Skip to main content
Log in

Lower Bound Restrictions on Intensities in Data Envelopment Analysis

  • Published:
Journal of Productivity Analysis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We propose an extension to the basic DEA models that guarantees that if an intensity is positive then it must be at least as large as a pre-defined lower bound. This requirement adds an integer programming constraint known within Operations Research as a Fixed-Charge (FC) type of constraint. Accordingly, we term the new model DEA_FC. The proposed model lies between the DEA models that allow units to be scaled arbitrarily low, and the Free Disposal Hull model that allows no scaling. We analyze 18 datasets from the literature to demonstrate that sufficiently low intensities—those for which the scaled Decision-Making Unit (DMU) has inputs and outputs that lie below the minimum values observed—are pervasive, and that the new model ensures fairer comparisons without sacrificing the required discriminating power. We explain why the “low-intensity” phenomenon exists. In sharp contrast to standard DEA models we demonstrate via examples that an inefficient DMU may play a pivotal role in determining the technology. We also propose a goal programming model that determines how deviations from the lower bounds affect efficiency, which we term the trade-off between the deviation gap and the efficiency gap.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baker, R. C. and S. Talluri. (1997). “A Closer Look at the Use of Data Envelopment Analysis for Technology Selection.” Computers & Industrial Engineering 32(1), 101-108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banker, R. D., A. Charnes and W. W. Cooper. (1984). “Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis.” Management Science 30(9), 1078-1092.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banker, R. D. and R. C. Morey. (1986). “The Use of Categorical Variables in Data Envelopment Analysis.” Management Science 32(12), 1613-1627.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrnes, P., R. Färe and S. Grosskopf. (1984). “Measuring Productive Efficiency: An Application to Illinois Strip Mines.” Management Science 30(6), 671-681.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A. and W. W. Cooper. (1980). “Auditing and Accounting for Program Efficiency in Non-for-Profit Entities.” Accounting Organizations and Society 5(1), 87-107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., W. W. Cooper, B. Golany, L. M. Seiford and J. Stutz. (1985). “Foundations of Data Envelopment Analysis for Pareto-Koopmans Efficient Empirical Production Functions.” Journal of Econometrics 30, 91-107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., W. W. Cooper and S. Li. (1989). “Using Data Envelopment Analysis to Evaluate Efficiency in Economic Performance of Chinese Cities.” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 23(6), 325-344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., W. W. Cooper and E. Rhodes. (1978). “Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units.” European Journal of Operational Research, 429-444.

  • Charnes, A., W. W. Cooper, A. R. Lewin and L. M. Seiford. (1995). Data Envelopment Analysis: Theory, Methodology and Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Chilingerian, J. A. (1995). “Exploring Why Some Physicians' Hospital Practices Are More Efficient: Taking the DEA Inside the Hospital.” In A. Charnes, W. W. Cooper, A. R. Lewin and L. M. Seiford (eds.), Data Envelopment Analysis: Theory, Methodology and Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 167-194.

  • Cook, W., Y. Roll and A. Kazakov. (1990). “A DEA Model for Measuring the Relative Efficiency of Highway Maintenance Patrols.” INFOR 28(2), 113-124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crino, J. R., R. A. Maurer and F. Grange. (1996). “A DEA Evaluation of US Army Infantry Training Efficiency.” Working Paper, Golden, CO: Colorado School of Mines.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyson, R. G. and E. Thanassoulis. (1988). “Reducing Weight Flexibility in Data Envelopment Analysis.” Journal Operational Research Society 39(6), 563-576.

    Google Scholar 

  • First, Z., S. T. Hackman and U. Passy. (1993). “Efficiency Estimation and Duality Theory for Non-Convex Technologies.” Journal of Mathematical Economics 22, 295-307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazelle, E. H. and S. T. Hackman. “The Warehouse Performance Index: A Single Point Metric for Benchmarking Warehouse Performance.” Material Handling Research Center Technical Report TR-93-14, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.

  • Giokas, D. (1991). “A Bank Branch and Bound Efficiency: A Comparative Application of DEA and the Log-linear Model.” Omega 19(6), 549-557.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golany, B. and S. Thore. (1997). “Restricted Best Practice Selection in DEA: An Overview with a Case Study Evaluating the Socio-Economic Performance of Nations.” Annals of Operations Research 73, 117-140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hackman, S. T. and U. Passy. (1988). “Projectively-Convex Sets and Functions.” Journal of Mathematical Economics 17, 51-60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hackman, S. T., E. H. Frazelle, P. M. Griffin, S. O. Griffin and D. A. Vlatsa. (2001). “Benchmarking Warehousing and Distribution Operations: An Input-Output Approach.” Journal of Productivity Analysis 16(1), 79-100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersen, N. C. (1990). “Data Envelopment Analysis on a Relaxed Set of Assumptions.” Management Science 36(3), 305-314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roll, Y., W. Cook and B. Golany. (1991). “Factor Weights in Data Envelopment Analysis.” IIE Transactions 23(1), 2-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seiford, L. M. (1995). “A DEA Bibliography.” In A. Charnes, W. W. Cooper, A. R. Lewin and L. M. Seiford (eds.), Data Envelopment Analysis: Theory, Methodology and Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 437-471.

  • Seiford, L. M. and R. M. Thrall. (1990). “Recent Developments in DEA.” Journal of Econometrics 46, 7-38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shephard, R. W. (1970). “Theory of Cost and Production Functions.” Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinuany-Stern, Z., A. Mehrez and A. Barboy. (1994). “Academic Departments Efficiency via DEA.” Computers & Operations Research 21(5), 543-556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sueyoshi, T. (1992). “Measuring the Industrial Performance of Chinese Cities by Data Envelopment Analysis.” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 26(2), 75-88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sueyoshi, T. (1997). “Measuring Efficiencies and Returns to Scale of Nippon Telegraph & Telephone in Production and Cost Analysis.” Management Science 43(6), 779-798.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thore, S. (1996). “Economies of Scale in the US Computer Industry: An Empirical Investigation Using Data Envelopment Analysis.” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 6, 199-216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tulkens, H. (1993). “ON FDH Efficiency Analysis: Some Methodological Issues and Applications to Retail Banking, Courts and Urban Transit.” Journal of Productivity Analysis 4(1/2), 183-210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vlatsa, D. A. (1995). “Data Envelopment Analysis with Intensity Restrictions.” Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, September.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bouhnik, S., Golany, B., Passy, U. et al. Lower Bound Restrictions on Intensities in Data Envelopment Analysis. Journal of Productivity Analysis 16, 241–261 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012510605812

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012510605812

Navigation