Efficiency, technology and productivity change in Australian universities, 1998–2003
Andrew C. Worthington, Boon L. Lee
Economics of Education Review Volume 27, Number 3, ISSN 0272-7757 Publisher: Elsevier Ltd
In this study, productivity growth in 35 Australian universities is investigated using non-parametric frontier techniques over the period 1998–2003. The five inputs included in the analysis are full-time equivalent academic and non-academic staff, non-labour expenditure and undergraduate and postgraduate student load while the six outputs are undergraduate, postgraduate and Ph.D. completions, national competitive and industry grants and publications. Using Malmquist indices, productivity growth is decomposed into technical efficiency and technological change. The results indicate that annual productivity growth averaged 3.3% across all universities, with a range from −1.8% to 13.0%, and was largely attributable to technological progress. However, separate analyses of research-only and teaching-only productivity indicate that most of this gain was attributable to improvements in research-only productivity associated with pure technical and some scale efficiency improvements. While teaching-only productivity also contributed, the largest source of gain in that instance was technological progress offset by a slight fall in technical efficiency.
Worthington, A.C. & Lee, B.L. (2008). Efficiency, technology and productivity change in Australian universities, 1998–2003. Economics of Education Review, 27(3), 285-298. Elsevier Ltd. Retrieved March 27, 2023 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/68674/.
This record was imported from Economics of Education Review on March 1, 2019. Economics of Education Review is a publication of Elsevier.Full text is availabe on Science Direct: http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ794632
ReferencesView References & Citations Map
- Abbott, M., & Doucouliagos, C. (2003). The efficiency of Australian universities: A data envelopment analysis . Economics of Education Review, 22(1), pp. 89-97.
- Abbott, M., & Doucouliagos, C. (2003). Research output of Australian universities . Education Economics, 12(3), pp. 251-265.
- Athanassopoulos, A.D., & Shale, E. (1997). Assessing the comparative efficiency of higher education institutions in the UK by means of data envelopment analysis . Education Economics, 5(1), pp. 117-134.
- Beasley, J.E. (1995). Determining teaching and research efficiencies . Journal of the Operational Research Society, 46, pp. 441-452.
- Carrington, R., Coelli, T., & Rao, P. (2005). The performance of Australian universities: Conceptual issues and preliminary results . Economic Papers, 24(2), pp. 145-163.
- Cobbold, T., & Kulys, A. (2003). Australia's industry sector productivity performance. Productivity commission research memorandum, Cat. no. GA 512, Canberra.
- Coelli, T., Prasada Rao, D.S., & Battese, G.E. (1998). An introduction to efficiency and productivity analysis . Boston: Kluwer.
- Department of Education, Science and Technology (2006). Higher education research data collection specifications for the collection of 2005 data. Available at: 〈 http://www.dest.gov.au/〉. Accessed June 2006.
- Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., Lindgren, B., & Roos, P. (1992). Productivity changes in Swedish pharmacies 1980–1989: A non-parametric Malmquist approach . Journal of Productivity Analysis, 3(1/2), pp. 85-101.
- Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., Norris, M., & Zhang, Z. (1994). Productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change in industrialized countries . American Economic Review, 84(1), pp. 66-83.
- Flegg, A.T., & Allen, D.O. (2007). Does expansion cause congestion? The case of the older British universities, 1994–2004 . Education Economics, 15(1), pp. 75-102.
- Flegg, A.T., Allen, D.O., Field, K., & Thurlow, T.W. (2004). Measuring the efficiency of British universities: A multi-period data envelopment analysis . Education Economics, 12(3), pp. 231-249.
- Johnes, G., & Johnes, J. (1993). Measuring the research performance of UK economics departments: An application of data envelopment analysis . Oxford Economic Papers, 45, pp. 322-347.
- Johnes, J. (2006). Data envelopment analysis and its application to the measurement of efficiency in higher education . Economics of Education Review, 25(3), pp. 273-288.
- Johnes, J., & Johnes, G. (1995). Research funding and performance in UK university departments of economics: A frontier analysis . Economics of Education Review, 14(3), pp. 301-314.
- Johnes, J., Johnes, G., Thanassoulis, E., Lenton, P., & Emrouznejad, A. (2004). An exploratory analysis of the cost structure of higher education in England. Department of Education and Skills, Research Report RR641. Available at: 〈 http://www.dfes.gov.uk/〉. Accessed June 2006.
- Madden, G., Savage, S., & Kemp, S. (1997). Measuring public sector efficiency: A study of economics departments at Australian universities . Education Economics, 5(2), pp. 153-168.
- Mahlberg, B., & Url, T. (2003). Effects of the single market on the Austrian insurance industry . Empirical Economics, 28(4), pp. 813-838.
- Maniadakis, N., & Thanassoulis, E. (2000). Assessing productivity changes in UK hospitals reflecting technology and input prices . Applied Economics, 32(12), pp. 1575-1589.
- Simar, L., & Wilson, P. (1998). Sensitivity analysis of efficiency scores: How to bootstrap in nonparametric frontier models . Management Science, 44(1), pp. 49-61.
- Sturm, J.E., & Williams, B. (2004). Foreign bank entry, deregulation and bank efficiency: Lessons from the Australian experience . Journal of Banking and Finance, 28(7), pp. 1775-1799.
- Ventura, J., Gonzalez, E., & Carcaba, A. (2004). Efficiency and program-contract bargaining in Spanish public hospitals . Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 75(4), pp. 549-573.
- Worthington, A.C. (1999). Malmquist indices of productivity change in Australian financial services . Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 9(3), pp. 303-320.
- Worthington, A.C. (2001). An empirical survey of frontier efficiency measurement techniques in education . Education Economics, 9(3), pp. 245-268.
These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.Suggest Corrections to References