Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Applied Mathematics
Volume 2014, Article ID 512157, 9 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/512157
Research Article

Measurement of Congestion in the Simultaneous Presence of Desirable and Undesirable Outputs

Department of Mathematics, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran 1477893855, Iran

Received 18 January 2014; Revised 15 March 2014; Accepted 15 March 2014; Published 15 April 2014

Academic Editor: Mohammad Khodabakhshi

Copyright © 2014 H. Zare-Haghighi et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. W. W. Cooper, L. M. Seiford, and J. Zhu, “A unified additive model approach for evaluating inefficiency and congestion with associated measures in DEA,” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 1–25, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. R. Fare and L. Svensson, “Congestion of production factors,” Econometrica, vol. 48, no. 7, pp. 1745–1753, 1980. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  3. R. Fare and S. Grosskopf, “Measuring congestion in production,” Zeitschrift fur Nationalokonomie, vol. 43, pp. 257–271, 1993. View at Google Scholar
  4. W. W. Cooper, B. Gu, and S. Li, “Comparisons and evaluations of alternative approaches to the treatment of congestion in DEA,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 132, no. 1, pp. 62–74, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  5. W. W. Cooper, R. G. Thompson, and R. M. Thrall, “Introduction: extensions and new developments in DEA,” Annals of Operations Research, vol. 66, pp. 3–45, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  6. G. R. Jahanshahloo and M. Khodabakhshi, “Suitable combination of inputs for improving outputs in DEA with determining input congestion considering textile industry of China,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 151, no. 1, pp. 263–273, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  7. Q. L. Wei and H. Yan, “Congestion and returns to scale in data envelopment analysis,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 153, no. 3, pp. 641–660, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  8. M. Asgharian, M. Khodabakhshi, and L. Neralic, “Congestion in stochastic data envelopment analysis: an input relaxation approach,” International Journal of Statistics and System Science, vol. 5, pp. 84–106, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  9. A. T. Flegg and D. O. Allen, “Congestion in the Chinese automobile and textile industries revisited,” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 177–191, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. M. Khodabakhshi, “A one-model approach based on relaxed combinations of inputs for evaluating input congestion in DEA,” Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 230, no. 2, pp. 443–450, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  11. T. Sueyoshi and K. Sekitani, “DEA congestion and returns to scale under an occurrence of multiple optimal projections,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 194, no. 2, pp. 592–607, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  12. K. Tone and B. K. Sahoo, “Degree of scale economies and congestion: a unified DEA approach,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 158, no. 3, pp. 755–772, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  13. R. G. Dyson, R. Allen, A. S. Camanho, V. V. Podinovski, C. S. Sarrico, and E. A. Shale, “Pitfalls and protocols in DEA,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 132, no. 2, pp. 245–259, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. A. Hailu and T. S. Veeman, “Non-parametric productivity analysis with undesirable outputs: an application to the Canadian pulp and paper industry,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, vol. 83, no. 3, pp. 605–616, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. H. Dyckhoff and K. Allen, “Measuring ecological efficiency with data envelopment analysis (DEA),” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 132, no. 2, pp. 312–325, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. T. Sueyoshi and M. Goto, “Methodological comparison between two unified (operational and environmental) efficiency measurements for environmental assessment,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 210, no. 3, pp. 684–693, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. R. Fare and S. Grosskopf, “Non-parametric productivity analysis with undesirable outputs,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, vol. 85, no. 4, pp. 1070–1074, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  18. T. Kuosmanen and V. Podinovski, “Weak disposability in nonparametric production analysis: reply to Fare and Grosskopf,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, vol. 91, no. 2, pp. 539–545, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. L. M. Seiford and J. Zhu, “Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 142, no. 1, pp. 16–20, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. H. Scheel, “Undesirable outputs in efficiency valuations,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 132, no. 2, pp. 400–410, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. R. Fare, S. Grosskopf, C. A. K. Lovell, and C. Pasurka, “Multilateral productivity comparisons when some outputs are undesirable: a nonparametric approach,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 90–98, 1989. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  22. R. W. Shephard, Indirect Production Functions, Verlag Anton Hain, Meisenheim am Glan, Germany, 1974, Mathematical Systems in Economics, No. 10. View at MathSciNet
  23. R. Fare, S. Grosskopf, D.-W. Noh, and W. Weber, “Characteristics of a polluting technology: theory and practice,” Journal of Econometrics, vol. 126, no. 2, pp. 469–492, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  24. P. Zhou, K. L. Poh, and B. W. Ang, “A non-radial DEA approach to measuring environmental performance,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 178, no. 1, pp. 1–9, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. T. Kuosmanen, “Weak disposability in nonparametric production analysis with undesirable outputs,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, vol. 87, no. 4, pp. 1077–1082, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. P. L. Brockett, W. W. Cooper, Y. Wang, and H. Shin, “Inefficiency and congestion in Chinese production before and after the 1978 economic reforms,” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 1–20, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. M. Khoveyni, R. Eslami, M. Khodabakhshi, G. R. Jahanshahloo, and F. Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, “Recognizing strong and weak congestion slack based in data envelopment analysis,” Computers and Industrial Engineering, vol. 64, pp. 731–738, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  28. J. Wu, Q. An, B. Xiong, and Y. Chen, “Congestion measurement for regional industries in China: a data envelopment analysis approach with undesirable outputs,” Energy Policy, vol. 57, pp. 7–13, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. J. T. Pastor, J. L. Ruiz, and I. Sirvent, “Enhanced DEA Russell graph efficiency measure,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 115, no. 3, pp. 596–607, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. F. Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, G. R. Jahanshahloo, M. Khodabakhshi, M. Rostamy-Malkhlifeh, Z. Moghaddas, and M. Vaez-Ghasemi, “A review of ranking models in data envelopment analysis,” Journal of Applied Mathematics, vol. 2013, Article ID 492421, 20 pages, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  31. G. R. Jahanshahloo and M. Khodabakhshi, “Using input-output orientation model for determining most productive scale size in DEA,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 146, no. 2-3, pp. 849–855, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  32. G. R. Jahanshahloo, M. Khodabakhshi, F. Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, and M. R. Moazami Goudarzi, “A cross-efficiency model based on super-efficiency for ranking units through the TOPSIS approach and its extension to the interval case,” Mathematical and Computer Modelling, vol. 53, no. 9-10, pp. 1946–1955, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. H. Jahanshahloo, F. H. Lotfi, and M. Khodabakhshi, “Modified nonradial supper efficiency models,” Journal of Applied Mathematics, vol. 2014, Article ID 919547, 5 pages, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  34. M. Khodabakhshi, “An output oriented super-efficiency measure in stochastic data envelopment analysis: considering Iranian electricity distribution companies,” Computers and Industrial Engineering, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 663–671, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. M. Khodabakhshi, “Chance constrained additive input relaxation model in stochastic data envelopment analysis,” International Journal of Information & Systems Sciences, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 99–112, 2010. View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  36. S. Li, G. R. Jahanshahloo, and M. Khodabakhshi, “A super-efficiency model for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 184, no. 2, pp. 638–648, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  37. A. Payan, F. Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, A. A. Noora, and M. Khodabakhshi, “A modified common set of weights method to complete ranking DMUs,” International Journal of Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences, vol. 5, no. 7, pp. 1143–1153, 2011. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. S. Ramazani-Tarkhorani, M. Khodabakhshi, S. Mehrabian, and F. Nuri-Bahmani, “Ranking decision-making units using common weights in DEA,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, 2013. View at Google Scholar