Rationality, accounting and benchmarking water businesses

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the sensitivity of economic efficiency rankings of water businesses to the choice of alternative physical and accounting capital input measures. Design/methodology/approach Data envelopment analysis (DEA) was used to compute efficiency rankings for government-owned water businesses from the state of Victoria, Australia, over the period 2005/2006 through 2012/2013. Differences between DEA models when capital inputs were measured using either: statutory accounting values (historic cost and fair value), physical measures, or regulatory accounting values, were scrutinised. Findings Depending on the choice of capital input, significant variation in efficiency scores and the ranking of the top (worst) performing firms was observed. Research limitations/implications Future research may explore the generalisability of findings to a wider sample of water utilities globally. Future work can also consider the most reliable treatment of capital inputs in efficiency analysis. Practical implications Regulators should be cautious when using economic efficiency data in benchmarking exercises. A consistent approach to account for the capital stock is needed in the determination of price caps and designing incentives for poor performers. Originality/value DEA has been widely used to explore the role of ownership structure, firm size and regulation on water utility efficiency. This is the first study of its kind to explore the sensitivity of DEA to alternative physical and accounting capital input measures. This research also improves the conventional performance measurement in water utilities by using a bootstrap procedure to address the deterministic nature of the DEA approach.

Does water accounting support sustainable water management? A review

“…Risk is defined as the chance of loss, and the risk is the possibility of loss, uncertainty, the dispersion of actual from expected, and risk is the probability of any outcome different from the one expected [10]. Research [9] explained that risk is classified as speculative and pure risk, which can come from within or outside of the company. The high growth of the population, either naturally or implicitly migratory, adds to the increasing pace of the water crisis and ineffective management of clean water [19].…”

“…The management of water flowing and distribution to the community can be seen from these components [8]. It means that it can integrate various aspects ranging from inputs, outputs, and impacts on the environment so that there is no scarcity of clean water availability [9]. Thus, clean water management can be effective and efficient and create water management continuity [10].…”

Assessing and Classification of Academic Efficiency in Engineering Teaching Programs

“…The key concept of DEA is the evaluation of the efficiency of the decision-making units that interact within a competition and development sector. Also known as border analysis, DEA has become the standard for the development of processes for comparing, measuring, and evaluating efficiency in productive organizations (Pawsey, Ananda and Hoque, 2018). Different approaches can be taken from the viewpoint of DEA analysis for educational purposes, for example, Amara, Rhaiem and Halilem (2020) evaluated research efficiency of Canadian scholars, considering aspects such as public funding seniority and university reputation.…”

Operational Efficiency of Mexican Water Utilities: Results of a Double-Bootstrap Data Envelopment Analysis

“…Moreover, the bootstrap DEA provides the unbiased or corrected efficiency scores. Pawsey et al [37] used a bootstrap DEA; they used four different models, and all of them had operating cost as a common input and the number of water connections as a unique output. Historic cost, regulatory asset base, and physical asset base were the distinct inputs used in models one, two, and three respectively.…”