4.6 Article

Measuring slacks-based efficiency for commercial banks in China by using a two-stage DEA model with undesirable output

Journal

ANNALS OF OPERATIONS RESEARCH
Volume 235, Issue 1, Pages 13-35

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10479-015-1987-1

Keywords

Two-stage DEA; Commercial bank; Slacks-based efficiency measure; Benchmark

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Funds of China [71501189, 71222106, 71371194, 71571173, 71110107024]
  2. Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China [20133402110028]
  3. Foundation for the Author of National Excellent Doctoral Dissertation of P. R. China [201279]
  4. Research Fund for Innovation-driven Plan of Central South University [2015CX010]
  5. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [WK2040160008]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bank industry plays a critical role in the economic development of China. In this paper, we develop a new two-stage data envelopment analysis approach for measuring the slacks-based efficiency of Chinese commercial banks during years 2008-2012, where the banking operation process of each bank is divided into a deposit-generation stage (division) and a deposit-utilization stage (division). In the approach, the increase of desirable outputs and the decrease of undesirable outputs are simultaneously considered in order to identify the inefficiency of a bank. Three efficiency statuses are first defined for such a system to investigate its input-output performance and divisional performances, and a full efficiency status is then defined based on these statuses. The empirical results show that the improvement of the banks' performances during this period was mainly contributed by the improvement of deposit-utilization stage. Besides, the results also show that our approach can provide a benchmark for the intermediate measures of the two stages of an inefficient bank.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available