Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

DEA based yardstick competition in natural resource management

  • Chapter
Recent Accomplishments in Applied Forest Economics Research

Part of the book series: Forestry Sciences ((FOSC,volume 74))

Abstract

In this paper, we discuss the pros and cons of using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to evaluate and enhance the efficiency of natural resource management. The need for a multidimensional production frontier approach is sketched, along with examples from other regulated multi-output industries. Also, reviews of the basic properties of DEA and DEA based yardstick competition are provided. Finally, we discuss the use of DEA based yardstick to evaluate bids in multi-dimensional procurement auctions.

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

Access this chapter

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 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  • Agrell, P., and Bogetoft. P. 2001. Should Health Regulators Use DEA? In Fidalgo, E.G. et al. (eds,), Coordination e Incentivos en Sanidad, Asociasion de Economia de la Salud, Barcelona, 2001. pp 133–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrell, P., Bogetoft, P., and Tind, J. 2002a. Dynamic DEA Yardsticks in Scandinavian Electricity Distribution. under revision for Journal of Productivity Analysis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agreli., P., Bogetoft, P., and Tind, J. 2002b. Incentive Plans for Productive Efficiency, Innovation and Learning. International Journal of Production Economics, 78: 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ali, A.I., Cook, W.D., and Seiford, L.M. 1991. Strict vs. Weak Ordinal Relations for Multipliers in Data Envelopment Analysis. Management Science, 37: 733–738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baneth, M.H. 1995. Auctions as A Means for Creating A Market for Environmental Services in The Countryside. In Gjolberg, O. (ed.)., Agricultural Policy and The Countryside. pp 106–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banker, R.D. 1980. A Game Theoretic Approach to Measuring Efficiency. European Journal of Operational Research, 5: 262–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banker, R.D. 1984. Estimating Most Productive Scale Size Using Data Envelopment Analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 17: 35–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banker, R.D., Charnes, A., and Cooper, W.W. 1984. Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis. Management Science, 30: 1078–1092.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banker, R.D., Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., and Clarke, R. 1989. Constrained Game Formulations and Interpretations for Data Envelopment Analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 40: 299–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumol, W.J., and Oates, W.E. 1988. The theory of environmental policy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft, P. 1990. Strategic Responses to DEA-Control - A Game Theoretical Analysis. WP, DASY, Copenhagen Business School. ppl-38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft, P. 1994. Incentive Efficient Production Frontiers: An Agency Perspective on DEA. Management Science, 40: 959–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft, P. 1994a. Non-Cooperative Planning Theory. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft, P. 1995. Incentives and Productivity Measurements. International Journal of Production Economics, 39: 67–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft, P. 1997. DEA-Based Yardstick Competition: The Optimality of Best Practice Regulation. Annals of Operations Research, 73: 277–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft, P. 2000. DEA and Activity Planning under Asymmetric Information. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 13: 7–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft, P., and Olsen, H.B. 2002. Design of Production Contracts: Lessons from Theory and Danish Agriculture. Book Manuscript, Royal Agricultural University, Denmark.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogetoft, P., and Pruzan, P. 1991. Planning with Multiple Criteria. North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowlin, W.F. 1997. A Proposal for Designing Employment Contracts for Government Managers. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 31: 205–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, R.G. 1997. Information, Incentives and the design of agricultural policies. In Handbook of Agricultural Economics. By B. L. Gardner and G. C. Rausser. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., and Rhodes, E. 1978. Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2: 429–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., and Rhodes, E. 1979. Short Communication: Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units. European Journal of Operational Research, 3: 339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W., Lewin, A.Y., and Seiford, L.M. 1994. Data Envelopment Analysis: Theory, Methodology and Application. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Che, Y.-K. 1993. Design of Competition through Multidimensional Auctions. Rand Journal of Economics, 24: 668–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coelli, T., Prasada, D.S., and Battese, G. 1998. An Introduction to Efficiency and Productivity Analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, W.W., Seiford, L.M., and Tone, K. 2000. Data Envelopment Analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crew, M.A., and Frierman, M.R. 1991. Information Economics and New Forms of Regulation. In M.A.Crew(ed.), “Competition and Regulation of Utilities”, Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp 157–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalen, D.M. 1996. Strategic Responses to Relative Evaluation of Bureaus: Implication for Bureaucratic Slack. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 7: 29–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalen, D.M., and Gomez-Lobo, A. 1997. Estimating Cost Functions in Regulated Industries under Asymmetric Information. European Economic Review, 31: 935–942.