DEA/AR efficiency and profitability of 14 major oil companies in U.S. exploration and production

Abstract With a U. S. focus, the efficiency and profitability of 14 integrated oil companies (Majors) were analyzed for the years 1980–1991. The data base represented primarily Arthur Andersen's oil and gas disclosures. Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and Assurance Region (AR) methods were applied. Unique optimal solution pairs of primal slacks and dual multipliers were found for almost all of the inefficient firms; these solutions provided unique projections to the DEA frontier. Separable input and output AR bounds were placed on the modelled prices (multipliers) to proceed from technical toward overall efficiency. Significantly fewer extreme-efficient DMUs and lower levels of efficiency were found in the presence of these bounds than in their absence. There was a 21 % level of average inefficiency present in the findings across the 12 years analyzed. Linked input and output bounds provided measures of maximum and minimum profit ratios. Profit potential was found for a high percentage of the Majorsl only modest downside risk indications were found. In this linked case, efficiency measurement requires a practical algorithm to compute optimal solutions to the nonlinear problem.

[1]  A. Charnes,et al.  A STRUCTURE FOR CLASSIFYING AND CHARACTERIZING EFFICIENCIES AND INEFFICIENCIES IN DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS by , .

[2]  William W. Cooper,et al.  SHORT COMMUNICATION: MEASURING EFFICIENCY OF DECISION MAKING UNITS , 1979 .

[3]  Russell G. Thompson,et al.  Polyhedral Assurance Regions with Linked Constraints , 1994 .

[4]  Russell G. Thompson,et al.  The role of multiplier bounds in efficiency analysis with application to Kansas farming , 1990 .

[5]  A. Charnes,et al.  Classifying and characterizing efficiencies and inefficiencies in data development analysis , 1986 .

[6]  P. S. Dharmapala,et al.  DEA ARs and CRs applied to worldwide major oil companies , 1994 .

[7]  Andrew B. Whinston,et al.  New directions in computational economics , 1994 .

[8]  Abraham Charnes,et al.  Basic DEA Models , 1994 .

[9]  A. Charnes,et al.  Data Envelopment Analysis Theory, Methodology and Applications , 1995 .

[10]  Hal R. Varian,et al.  GOODNESS-OF-FIT IN OPTIMIZING MODELS , 1989 .

[11]  R. Färe,et al.  Productivity Growth, Technical Progress, and Efficiency Change in Industrialized Countries , 1994 .

[12]  Russell G. Thompson,et al.  DEA/AR-efficiency of U.S. independent oil/gas producers over time , 1992, Comput. Oper. Res..

[13]  A. Charnes,et al.  Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis , 1984 .

[14]  A. Charnes,et al.  A structure for classifying and characterizing efficiency and inefficiency in Data Envelopment Analysis , 1991 .

[15]  Abraham Charnes,et al.  Preface to topics in data envelopment analysis , 1984, Ann. Oper. Res..

[16]  Lawrence M. Seiford,et al.  Recent developments in dea : the mathematical programming approach to frontier analysis , 1990 .

[17]  A. Charnes,et al.  Polyhedral Cone-Ratio DEA Models with an illustrative application to large commercial banks , 1990 .

[18]  Russell G. Thompson,et al.  Sensitivity Analysis of Efficiency Measures with Applications to Kansas Farming and Illinois Coal Mining , 1994 .