Request a copy

Full Text

See more details

News (1)

Mendeley (13)

13

CITATIONS

13 Total citations

8 Recent citations

5.62 Field Citation Ratio

n/a Relative Citation Ratio

publications

0

supporting

0

mentioning

0

contrasting

0

Smart Citations

0

0

0

0

Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting

View Citations

See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

• Abbott, M. (2006). The productivity and efficiency of the Australian electricity supply industry. Energy Economics, 28, 444–454.
• Afriat, S. (1972). Efficiency estimation of production functions. International Economic Review, 13, 568–598.
• Afsharian, M., Ahn, H., & Alirezaee, M. (2015). Developing selective proportionality on the FDH models: New insight on the proportionality axiom. International Journal of Information and Decision Sciences, 7, 99–114.
• Agrell, P. J., Bogetoft, P., Brock, M., & Tind, J. (2005). Efficiency evaluation with convex pairs. Advanced Modeling and Optimization, 7, 211–237.
• Alirezaee, M., Hajinezhad, E., & Paradi, J. C. (2018). Objective identification of technological returns to scale for data envelopment analysis models. European Journal of Operational Research, 266, 678–688.
• Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale efficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30, 1078–1092.
• Banker, R. D., Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., Thrall, R. M., & Zhu, J. (2004). Returns to scale in different DEA models. European Journal of Operational Research, 154, 345–362.
• Banker, R. D., Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Zhu, J. (2011). Returns to Scale in DEA. In W. Cooper, L. Seiford, & J. Zhu (Eds.), Handbook on data envelopment analysis. International series in operations research & management science (Vol. 164). Boston, MA: Springer.
• Bi, G., Luo, Y., Ding, J., & Liang, L. (2015). Environmental performance analysis of Chinese industry from a slacks-based perspective. Annals Of Operations Research, 228, 65–80.
• Bogetoft, P. (1996). DEA on relaxed convexity assumptions. Management Science, 42, 457–465.
• Bogetoft, P., Tama, J. M., & Tind, J. (2000). Convex input and output projections of nonconvex production possibility sets. Management Science, 46, 858–869.
• Briec, W., Kerstens, K., & Vanden, Eeckaut P. (2004). Non-convex technologies and cost functions: Definitions, duality and nonparametric tests of convexity. Journal of Economics, 81, 155–192.
• Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429–444.
• Chen, C.-M. (2014). Evaluating eco-efficiency with data envelopment analysis: An analytical reexamination. Annals of Operations Research, 214, 49–71.
• Cherchye, L., De Rock, B., Dierynck, B., Roodhooft, F., & Sabbe, J. (2013). Opening the black box of efficiency measurement: Input allocation in multi-output settings. Operations Research, 61, 1148–1165.
• Cherchye, L., De Rock, B., & Walheer, B. (2015). Multi-output efficiency with good and bad outputs. European Journal of Operational Research, 240, 872–881.
• Cherchye, L., De Rock, B., & Walheer, B. (2016). Multi-output profit efficiency and directional distance function. OMEGA, 61, 100–109.
• Chung, Y., Färe, R., & Grosskopf, S. (1997). Productivity and undesirable outputs: A directional distance function approach. Journal of Environmental Management, 51, 229–240.
• Cook, W. D., Du, J., & Zhu, J. (2017). Units invariant DEA when weight restrictions are present: Ecological performance of US electricity industry. Annals of Operations Research, 255, 323–346.
• Cook, W. D., & Seiford, L. M. (2009). Data envelopment analysis (DEA)-thirty years on. European Journal of Operational Research, 192, 1–17.
• Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Tone, K. (2007). Data envelopment analysis: A comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.
• Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Zhu, J. (2004). Handbook on data envelopment analysis (Vol. 2). New York: Springer.
• Dakpo, K. H., Jeanneaux, P., & Latruffe, L. (2016). Modelling pollution-generating technologies in performance benchmarking: Recent developments, limits and future prospects in the nonparametric framework. European Journal of Operational Research, 250, 347–359.
• Debreu, G. (1951). The coefficient of resource utilization. Econometrica, 19(3), 273–292.
• Dekker, D., & Post, T. (2001). A quasi-concave DEA model with an application for branch performance evaluation. European Journal of Operational Research, 132, 296–311.
• Despic, O., Despic, M., & Paradi, J. (2007). DEA-R: ratio-based comparative efficiency model, its mathematical relation to DEA and its use in applications. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 28, 33–44.
• Ding, J., Dong, W., Liang, L., & Zhu, J. (2017). Goal congruence analysis in multi-Division Organizations with shared resources based on data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 263, 961–973.
• Du, J., Cook, W. D., Liang, L., & Zhu, J. (2014). Fixed cost and resource allocation based on DEA cross-efficiency. European Journal of Operational Research, 235, 206–214.
• Ehrgott, M., & Tind, J. (2009). Column generation with free replicability in DEA. Omega, 37, 943–950.
• Färe, R., & Grosskopf, S. (2000). Network DEA. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 34, 35–49.
• Färe, R., & Grosskopf, S. (2003). Nonparametric productivity analysis with undesirable outputs: Comment. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 85, 1070–1074.
• Färe, R., & Grosskopf, S. (2004). Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation: Comment. European Journal of Operational Research, 157, 242–245.
• Färe, R., & Grosskopf, S. (2009). A comment on weak disposability in nonparametric production analysis. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 91, 535–538.
• Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., & Lovell, C. A. K. (1994). Production frontier. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., Lovell, C. A. K., & Pasurka, C. (1989). Multilateral productivity comparisons when some outputs are undesirable: A nonparametric approach. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 71, 90–98.
• Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., & Whittaker, G. (2007). Network DEA. In J. Zhu & W. Cook (Eds.), Modeling data irregularities and structural complexities in data envelopment analysis. New York: Springer.
• Färe, R., & Primont, D. (1995). Multi-output production and duality: theory and applications. Boston: Kluwer.
• Farrell, M. (1957). The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series 1, General, 120(Part, 3), 253–281.
• Forsund, F. R. (2018). Multi-equation modelling of desirable and undesirable outputs satisfying the materials balance. Empirical Economics, 54, 67–69.
• Fried, H., Lovell, C. A. K., & Schmidt, S. (2008). The measurement of productive efficiency and productivity change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Giannakis, D., Jamasb, T., & Pollitt, M. (2005). Benchmarking and incentive regulation of quality of service: An application to the UK electricity distribution networks. Energy Policy, 33, 2256–2271.
• Hailu, A. (2003). Nonparametric productivity analysis with undesirable outputs: Reply. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 85, 1075–1077.
• Hailu, A., & Veeman, T. S. (2001). Non-parametric productivity analysis with undesirable outputs: An application to the Canadian pulp and paper industry. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 83, 605–616.
• Hoff, A. (2007). Second stage DEA: Comparison of approaches for modeling the DEA score. European Journal of Operational Research, 181, 425–435.
• Izadikhah, M., & Saen, R. F. (2018, forthcoming). Assessing sustainability of supply chains by chance-constrained two-stage DEA model in the presence of undesirable factors. Computers & Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2017.10.002.
• Jamasb, T., & Pollitt, M. (2003). International benchmarking and regulation: An application to European electricity distribution utilities. Energy Policy, 31, 16091622.
• Korhonen, P. J., & Syrijanen, M. J. (2003). Evaluation of cost efficiency in finnish electricity distribution. Annals of Operations Research, 121, 105–122.
• Kulshreshtha, M., & Parikh, J. K. (2002). Study of efficiency and productivity growth in opencast and underground coal mining in India: A DEA analysis. Energy Economics, 24, 439–453.
• Kuosmanen, T. (2001). DEA with efficiency classification preserving conditional convexity. European Journal of Operational Research, 132, 326–342.
• Kuosmanen, T. (2003). Duality theory of non-convex technologies. European Journal of Operational Research, 20, 273–304.
• Kuosmanen, T. (2005). Weak disposability in nonparametric production analysis with undesirable outputs. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 87, 1077–1082.
• Kuosmanen, T., & Podinovski, V. (2009). Weak disposability in nonparametric production analysis: Reply to Färe and Grosskopf. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 91, 539–545.
• Li, Y. J., Yang, F., Liang, L., & Hua, Z. S. (2009). Allocating the fixed cost as a complement of other cost inputs: A DEA approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 197, 389–401.
• Liu, W., Meng, W., Li, X. X., & Zhang, D. Q. (2010). DEA models with undesirable inputs and outputs. Annals of Operations Research, 173, 177–194.
• Liu, W., Zhou, Z., Ma, C., Liu, D., & Shen, W. (2015). Two-stage DEA models with undesirable input-intermediate-outputs. Omega, 56, 74–87.
• Lozano, S., & Villa, G. (2010). Gradual technical and scale efficiency improvement in DEA. Annals of Operations Research, 173, 123–136.
• Maghbouli, M., Amirteimoori, A., & Kordrostami, S. (2014). Two-stage network structures with undesirable outputs: A DEA based approach. Measurement, 48, 109–118.
• McDonald, J. (2009). Using least squares and tobit in second stage DEA efficiency analyses. European Journal of Operational Research, 197, 792–798.
• Nehring, K., & Puppe, C. (2004). Modelling cost complementarities in terms of joint production. Journal of Economic Theory, 118, 252–264.
• Panzar, J. C., & Willig, R. D. (1977). Economies of scale in multi-output production. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 91, 481–493.
• Panzar, J. C., & Willig, R. D. (1981). Economies of scope. American Economic Review, 71(2), 268–272.
• Perez-Lopez, G., Prior, D., & Zafra-Gomez, J. L. (2018). Temporal scale efficiency in DEA panel data estimations. An application to the solid waste disposal service in Spain. Omega, 76, 18–27.
• Petersen, N. C. (1990). Data envelopment analysis on a relaxed set of assumptions. Management Science, 36, 305–314.
• Podinovski, V. V. (2004a). Bridging the gap between the constant and variable returns-to-scale models: Selective proportionality in data envelopment analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 55, 265–276.
• Podinovski, V. V. (2004b). On the linearization of reference technologies for testing returns to scale in FDH models. European Journal of Operational Research, 152(3), 800–802.
• Podinovski, V. V. (2004c). Local and global returns to scale in performance measurement. Journal of Operational Research Society, 55(2), 170–178.
• Podinovski, V. V. (2005). Selective convexity in DEA models. European Journal of Operational Research, 161, 552–563.
• Podinovski, V. V. (2009). Production technologies based on combined proportionality assumptions. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 32, 21–26.
• Podinovski, V. V. (2018). Returns to scale in convex production technologies. European Journal of Operational Research, 258, 970–982.
• Podinovski, V. V., & Husain, W. R. W. (2017). The hybrid returns-to-scale model and its extension by production trade-offs: An application to the efficiency assessment of public universities in Malaysia. Annals of Operations Research, 250, 65–84.
• Podinovski, V. V., Ismail, I., Bouzdine-Chameeva, T., & Wenjuan Zhang, W. J. (2014). Combining the assumptions of variable and constant returns to scale in the efficiency evaluation of secondary schools. European Journal of Operational Research, 239, 504–513.
• Podinovski, V. V., & Kuosmanen, T. (2011). Modelling weak disposability in data envelopment analysis under relaxed convexity assumptions. European Journal of Operational Research, 211, 577–585.
• Podinovski, V. V., Olesen, O. B., & Sarrico, S. C. (2018). Nonparametric production technologies with multiple component processes. Operations Research, 66, 282–300.
• Pombo, C., & Taborda, R. (2006). Performance and efficiency in Colombias power distribution system: Effects of the 1994 reform. Energy Economics, 28, 339–369.
• Reinhard, S., Lovell, C. A. K., & Thijssen, G. J. (2002). Analysis of Environmental Variation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 84, 1054–1065.
• Sahoo, B., & Tone, K. (2015). Scale elasticity in non-parametric DEA approach. In J. Zhu (Ed.), Data envelopment analysis. International series in operations research & management science (Vol. 221). Boston, MA: Springer.
