Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Units invariant DEA when weight restrictions are present: ecological performance of US electricity industry

  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Electricity generation currently is the main industrial source of air emissions in the United States. Both researchers and practitioners are interested in conducting studies to evaluate the ecological performance of this industry, in order to propose solutions to curb emissions of air pollutants and to improve the efficiency of converting fossil resources into electric energy. In this paper, data envelopment analysis (DEA) is used to assess ecological efficiency where air emissions are used as undesirable outputs. Although conventional DEA does not require a priori information on the input and output weights, weight restrictions can be incorporated to reflect a user’s preference over the performance metrics, or to refine the DEA results. Adding weight restrictions voids the fact that DEA scores are independent of the units of measurement. To incorporate weight constraints in ecological efficiency assessment, this paper develops a DEA model that is units-invariant when weight restrictions are imposed. Moreover, the proposed model is equivalent to the standard units-invariant DEA model when weight restrictions are not present.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-and-you/affect/air-emissions.html.

  2. http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/egrid/.

References

  • Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1962). Programming with linear fractional functionals. Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, 15, 333–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C.-M. (2014). Evaluating eco-efficiency with data envelopment analysis: An analytical reexamination. Annals of Operations Research, 214(1), 49–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cherchye, L., Moesen, W., & Van Puyenbroeck, T. (2004). Legitimately diverse, yet comparable: On synthesizing social inclusion performance in the EU. Journal of Common Market Studies, 42, 919–955.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cherchye, L., Moesen, W., Rogge, N., & Van Puyenbroeck, T. (2007). An introduction to “benefit of the doubt” composite indicators. Social Indicators Research, 82, 111–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Zhu, J. (2011). Data envelopment analysis: History, models, and interpretations. In W. W. Cooper, L. M. Seiford, & J. Zhu (Eds.), Handbook on Data Envelopment Analysis (pp. 1–39). New York: Springer. chapter 1.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Goto, M., Otsuka, A., & Sueyoshi, T. (2014). DEA (Data Envelopment Analysis) assessment of operational and environmental efficiencies on Japanese regional industries. Energy, 66, 535–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korhonen, P. A., & Luptacik, M. (2004). Eco-efficiency of power plants: An extension of data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 154(2), 437–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, R. L., See, K. E., & von Winterfeldt, D. (2006). Evaluating academic programs: With applications to U.S. graduate decision science programs. Operations Research, 54(5), 813–828. 1011–1013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lozano, S., Villa, G., & Brannlund, R. (2009). Centralized reallocation of emission permits using DEA. European Jounal of Operational Research, 193(3), 752–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roll, Y., & Golany, B. (1993). Alternative methods of treating factor weights in DEA. OMEGA, 21(1), 99–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramón, N., Ruiz, J. L., & Sirvent, I. (2010). A multiplier bound approach to assess relative efficiency in DEA without slacks. European Journal of Operational Research, 203, 261–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz, J. L., & Sirvent, I. (2012). On the DEA total weight flexibility and the aggregation in cross-efficiency evaluations. European Journal of Operational Research, 223, 732–738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarkis, J. (2006). The adoption of environmental and risk management practices: Relationships to environmental performance. Annals of Operations Research, 145, 367–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarkis, J., & Cordeiro, J. J. (2012). Ecological modernization in the electrical utility industry: An application of a bads-goods DEA model of ecological and technical efficiency. European Journal of Operational Research, 219, 386–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarrico, C. S., & Dyson, R. G. (2004). Restricting virtual weights in data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 159, 17–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seiford, L. M., & Zhu, J. (2002). Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation. European Journal of Operational Research, 142(1), 16–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sueyoshi, T., & Goto, M. (2012). DEA radial measurement for environmental assessment and planning: Desirable procedures to evaluate fossil fuel power plants. Energy Policy, 41(1), 422–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thanassoulis, E., Portela, M. C., & Allen, R. (2004). Incorporating value judgments in DEA. In W. W. Cooper, L. M. Seiford, & J. Zhu (Eds.), Handbook on data envelopment analysis (pp. 99–138). Boston: Kluwer. chapter 4, 2004.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tone, K., & Tsutsui, M. (2010). Dynamic DEA: A slacks-based measure approach. OMEGA, 38, 145–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, J. (2014). Quantitative models for performance evaluation and benchmarking: DEA with spreadsheets (3rd ed.). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for the comments and suggestions made by two anonymous reviewers. Dr. Juan Du thanks the support by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 71471133 & 71432007) and the Youth Project of Humanities and Social Science funded by Tongji University (Grant No. 20141872). This paper is partially supported by the Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (China).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Schulich School of Business, York University, Toronto, ON, M3J 1P3, Canada

    Wade D. Cook

  2. School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, 1239 Siping Road, Shanghai, 200092, People’s Republic of China

    Juan Du

  3. International Center for Auditing and Evaluation, Nanjing Audit University, Nanjing, 211815, People’s Republic of China

    Joe Zhu

  4. Robert A. Foisie School of Business, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA, 01609, USA

    Joe Zhu

Authors
  1. Wade D. Cook
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Juan Du
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joe Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juan Du.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cook, W.D., Du, J. & Zhu, J. Units invariant DEA when weight restrictions are present: ecological performance of US electricity industry. Ann Oper Res 255, 323–346 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-015-1881-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-015-1881-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation