##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

E. Hajinezhad M.R. Alirezaee

Abstract

One of the most critical issues for using data envelopment analysis models is the identification of technological returns to scale (TRTS). Recently, the angles method based on data mining is introduced for the identification of TRTS. This objective method uses the angles to measure the gap between the constant and variable TRTS. The gap is calculated in both the increasing and decreasing sections of the frontier. The larger the gap in the increasing and/or decreasing sections of the frontier, the closer TRTS is to the increasing and/or decreasing form of TRTS. In this paper, we propose a heuristic method for visualizing TRTS that would give a better understanding of identification of TRTS in the dataset. To this end, we introduce the maximum angles method for measuring the maximum possible deviation from constant TRTS assumption in the increasing and decreasing sections of the frontier. By the angles and the maximum angles , we can display the dataset’s TRTS in a two-dimensional space. To validate the proposed method, we consider six one input/one output cases. Also, we apply the angles method and the maximum angles method for the Maskan bank of Iran. Using the proposed method, we show that how TRTS of the bank dataset can be displayed in a two-dimensional space.

Article Details

References
1. Alirezaee, M., Hajinezhad, E., and Paradi, J. C. Objective identification of technological returns to scale for data envelopment analysis models. European Journal of Operational Research (2017).
2. Allahyar, M., and Rostamy-Malkhalifeh, M. Negative data in data en velopment analysis: Efficiency analysis and estimating returns to scale. Computers & Industrial Engineering 82 (2015), 78–81.
3. Banker, R. D. Estimating most productive scale size using data envelop ment analysis. european journal of Operation Researchs 17 (1984), 35–44.
4. Banker, R. D. Hypothesis tests using data envelopment analysis. Journa of Productivity Analysis 7, 2 (1996), 139–159.
5. Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., and Cooper, W. W. Some models for estimating technical and scale ineffciencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science 30, 9 (1984).
6. Banker, R. D., Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., Thrall, R. M., and Zhu, J. Returns to scale in different dea models. European Journal of Operational Research 154, 2 (2004), 345–362.
7. Banker, R. D. Maximum likelihood, consistency and data envelopment analysis. a statistical foundation. Management Science 39, 10 (1993), 1265–1273.
8. Banker, R. D., and Natarajan, R. Statistical tests based on DEA effi ciency scores. Springer, 2011, pp. 273–295.
9. Banker, R. D., and Thrall, R. M. Estimation of returns to scale using data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research 62, 1 (1992), 74–84.
10. Bougnol, M. L., and Dul, J. H. Anchor points in dea. European Journal of Operational Research 192, 2 (2009), 668–676.
11. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., and Rhodes, E. Measuring the efficient of decision making unit. European Journal of Operation Research 2 (1978), 429–444.
12. Divine, J. D. Efciency Analysis and Management of Not for Prot and Governmentally Regulated Organizations. Thesis, 1986.
13. Fre, R., Grosskopf, S., and Lovell, C. The measurement of efciency of production. Boston: Kluwer Nijhoff Publishing, 1985.
14. Fre, R., Grosskopf, S., and Lovell, C. A. K. Production Frontiers. Cam bridge University Press, 1994.
15. Kerstens, K., and Vanden Eeckaut, P. Estimating returns to scale us ing non-parametric deterministic technologies: A new method based on goodness-of-fit. European Journal of Operational Research 113, 1 (1999), 206–214.
16. Korhonen, P. J., Soleimani-Damaneh, M., and Wallenius, J. On ratio based rts determination: An extension. European Journal of Operational Research 231, 1 (2013), 242–243.
17. Krivonozhko, V. E., Frsund, F. R., and Lychev, A. V. Measurement of returns to scale using non-radial dea models. European Journal of Operational Research 232, 3 (2014), 664–670.
18. Lotfi, F. H., Jahanshahloo, G. R., and Esmaeili, M. An alternative approach in the estimation of returns to scale under weight restrictions. Applied mathematics and computation 189, 1 (2007), 719–724.
19. Podinovski, V. On the linearisation of reference technologies for testing returns to scale in fdh models. European Journal of Operational Research 152, 3 (2004), 800–802.
20. Simar, L., and Wilson, P. W. Non-parametric tests of returns to scale. European Journal of Operational Research 139, 1 (2002), 115–132.
21. Soleimani-damaneh, M., and Reshadi, M. A polynomial-time algorithm to estimate returns to scale in fdh models. Computers & Operations Research 34, 7 (2007), 2168–2176.
22. Sueyoshi, T., and Goto, M. Measurement of returns to scale and damages to scale for dea-based operational and environmental assessment: How to manage desirable (good) and undesirable (bad) outputs? European Journal of Operational Research 211, 1 (2011), 76–89.
23. Sueyoshi, T., and Goto, M. Returns to scale vs. damages to scale in data envelopment analysis: An impact of u.s. clean air act on coal-fired power plants. Omega 41, 2 (2013), 164–175.
24. Thanassoulis, E. Setting achievements targets for school children. Education Economics 7, 2 (1999), 101–119.
25. Tone, K. On returns to scale under weight restrictions in data envelopment analysis. Journal of Productivity Analysis 16, 1 (2001), 31–47.
26. Wu, J., and An, Q. Slacks-based measurement models for estimating returns to scale. International Journal of Information and Decision Sciences 5, 1 (2013), 25–35.
How to Cite
حاجی نژادا., & علیرضاییم. (2018). Technological returns to scale: Identification and visualization. Iranian Journal of Numerical Analysis and Optimization, 8(2), 55-74. https://doi.org/10.22067/ijnao.v8i2.51969
Section
Articles