Choosing weights from alternative optimal solutions of dual multiplier models in DEA

In this paper we propose a two-step procedure to be used for the selection of the weights that we obtain from the multiplier model in a DEA efficiency analysis. It is well known that optimal solutions of the envelopment formulation for extreme efficient units are often highly degenerate and, consequently, have alternate optima for the weights. Different optimal weights may then be obtained depending, for instance, on the software used. The idea behind the procedure we present is to explore the set of alternate optima in order to help make a choice of optimal weights. The selection of weights for a given extreme efficient point is connected with the dimension of the efficient facets of the frontier. Our approach makes it possible to select the weights associated with the facets of higher dimension that this unit generates and, in particular, it selects those weights associated with a full dimensional efficient facet (FDEF) if any. In this sense the weights provided by our procedure will have the maximum support from the production possibility set. We also look for weights that maximize the relative value of the inputs and outputs included in the efficiency analysis in a sense to be described in this article.

[1]  Emmanuel Thanassoulis,et al.  Weights restrictions and value judgements in Data Envelopment Analysis: Evolution, development and future directions , 1997, Ann. Oper. Res..

[2]  W. Cooper,et al.  Using DEA to improve the management of congestion in Chinese industries (1981-1997) , 2001 .

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

[4]  A. Bessent,et al.  Efficiency Frontier Determination by Constrained Facet Analysis , 1988, Oper. Res..

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

[6]  Ana S. Camanho,et al.  Performance Assessment of Portuguese Secondary Schools , 2007 .

[7]  Barton A. Smith,et al.  Comparative Site Evaluations for Locating a High-Energy Physics Lab in Texas , 1986 .

[8]  Ole Bent Olesen,et al.  Identification and Use of Efficient Faces and Facets in DEA , 2003 .

[9]  Kuo-Ping Chang,et al.  Linear production functions and the data envelopment analysis , 1991 .

[10]  R. Dyson,et al.  Reducing Weight Flexibility in Data Envelopment Analysis , 1988 .

[11]  A. Charnes,et al.  Management Models and Industrial Applications of Linear Programming , 1961 .

[12]  Joe Zhu,et al.  Multiplier bounds in DEA via strong complementary slackness condition solution , 2003 .

[13]  Emmanuel Thanassoulis,et al.  Introduction to the Theory and Application of Data Envelopment Analysis: A Foundation Text with Integrated Software , 2001 .

[14]  Abraham Charnes,et al.  Measuring the efficiency of decision making units , 1978 .

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

[16]  Ole Bent Olesen,et al.  Indicators of ill-conditioned data sets and model misspecification in data envelopment analysis: an extended facet approach , 1996 .

[17]  W. W. Cooper,et al.  Marginal Rates and Elasticities of Substitution with Additive Models in DEA , 2000 .

[18]  Emmanuel Thanassoulis,et al.  Relative Efficiency Assessments Using Data Envelopment Analysis: An Application to Data on Rates Departments , 1987 .

[19]  Wade D. Cook,et al.  Efficiency bounds in Data Envelopment Analysis , 1996 .

[20]  Emmanuel Thanassoulis,et al.  Simulating Weights Restrictions in Data Envelopment Analysis by Means of Unobserved Dmus , 1998 .

[21]  Abraham Charnes,et al.  Programming with linear fractional functionals , 1962 .