (1935), “The Theory of Monopoly: A Survey,” Econometrica 3:1 (January), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hirschman, A. 0. (1970), Exit, Voice and Loyalty; Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations and States. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal of New South Wales (1998), Benchmarking Local Government Performance in New South Wales. Sydney: IPART.Google Scholar
  22. King, S., and R. Pitchford (1998), “Privatisation in Australia: Understanding the Incentives in Public and Private Firms,” Australian Economic Review 31:4 (December), 313–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lawrence, D. (1998), “Discussion,” in Microeconomic Reform and Productivity Growth. Canberra: Ausinfo.Google Scholar
  24. Lindsay, C. M. (1976), “A Theory of Government Enterprise,” Journal of Political Economy 84:5, 1061–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McCarty, T., and S. Yaisawarng (1993), “Technical Efficiency in New Jersey School Districts,” in H. O. Fried, C. A. K. Lovell and S. S. Schmidt, eds., The Measurement of Productive Efficiency; Techniques and Applications. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Mintzberg, H. (1996), “Managing Government, Governing Management,” Harvard Business Review (May/June), 75–83.Google Scholar
  27. Morrison Paul, C. J. (2001), “Productive Structure and Efficiency of Public Hospitals,” this volume.Google Scholar
  28. Niskanen, W. A. (1971), Bureaucracy and Representative Government Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  29. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (1997), Historical Statistics, Part II, Analytical Tables. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  30. Orzechowski, W. (1977), “Economic Models of Bureaucracy: Survey, Extensions and Evidence,” in T. E. Borcherding, ed., Budgets and Bureaucrats: The Sources of Government Growth. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Otto, G., and G. Voss (1994), “Public Capital and Private Sector Productivity,” Economic Record 70:209 (June), 121–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pestieau, P., and H. Tulkens (1993), “Assessing and Explaining the Performance of Public Enterprises,” Finanz Archiv 50:3, 293–323.Google Scholar
  33. Productivity Commission (1998), Annual Report 1997–98. Canberra: Ausinfo.Google Scholar
  34. Quiggin, J. (2001), “Why Have the Returns to Microeconomic Reform Been So Disappointing?,” this volume.Google Scholar
  35. Rees, R. (1984), Public Enterprise Economics, Second Edition. London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson.Google Scholar
  36. Roos, P. (2001), “Measurement of Output and Productivity of Hospital Services,” this volume.Google Scholar
  37. Searle, A. D., and C. A. Waite (1980), “Current Efforts to Measure Productivity in the Public Sector: How Adequate for the National Accounts?,” in J. W. Kendrick and B. N. Vaccara, eds., New Developments in Productivity Measurement and Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  38. Smith, P., and D. Mayston (1987), “Measuring Efficiency in the Public Sector,” Omega 15:3,181–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Steering Committee for the Review of Commonwealth/State Service Provision (1997), Data Envelopment Analysis: A Technique for Measuring the Efficiency of Government Service Delivery. Canberra: AGPS.Google Scholar
  40. Steering Committee on National Performance Monitoring of Government Trading Enterprises (various years), Government Trading Enterprises Performance Indicators. Canberra: AGPS.Google Scholar
  41. Stigler, G. J. (1965), “The Economist and the State,” American Economic Review 55:1 (March), 1–18.Google Scholar
  42. Tulkens, H. (1992), “Economics and the Performance of the Public Sector,” Annales de I’Economie Publique Sociale et Coopérative 63:3, 373–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Vanden Eeckaut, P., H. Tulkens and M.-A. Jamar (1993), “Cost Efficiency in Belgian Municipalities,” in H. O. Fried, C. A. K. Lovell and S. S. Schmidt, eds., The Measurement of Productive Efficiency; Techniques and Applications. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Waters, W. G. II, and J. Street (1998), “Monitoring the Performance of Government Trading Enterprises,” Australian Economic Review 31:4 (December), 357–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Williamson, O. E. (1964), The Economics of Discretionary Behavior. Managerial Objectives in a Theory of the Finn. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  46. Yaisawarng, S. (2001), “Performance Measurement and Resource Allocation,” this volume.Google Scholar
  47. Zeitsch, J., D. Lawrence and J. Salerian (1994), “Comparing Like with Like in Productivity Studies: Apples, Oranges and Electricity,” Economic Record 70:209 (June), 162–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. A. Knox Lovell
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Economics, Terry College of BusinessUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations