Abstract
A large literature exists on measuring the allocative and technical efficiency of a set
of firms. A segment of this literature uses data envelopment analysis (DEA), creating
relative efficiency rankings that are nonstochastic and thus cannot be evaluated accord-
ing to the precision of the rankings. A parallel literature uses econometric techniques to
estimate stochastic production frontiers or distance functions, providing at least the pos-
sibility of computing the precision of the resulting efficiency rankings. Recently, Horrace
and Schmidt (2000) have applied sampling theoretic statistical techniques known as mul-
tiple comparisons with control (MCC) and multiple comparisons with the best (MCB) to
the issue of measuring the precision of efficiency rankings. This paper offers a Bayesian
multiple comparison alternative that we argue is simpler to implement, gives the researcher
increased flexibility over the type of comparison made, and provides greater, and more in-
tuitive, information content. We demonstrate this method on technical efficiency rankings
of a set of U.S. electric generating firms derived within a distance function framework.
Keywords: distance functions, electric utilities, Gibbs sampling, technical efficiency rank-
ings, electric utilities, multiple comparisons with the best.
JEL classification: C11, C32, D24
More intriguing information
1. Monetary Policy News and Exchange Rate Responses: Do Only Surprises Matter?2. Consumer Networks and Firm Reputation: A First Experimental Investigation
3. The name is absent
4. Beyond Networks? A brief response to ‘Which networks matter in education governance?’
5. Estimation of marginal abatement costs for undesirable outputs in India's power generation sector: An output distance function approach.
6. The name is absent
7. Regional science policy and the growth of knowledge megacentres in bioscience clusters
8. The name is absent
9. AN EXPLORATION OF THE NEED FOR AND COST OF SELECTED TRADE FACILITATION MEASURES IN ASIA AND THE PACIFIC IN THE CONTEXT OF THE WTO NEGOTIATIONS
10. Staying on the Dole