The performance of subsidized urban and rural public bus operators: Empirical evidence from Norway

Abstract.The performance of Norwegian subsidized urban and rural bus operators is analyzed to gain insight about factors affecting it. Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) is used to analyze efficiency differences in the sector. In addition, Mann-Whitney rank test is employed to test for efficiency and scale differences with respect to ownership, region of operation and scope of operation. The results suggest that there is in general a potential for input saving in the whole sector of about 28 percent. Nevertheless, while no significant differences are found between urban and rural operators with respect to input saving and output increasing efficiency scores, rural operators on average have lower mean scale efficiency and a higher variance of scale efficiency. Further, statistical tests using a Mann-Whitney rank test verify the latter. Thus the crucial issue in the Norwegian bus industry is less a question of differences in ownership or economies of scope but more a result of sub-optimal input allocation, which varies according to area of operations; either urban or rural. The analysis presented here also demonstrates that DEA is an appealing procedure for assessing efficiency in the bus industry, which is also easily acceptable to the decision-makers.

[1]  Philip A. Viton,et al.  TECHNICAL EFFICIENCY IN MULTI-MODE BUS TRANSIT: A PRODUCTION FRONTIER ANALYSIS , 1997 .

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

[3]  Pål Andreas Pedersen,et al.  Estimating the inefficiency in the Norwegian bus industry from stochastic cost frontier models , 1997 .

[4]  R. Färe,et al.  The measurement of efficiency of production , 1985 .

[5]  Lennart Hjalmarsson,et al.  On the Measurement of Productive Efficiency , 1974 .

[6]  Charles Lave,et al.  Measuring the Decline in Transit Productivity in the U.S. , 1991 .

[7]  M. Farrell The Measurement of Productive Efficiency , 1957 .

[8]  W. Cooper,et al.  Data Envelopment Analysis: A Comprehensive Text with Models, Applications, References and DEA-Solver Software , 1999 .

[9]  T. Oum,et al.  ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY OF RAILWAYS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC POLICY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE OECD COUNTRIES' RAILWAYS. IN: RAILWAYS , 2002 .

[10]  Svante Ylvinger,et al.  Industry performance and structural efficiency measures: Solutions to problems in firm models , 2000, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[11]  J. Cowie,et al.  THE TECHNICAL EFFICIENCY OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE OWNERSHIP IN THE RAIL INDUSTRY. THE CASE OF SWISS PRIVATE RAILWAYS , 1999 .

[12]  Philip A. Viton,et al.  Changes in multi-mode bus transit efficiency, 1988–1992 , 1998 .

[13]  Vicente Pina,et al.  Analysis of the efficiency of local government services delivery. An application to urban public transport , 2001 .

[14]  Antti Talvitie,et al.  Productivity and performance , 1991 .

[15]  J. M. Pastor,et al.  Productivity, efficiency and technical change in the European railways: A non-parametric approach , 1999 .

[16]  Zilla Sinuany-Stern,et al.  Combining ranking scales and selecting variables in the DEA context: the case of industrial branches , 1998, Comput. Oper. Res..

[17]  J. Berechman Public transit economics and deregulation policy , 1993 .