No abstract

We propose a set of consistency conditions that frontier efficiencymeasures should meet to be most usefd for re@atory analysis or other purposes. The efficiency estimates shotid be consistent in their efficiency levels, rankings, and identification of best and worst fus, consistent over time and with competitiveconditions in the market, and consistent with standard nonfrontier measures of performance. We provide evidence on these conditions by evaluating and comparing efficiency estimates on U.S. bank efficiency from variants of all four of the major approaches-DEA, SFA, TFA, and DFA-and fmd mixed results.

We propose a set of consistency conditions that frontier efficiencymeasures should meet to be most usefd for re@atory analysis or other purposes. The efficiency estimates shotid be consistent in their efficiency levels, rankings, and identification of best and worst fus, consistent over time and with competitiveconditions in the market, and consistent with standard nonfrontier measures of performance. We provide evidence on these conditions by evaluating and comparing efficiency estimates on U.S. bank efficiency from variants of all four of the major approaches-DEA, SFA, TFA, and DFA-and fmd mixed results.

The cost, technical, allocative and scale efficiencies of a sample of rural U.S. hospitals are calculated via linear programming models. Tobit analysis is used to assess possible correlates of each of the efficiency measures. A large amount of dispersion in operating efficiency is found within our data set; the majority of the dispersion is due to technical inefficiency, In general, for-profit hospitals are found to outperform not-for-profit and public hospitals, Demand characteristics, quality of care, and the mix of services offered are also found to influence performance.

No abstract