Measurement of Environmentally Sensitive Productivity Growth in Korean Industries

This study measures productivity growth using the Metafrontier Malmquist-Luenberger productivity growth index (MML index) method and decomposes the index. The results are compared with those obtained from the conventional Malmquist-Luenberger (ML) productivity growth index. MML has two advantages compared with the ML index. The former is able to consider undesirable output as a by-product of production which accounts for producer group heterogeneities. As a result, it enables separation and estimation of changes in the technological gap between regional and global frontier technologies. The proposed index is employed to measure productivity growth and decompose its components in 14 Korean industrial sectors during the period between 1981 and 2007. For the purpose of detailed analysis of policy effects, the study period was divided into three decades. The results show that technology innovation can be regarded as a more important factor of productivity growth, rather than efficiency change. The chemical and Petrochemical, Machinery and Transport equipment industries are treated as global innovators in the whole period. However, the result differs according to decades. It is found that the groups with higher energy efficient technology and profitability obtain a higher productivity growth rate in comparison with their low energy efficient technology industry counterparts. Policy implications of the empirical results are discussed.

[1]  Philippe Vanden Eeckaut,et al.  Non-parametric efficiency, progress and regress measures for panel data: Methodological aspects☆ , 1995 .

[2]  A. Aldanondo-Ochoa,et al.  Environmental efficiency and the impact of regulation in dryland organic vine production , 2014 .

[3]  R. Banker.  Maximum likelihood, consistency and data envelopment analysis: a statistical foundation , 1993 .

[4]  Timothy Coelli,et al.  An Introduction to Efficiency and Productivity Analysis , 1997 .

[5]  Dong-hyun Oh,et al.  A global Malmquist-Luenberger productivity index , 2010 .

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

[7]  Almas Heshmati,et al.  A sequential Malmquist-Luenberger productivity index : Environmentally sensitive productivity growth considering the progressive nature of technology , 2010 .

[8]  Shunsuke Managi,et al.  Regulatory reforms and productivity : an empirical analysis of the Japanese electricity industry , 2008 .

[9]  William L. Weber,et al.  Productivity Growth and Pollution in State Manufacturing , 2001, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[10]  D. Aigner,et al.  P. Schmidt, 1977,?Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models,? , 1977 .

[11]  Heike Wetzel,et al.  Transport and CO2: Productivity Growth and Carbon Dioxide Emissions in the European Commercial Transport Industry , 2012 .

[12]  Rolf Färe,et al.  Productivity and Undesirable Outputs: A Directional Distance Function Approach , 1995 .

[13]  Sebastián Lozano,et al.  Non-parametric frontier approach to modelling the relationships among population, GDP, energy consumption and CO2 emissions , 2008 .

[14]  Ching-Ren Chiu,et al.  Decomposition of the environmental inefficiency of the meta-frontier with undesirable output , 2012 .

[15]  Chih-Hai Yang,et al.  Cost efficiency and optimal scale of electricity distribution firms in Taiwan: An application of metafrontier analysis , 2010 .

[16]  B. W. Ang,et al.  Total factor carbon emission performance: A Malmquist index analysis , 2010 .

[17]  Carl A. Pasurka,et al.  Decomposing electric power plant emissions within a joint production framework , 2006 .

[18]  Toshiyuki Sueyoshi,et al.  Should the US clean air act include CO2 emission control?: Examination by data envelopment analysis , 2010 .

[19]  B. Hansen,et al.  Testing for two-regime threshold cointegration in vector error-correction models , 2002 .

[20]  Kihoon Lee,et al.  The relationship between CO2 emissions and economic growth: The case of Korea with nonlinear evidence , 2010 .

[21]  Timo Teräsvirta,et al.  Testing linearity against smooth transition autoregressive models , 1988 .

[22]  George E. Battese,et al.  Technology Gap, Efficiency, and a Stochastic Metafrontier Function , 2002 .

[23]  L. R. Christensen,et al.  MULTILATERAL COMPARISONS OF OUTPUT, INPUT, AND PRODUCTIVITY USING SUPERLATIVE INDEX NUMBERS* , 1982 .

[24]  F. J. Arcelus,et al.  Productivity differences across OECD countries in the presence of environmental constraints , 2005, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[25]  Jeong-Dong Lee,et al.  A metafrontier approach for measuring Malmquist productivity index , 2010 .

[26]  Chih-Hai Yang,et al.  Environmental regulations, induced R&D, and productivity: Evidence from Taiwan's manufacturing industries , 2012 .

[27]  David Hsieh.  Chaos and Nonlinear Dynamics: Application to Financial Markets , 1991 .

[28]  P. Grimes,et al.  Exporting the Greenhouse: Foreign Capital Penetration and CO? Emissions 19801996 , 2003 .

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

[30]  G. Battese,et al.  A Metafrontier Production Function for Estimation of Technical Efficiencies and Technology Gaps for Firms Operating Under Different Technologies , 2004 .

[31]  Peng Zhou,et al.  Measuring environmental performance with stochastic environmental DEA: The case of APEC economies , 2014 .

[32]  Jeong-Dong Lee,et al.  Estimation of the shadow prices of pollutants with production/environment inefficiency taken into account: a nonparametric directional distance function approach. , 2002, Journal of environmental management.

[33]  William L. Weber,et al.  Characteristics of a Polluting Technology: Theory and Practice , 2002 .

[34]  Qunwei Wang,et al.  Energy efficiency and production technology heterogeneity in China: A meta-frontier DEA approach , 2013 .

[35]  Yi-Ming Wei,et al.  Energy and emissions efficiency patterns of Chinese regions: A multi-directional efficiency analysis , 2013 .

[36]  Kihoon Lee,et al.  CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ENERGY CONSUMPTION AND GDP REVISITED: THE CASE OF KOREA 1970-1999 , 2004 .

[37]  Dong-hyun Oh.  A metafrontier approach for measuring an environmentally sensitive productivity growth index , 2010 .

[38]  William L. Weber,et al.  Shadow prices and pollution costs in U.S. agriculture , 2006 .

[39]  R. Färe,et al.  Accounting for Air Pollution Emissions in Measures of State Manufacturing Productivity Growth , 2001 .

[40]  W. Meeusen,et al.  Technical efficiency and dimension of the firm: Some results on the use of frontier production functions , 1977 .

[41]  Blake LeBaron,et al.  A Dynamic Structural Model for Stock Return Volatility and Trading Volume , 1995 .

[42]  Rolf Färe,et al.  Environmental production functions and environmental directional distance functions , 2007 .

[43]  Surender Kumar,et al.  Environmentally Sensitive Productivity Growth: A Global Analysis Using Malmquist-Luenberger Index , 2006 .

[44]  Kihoon Lee,et al.  Energy consumption and economic growth in Korea: testing the causality relation , 2004 .