Advertisement

Sustainable Tourism and Agriculture Multifunctionality by PAR: A Variable Selection Approach

  • Armando B. MendesEmail author
  • Veska Noncheva
  • Emiliana Silva
Chapter
First Online:
  • 906 Downloads

Abstract

Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) is a popular non-parametric method used to measure efficiency. It uses linear programming to identify points on a convex hull defined by the inputs and outputs of the most efficient Decision Making Units (DMUs). Two critical elements account for the strength of the DEA approach: (1) no a priori structure is placed on the production process of the firm, and (2) the models can yield a measure of efficiency even with a very small number of data points. The first point is particularly important because the measure of efficiency is based upon the best practice of the DMUs at any of the levels of output observed.

Data envelopment analysis measures efficiency and is very sensitive to the choice of variables for two reasons: the number of efficient DMUs is directly related to the number of variables, and the selection of the variables greatly affects the measure of efficiency when the number of DMUs is few and/or when the number of explanatory variables needed to compute the measure of efficiency is too large. Our approach advises which variables should be included in a DEA model. Hence, a variable selection method is presented for the deterministic DEA approach. First, a definition of different measures of efficiency and the various DEA models used to measure efficiency is provided, and then a variable selection method is proposed. The Azorean agricultural system is used as an example to illustrate the method.

Keywords

Data envelopment analysis Productivity analysis with R Canonical correlation analysis Variable selection 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work has been partially supported by Direcção Regional da Ciência e Tecnologia of Azores Government through the project M.2.1.2/l/009/2008.