• Salerian, J., & Chan, C. (2005). Restricting multiple-output multiple-input DEA models by disaggregating the output-input vector. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 24, 5–29.
• Sarkis, J., & Cordeiro, J. J. (2012). Ecological modernization in the electrical utility industry: An application of a bads-goods DEA model of ecological and technical efficiency. European Journal of Operational Research, 219, 386–395.
• Scheel, H. (2001). Undesirable outputs in efficiency valuations. European Journal of Operational Research, 142, 16–20.
• Seiford, L. M., & Zhu, J. (2002). Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation. European Journal of Operational Research, 132, 400–410.
• Shepard, R. W. (1970). Theory of cost and production functions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Silva, M. C. A. (2018). Output-specific inputs in DEA: An application to courts of justice in Portugal. Omega, 79, 43–53.
• Sueyoshi, T., & Goto, M. (2011). DEA approach for unified efficiency measurement: Assessment of Japanese fossil fuel power generation. Energy Economics, 33, 292–303.
• Sueyoshi, T., & Goto, M. (2012). DEA environmental assessment of coal fired power plants: Methodological comparison between radial and non-radial models. Energy Economics, 34, 1854–1863.
• Sueyoshi, T., & Goto, M. (2014). Environmental Sustainability development for supply chain management in U.S. petroleum industry by DEA environmental assessment. Energy Economics, 46, 360–374.
• Tone, K. (2011). On returns to scale under weight restrictions in data envelopment analysis. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 16, 31–47.
• Tone, K., & Sahoo, B. S. (2006). Re-examining scale elasticity in DEA. Annals of Operations Research, 145, 69–87.
• Tone, K., & Tsutsui, M. (2007). Decomposition of cost efficiency and its application to Japanese-US electric utility comparisons. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 41, 91–106.
• Tone, K., & Tsutsui, M. (2009). Network DEA: A slacks-based measure approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 197, 243–252.
• Tone, K., & Tsutsui, M. (2011). Applying an efficiency measure of desirable and undesirable outputs in DEA to U.S. electric utilities. Journal of Centrum Cathedra, 4(2), 236–249.
• Tulkens, H. (1993). On FDH analysis: Some methodological issues and applications to retail banking, courts, and urban transit. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 4, 183–210.
• Walheer, B. (2016a). A multi-sector nonparametric production-frontier analysis of the economic growth and the convergence of the European countries. Pacific Economic Review, 21(4), 498–524.
• Walheer, B. (2016b). Growth and convergence of the OECD countries: A multi-sector production-frontier approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 252, 665–675.
• Walheer, B. (2018a). Aggregation of metafrontier technology gap ratios: The case of European sectors in 1995–2015. European Journal of Operational Research, 269, 1013–1026.
• Walheer, B. (2018b). Cost Malmquist productivity index: An output-specific approach for group comparison. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 49(1), 79–94.
• Walheer, B. (2018c). Disaggregation of the Cost Malmquist Productivity Index with joint and output-specific inputs. Omega, 75, 1–12.
• Walheer, B. (2018d). Malmquist productivity index for multi-output producers: An application to electricity generation plants. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences. 10.1016/j.seps.2018.02.003.
• Walheer, B. (2018e). Scale efficiency for multi-output cost minimizing producers: The case of the US electricity plants. Energy Economics, 70, 26–36.
• Walheer, B. (2018f). Scale, congestion, and technical efficiency of European countries: A sector-based nonparametric approach. Empirical Economics. 10.1007/s00181-018-1426-7.
• Walheer, B., & Zhang, L.-J. (2018). Profit Luenberger and Malmquist–Luenberger indexes for multi-activity decision making units: The case of the star-rated hotel industry in China. Tourism Management, 69, 1–11.
• Yu, M.-M., Chern, C.-C., & Hsiao, B. (2013). Human resource rightsizing using centralized data envelopment analysis: Evidence from Taiwans airports. Omega, 41(1), 119–130.
• Zhou, P., Ang, B. W., & Poh, K. L. (2008). A survey of data envelopment analysis in energy and environmental studies. European Journal of Operational Research, 189, 1–18.