An Introduction to ‘Benefit of the Doubt’ Composite Indicators

Cherchye, Laurens; Moesen, Willem; Rogge, Nicky; Puyenbroeck, Tom Van

doi:10.1007/s11205-006-9029-7

Cited by 565 publications

(400 citation statements)

References 32 publications

(26 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

384

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…for output-specific inputs k we can have ( P m x,t ) k = ( P m x,t ) k when m = m . 10 Following our reasoning of the previous section, we can evaluate our shadow profit efficiency criterion by the following efficiency measure, which endogenizes the (shadow) price selection in the efficiency evaluation process:…”

Section: Shadow Prices and Dualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-output profit efficiency and directional distance functions

Cherchye

Rock

Walheer

2016

Omega

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We extend a recently developed DEA methodology for cost efficiency analysis towards profit efficiency settings. This establishes a novel DEA toolkit for profit efficiency assessments in situations with multiple inputs and multiple outputs. A distinguishing feature of our methodology is that it assumes outputspecific production technologies. In addition, the methodology accounts for the use of joint inputs, and explicitly includes information on the allocation of inputs to individual outputs. We also establish a dual relationship between our multi-output profit inefficiency measure and a technical inefficiency measure that takes the form of a multi-output directional distance function. 1we demonstrate the empirical usefulness of our methodology by an empirical application to a large service company.

show abstract

Section: Shadow Prices and Dualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-output profit efficiency and directional distance functions

Cherchye

Rock

Walheer

2016

Omega

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This method was originally proposed to evaluate macroeconomic performance. Elaboration of this method as a weighting method can be found in work of Cherchye et al [3]. A well-known property of the original DEA model [2] is units invariance; i.e.…”

Section: Composite Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…the CI values are independent of the units in which the constituent sub-indicator values are measured [4]. The DEA was already applied in the field of CI providing alternative weighting systems ( [11], [8], [3], [4], [22]). It was reported that the use of DEA overcomes some key limitations, the undesirable dependence of final results from the preliminary normalization of sub-indicators, and from subjectivity in weighting [4].…”

Section: Composite Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Incorporating some available information (expert opinion) about appropriate weights to make the weights acceptable is considered useful. Sub-indicator share restrictions (4) can be interpreted as bounds for the importance of sub-indicators in a composite score [3]. Restrictions on sub-indicator shares provide an easy and natural representation of previous information on the importance of CI components [3].…”

Section: Composite Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sub-indicator share restrictions (4) can be interpreted as bounds for the importance of sub-indicators in a composite score [3]. Restrictions on sub-indicator shares provide an easy and natural representation of previous information on the importance of CI components [3]. An introduction to an extended BOD approach subject to restrictions on weights and sub-indicator shares can be found in [3].…”

Section: Composite Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Data-driven weights and restrictions in the construction of composite indicators

Perišić

2015

Croat. Oper. Res. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Composite indicators are increasingly recognized as a useful tool in policy analysis and public communication. However, if poorly constructed, they can send misleading policy messages. Perhaps the most difficult aspect of constructing a composite indicator is choosing weights for the components. The categorization of Croatian territorial units for development policy is based on the value of the composite indicator called the development index. The main goal of this paper is to propose an empirical approach for weight selection. In order to generate the set of non-subjective weights, principal component analysis and linear programming methods have been applied. An application of data envelopment analysis to the field of composite indicators, known as the Benefit-of-the-Doubt approach, has been demonstrated subject to proportional subindicator share restrictions. Additionally, the Monte Carlo simulation of weights was conducted, and confidence intervals for the values of the development index were estimated. Owing to the fact that the examined weighting schemes have resulted in the different categorization of territorial units, use of unit-specific weights and incorporating uncertainty in the construction of a composite indicator looks promising for further work.

show abstract

Well‐Being as a Multidimensional Phenomenon

2017

Analyzing Multidimensional Well‐Being

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An Introduction to ‘Benefit of the Doubt’ Composite Indicators

Abstract: composite indicators, data envelopment analysis, performance benchmarking, technology,

Cited by 565 publications

References 32 publications

Multi-output profit efficiency and directional distance functions

Multi-output profit efficiency and directional distance functions

Data-driven weights and restrictions in the construction of composite indicators

Well‐Being as a Multidimensional Phenomenon

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About