References

  1. Alpert M, Peterson R (1972) On the interpretation of canonical analysis. J Mark Res 30:29–50Google Scholar
  2. Banker R (1996) Hypothesis tests using data envelopment analysis. J Product Anal 7(2–3):139–159Google Scholar
  3. Banker R, Charnes R, Cooper W (1984a) Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manag Sci 30:1078–1092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Banker R, Charnes R, Cooper WW (1984b) Equivalence and interpretation of alternative methods for determining returns to scales in data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 89:473–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barcikowski R, Stevens J (1975) A Monte Carlo study of the stability of canonical correlations, canonical weights, and canonical variate-variable correlations. Multivar Behav Res 10:353–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bauernfeind U, Mitsche N (2008) The application of the data envelopment analysis for tourism website evaluation. Inf Technol Tour 10(13):245–257Google Scholar
  7. Berger A, Humphrey D (1997) Efficiency of financial institutions: international survey and directions for future research. Eur J Oper Res 98:175–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boussofiane A, Dyson RG, Thanassoulis E (1991) Applied data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 52:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brockett PL, Golany B (1996) Using rank statistics for determining programmatic efficiency differences in data envelopment analysis. Manag Sci 42(3):466–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Charnes A, Cooper WW (1985) Foundations of data envelopment analysis for Pareto-Koopmans efficient empirical production functions. J Econ 30(1/2):91–107Google Scholar
  11. Charnes A, Cooper W, Rhodes E (1978) Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units. Eur J Oper Res 2:429–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chiang WE, Tsai M-H, Wang LS-M (2004) A DEA evaluation of Taipei hotels. Annal Tour Resear 31(3):712–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chilingerian J (1995) Evaluating physician efficiency in hospitals: a multivariate analysis of best practices. Eur J Oper Res 80:548–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cloutier L, Rowley R (1993) Relative technical efficiency: data envelopment analysis and Quebec’s dairy farms. Can J Agric Econ 41:169–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cooper W, Seiford L, Tone K (2007) Data envelopment analysis: a comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Diaz-Martinez Z, Fernandez-Menendez J (2008) The DEA package, Version 0.1–2, Retrived from http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/DEA/DEA.pdf
  17. Färe R, Grosskopf S, Lovell C (1988) Scale elasticity and scale efficiency. J Inst Theor Econ 144:721–729Google Scholar
  18. Fraser I, Cordina D (1999) An application of data envelopment analysis to irrigated dairy farms in northern Victoria, Australia. Agric Syst 59:267–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gifi A (1990) Nonlinear multivariate analysis. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  20. Gimenez-Garcia VM, Martínez-Parra JL, Frank P (2007) Improving resource utilization in multi-unit networked organizations: the case of a Spanish restaurant chain. Tour Manag 28:262–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Golany B, Roll Y (1989) An application procedure for DEA. Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, IsraelGoogle Scholar
  22. Hallam D, Machado F (1996) Efficiency analysis with panel data – a study of Portuguese dairy farms. Eur Rev Agric Resou Econ 23(1):79–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hughes A, Yaisawarng S (2004) Sensitivity and dimensionality tests of DEA efficiency scores. Eur J Oper Res 154:419–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jaforullah M, Whiteman J (1999) Scale efficiency in the New Zealand dairy industry: a non-parametric approach. Aust J Agric Resour Econ 43(4):523–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jenkins L, Anderson M (2003) A multivariate statistical approach to reducing the number of variables in data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 147:51–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Levine M (1977) Canonical analysis and factor comparison, vol 6, Quantitative applications in the social sciences series. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  27. Lewin A, Morey R, Cook T (1982) Evaluating the administrative efficiency of courts. Omega 10(4):401–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lovell C (1993) Production frontier and productive efficiency. In: Fried HO, Lovell CAK, Schmidt SS (eds) The measurement of productive efficiency-techniques and applications. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 3–67Google Scholar
  29. Marianna S, David A, Peter J, Andrew L (2004) ICT paradox lost? A stepwise DEA methodology to evaluate technology investments in tourism settings. J Trav Resear 43(2):180–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Marote E, Silva E (2002) Análise Dinâmica da Eficiência das Explorações Leiteiras da Ilha Terceira. XII Congresso de Zootecnia. NovemberGoogle Scholar
  31. Marote E, Silva E (2011) Importância dos Subsídios na Eficiência das Explorações Leiteiras da Terceira. Revista de Ciências Agrárias, pp 161–170Google Scholar
  32. Noncheva V, Mendes A, Silva E (2009) An approach to variable aggregation in efficiency analysis. In: Classification, forecasting, data mining, international book series information science & computing. Suppl Int J Inf Technol Knowl 3(8):97–104Google Scholar
  33. Noncheva V, Mendes A, Silva E (2012) Azorean agriculture efficiency by PAR. In: Mendes A, Silva E, Santos J (eds) Efficiency measures in the agricultural sector, with applications. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 53–72Google Scholar
  34. Norman M, Stoker B (1991) Data envelopment analysis: the assessment of performance. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  35. Nunamaker T (1985) Using data envelopment analysis to measure the efficiency of non-profit organizations: a critical evaluation. Manag Decis Econ 6(1):50–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. OECD – Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (2001) Environmental indicators for agriculture methods and results. Executive summary. Retrived from http://www.oecd.org/greengrowth/sustainableagriculture/1916629.pdf.
  37. Pastor JT, Ruiz I-S (2002) A statistical test for nested radial DEA models. Oper Res 50(4):728–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rodriguez M, Gómez E, Lorente J (2004) Rural multifunctionality in Europe. The concepts and policies. 90th AEEA SeminarGoogle Scholar
  39. Salinas-Jimenez J, Smith P (1996) Data envelopment analysis applied to quality in primary health care. Ann Oper Res 67:141–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sigala M, Airey D, Jones P, Lockwood A (2004) ICT paradox lost? A stepwise DEA methodology to evaluate technology investments in tourism settings. J Travel Res 43:180–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Silva E, Santos C (2007) Eficiência nos Sistemas de Produção Pecuária nos Açores. APDEA Congress, Vila RealGoogle Scholar
  42. Silva E, Arzubi A, Berbel J (1996) An application of data envelopment analysis (DEA) in Azores dairy farms. New Medit 3:39–43Google Scholar
  43. Silva E, Arzubi A, Berbel J (2004) An application of data envelopment analysis (DEA) in Azores dairy farms. New Medit 3:39–43Google Scholar
  44. Simar L (1996) Aspects of statistical analyses in DEA-type frontier models. J Product Anal 7:177–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Simar L, Wilson P (2008) Statistical interference in nonparametric frontier models: recent developments and perspectives. In: Fried H, Lovell CAK, Schmidt S (eds) The measurement of productive efficiency and productivity change. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  46. SREA (2007a) Estudo sobre os Turistas que visitam os Açores. 2005 – 2006. Região Autónoma dos Açores/ed. Serviço Regional de Estatística dos AçoresGoogle Scholar
  47. SREA (2007b) Anuário Estatístico dos Açores, 2007. Região Autónoma dos Açores/ed. Serviço Regional de Estatística dos AçoresGoogle Scholar
  48. Stevens J (1986) Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Erlbaum, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  49. Suhariyanto K (1999) Productivity growth efficiency and technical changes in Asian agriculture: a Malmquist index analysis. PhD thesis, University of ReadingGoogle Scholar
  50. Sungsoo P (2007) DEA application for the tourist satisfaction management. Tour Anal 12:201–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Valdmanis V (1992) Sensitivity analysis for DEA model: an empirical example using public vs. NEP hospitals. J Public Econ 48:185–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Venâncio F, Silva E (2004) A Eficiência de Exploração Agro-pecuárias dos Açores: uma abordagem paramétrica. XIV Jornadas Luso Espanholas de Gestão CientíficaGoogle Scholar
  53. Wilson PW (2005) FEAR 1.0: a software package for frontier efficiency analysis with R, Retrieved from http://business.clemson.edu/Economic/faculty/wilson/courses/bcn/papers/fear.pdf

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Armando B. Mendes
    • 1
    Email author
  • Veska Noncheva
    • 2
  • Emiliana Silva
    • 3
  1. 1.CEEAplA, Departamento de MatemáticaUniversidade dos AçoresPonta Delgada, AçoresPortugal
  2. 2.CEEAplA, Faculty of Mathematics and InformaticsUniversity of PlovdivPlovdivBulgaria
  3. 3.CEEAplA, Departamento de Ciências AgráriasUniversidade dos AçoresAngra do Heroísmo, AçoresPortugal

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options