4.7 Article

Efficiency evaluation of Chinese regional industrial systems with undesirable factors using a two-stage slacks-based measure approach

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
卷 87, 期 -, 页码 348-356

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.10.055

关键词

Two-stage data envelopment analysis; Slacks-based measure; Undesirable factors; Regional industrial system in China

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71101085, 71371010]
  2. NSFC Major Program [71090401/71090400]
  3. NSFC major international (regional) joint research program [71320107004]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The process of a regional industrial system in China can be separated into two internal stages: production stage and pollutant abatement stage. This paper aims to examine the efficiency of Chinese regional industrial systems by taking the operational performance of its two internal stages into consideration. Unlike traditional data envelopment analysis models that treat decision making units as black box when measuring their efficiencies with undesirable factors, this paper proposes a two-stage model based on slacks-based measure to evaluate the efficiency of Chinese regional industrial systems. By decomposing the efficiency into production efficiency and abatement efficiency, the proposed model can estimate the efficiencies of the whole regional industrial system, its production stage and abatement stage simultaneously. The model provides a way of improving performance of a regional industrial system through identifying its inefficient internal stages. This can help to find out the main sources of the inefficiency that arise from the internal stages within the system, which cannot be done by using conventional environmental data envelopment analysis models. Findings resulting from the model application show that there are great disparities in regional industrial systems' efficiencies, and the inefficiency of Chinese industrial system is largely driven by the abatement stage. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据