Further discussion on linear production functions and DEA

Abstract The purpose of the current paper is to clarify the misunderstanding in using the constant returns to scale (CRS) model in data envelopment analysis (DEA) to estimate returns to scale (RTS) classification. By illustrating the following two different assumptions: (a) all decision making units (DMUs) are assumed to be compared to a CRS frontier in the CCR model, i.e., all DMUs are assumed to be capable of operating under CRS and (b) all DMUs exhibit CRS, several incorrect points about RTS estimation raised by Chang, K.P. and Guh, Y.Y. (1991) (European Journal of Operational Research 52, 215–223) and Chang. K.P. (1997) (European Journal of Operational Research 97, 597–599) are examined. It is shown that the assumption (a) does not mean that the RTS classification cannot be estimated. The CRS frontier assumption cannot change the RTS nature of each DMU. Since the CCR model mixes a technical efficiency and a scale efficiency, it is possible and meaningful to use the CCR results to determine the RTS classification. Finally, the infeasibility of Chang and Guh's (1991) treatment of non-archimedean infinitesimal is discussed.

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

[2]  Rajiv D. Banker,et al.  Equivalence and Implementation of Alternative Methods for Determining Returns to Scale in Data Envel , 1996 .

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

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

[5]  Rajiv D. Banker,et al.  A note on returns to scale in DEA , 1996 .

[6]  Joe Zhu,et al.  A discussion of testing DMUs' returns to scale , 1995 .

[7]  A note on "A discussion of testing DMUs' returns to scale" by Zhu and Shen European Journal of Operational Research 81 (1995) 590-596 , 1997 .

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

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

[10]  Lawrence M. Seiford,et al.  Data envelopment analysis: The evolution of the state of the art (1978–1995) , 1996 .

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

[12]  Toshiyuki Sueyoshi Measuring Technical, Allocative and Overall Efficiencies Using a DEA Algorithm , 1992 .

[13]  L. Seiford,et al.  An investigation of returns to scale in data envelopment analysis , 1999 .

[14]  Lawrence M. Seiford,et al.  On alternative optimal solutions in the estimation of returns to scale in DEA , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[15]  Rolf Färe,et al.  Estimation of returns to scale using data envelopment analysis: A comment , 1994 .

[16]  Rajiv D. Banker,et al.  Estimation of returns to scale using data envelopment analysis , 1992 .

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