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalen, D.M., and Gomez-Lobo, A. 2000. Yardstick on the Road: Regulatory Contracts and Cost Efficiency in the Norwegian Bus Industry. WP, Norwegian School of Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deprins, D., Simar, D., and Tulkens, H. 1984. Measuring Labor Efficiency in Post Offices. In M. Marchand, P. Pestieau, and H. Tulkens, (eds.) “The Performance of Public Enterprises: Concepts and Measurements”, North Holland. pp 243–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, M.J. 1957. The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, III: 253–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golany, B. 1988a. An Interactive MOLP Procedure for Extension of DEA to Effectiveness Analysis. Journal of Operational Research Society, 39: 725–734.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golany, B. 1988b. A Note on Including Ordinal Relations Among Multipliers in Data Envelopment Analysis. Management Science, 34: 1029–1033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halme, M., Joro, T., Korhonen, P., Salo, S., and Wallenius, J. 1999. A Value Efficiency Approach to Incorporating Preference Information in Data Envelopment Analysis. Management Science, 45: 103–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanley, N., Siiogren, J.F., and White, B. 1997. Environmental economics in theory and practice. Macmillan Press Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmstrom, B. 1982. Moral Hazard in Teams. Bell Journal of Economics, 13: 324–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joro, T., Korhonen, P., and Wallenius, J. 1998. Structural Comparison of Data Envelopment Analysis and Multiple Objective Linear Programming. Management Science, 44: 962–970.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klemperer, P. 1999. Auction Theory. A Guide to The Literature. Journal of Economic Surveys, 13: 227–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laffont,.J.J. 1994. The New Economics of Regulation Ten Years After. Econometrica, 62: 507537.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laffont, J.J., and Tirole, J. 1987. Auctioning Incentive Contracts. Journal of Political Economy, 95: 921–937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laffont, J.J., and Tirole, J. 1993. A Theory of Incentives in Procurement and Regulation. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latacz-Lohmann, U., and van der Hamsvoort, C.P.C.M. 1997. Auctioning Conservation Contracts: A Theoretical Analysis and an Application. American Journal Agricultural Economics, 79: 407–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latacz-Lohmann, U., and van der Hamsvoort, C.P.C.M. 1998. Auctions as a Means for Public Goods from Agriculture. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 49: 334–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maskin, E., and Riley, J. 2000. Asymmetric Auctions. Review of Economic Studies, 67: 413–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maskin, E.S.. and Riley. J.G. 1984. Optimal Auctions with Risk Averse Buyers. Econometrica,52:1473–151g.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mcaffee, R.P., and Mcmillan, J. 1987. Auctions and Bidding. Journal of Economic Literature, 25: 699–738.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myersqn, R.B. 1981. Optimal Auction. Design. Mathematics of Operations Research, 6: 58–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, H.B. 2002. Contract Production of Peas. Food Policy. (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Resende, M. 2001. Relative Efficiency Measurement and Prospects for Yardstick Competition in Brazilian Electricity Distribution. Energy Policy. (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Riley, J.G., and Samuelson, W.F. 1981. Optimal Auctions. American Journal of Economics, 71: 184–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, D., Froud, J., and Fraser, R.W. 1996. Participation in set aside: what determines the opting in price? Journal of Agricultural Economics, 47: 89–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheriff, G. 2001. Using Data Envelopment Analysis to Design Contracts under Asymmetric Information. ppl-17. WP, University of Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shleifer, A. 1985. A Theory of Yardstick Competition. Rand Journal of Economics, 16: 319–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shoemaker, R. 1989. Agricultural land values and rents under the Conservation Reserve Program. Land Economics, 65: 131–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simar, L., and Wilson. P. 2000. Statistical Inference in Nonparametric Frontier Models: The State of the Art. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 13: 49–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thanassoulis, E. 2000. DEA and its Use in the Regulation of Water Companies. European Journal of Operational Research, 127: 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vickrey, W. 1961. Counterspeculation, Auctions, and Competitive Sealed Tenders. The Journal of Finance, 16: 8–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vukina, T., Levy, A., and Marra, M. 2000. Auctions with environmental criteria: Evidence from the conservation programme. WP, North Carolina State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitby, M., Saunders, C., and Ray, C. 1998. The full cost of stewardship policies. In Dabbert S, A. Dubgaard, I. Slangen og M. Whitby (eds.), “The economics of landscape and wildlife conservation”, CAB International, Wallingford, UK. pp 97–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wunsch, P. 1995. Peer Comparison and Regulation: An Application to Urban Mass Transit Firms in Europe. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Economics, Université Catholique de Louvain. 182 pp.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Peter Bogetoft
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kurt Nielsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics and Natural Resources, The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Copenhagen, Denmark

    F. Helles , N. Strange  & L. Wichmann ,  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bogetoft, P., Nielsen, K. (2003). DEA based yardstick competition in natural resource management. In: Helles, F., Strange, N., Wichmann, L. (eds) Recent Accomplishments in Applied Forest Economics Research. Forestry Sciences, vol 74. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0279-9_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0279-9_9

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-6221-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-0279-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation