universities operating in the area of Increasing Returns to Scale (IRS), and another
50 – 55% of universities operating in the area of Decreasing Returns to Scale (DRS).
These results are similar with Table4.4, with a relatively smaller amount of scale
efficient units.
It can be seen from Table4.7, applying the method of MA with one-period lag,
the estimations of the averages of TE, PTE, and SE scores are around 0.80, 0.88,
and 0.91 respectively, all of which are placed at a considerably high level with
relatively small yearly changes. The averages of TE and SE scores are in the
downtrend, while the average of PTE is in the uptrend (see Fig.4.3). These results
are in the similar pattern with Table4.5. Generally speaking, there are more rooms
to improve the TE, PTE and SE of NEAM research efficiency in 211Us. From the
efficiency data in 2009 (Table4.6), the percentages of universities which need to
improve their TE and SE are 70 and 67% respectively. These results are 5% larger
than those results estimated by original data.
From the results of standard deviations of TE, PTE and SE scores, wefind the
between-university variations of TE, PTE, or SE are not enlarged during the period
of 2007–2009. The standard deviations of TE and SE scores are in the downtrend,
but that of PTE increases a little. The SDs of three efficiency scores are around 0.18,
0.17, and 0.12 respectively, a little smaller than the calculations in Table4.5. The
changes of SD are very small during these three years, reflecting the converging
trend of TE, PTE and SE inside the NEAM research production of 211Us.
Table 4.7 TE, PTE and SE
for NEAM discipline (2007–
2009, MA)
2007 2008 2009
TE mean
(SD)0.805
(0.189)
0.804
(0.186)
0.800
(0.184)
PTE mean
(SD)0.896
(0.168)
0.888
(0.168)
0.875
(0.172)
SE mean
(SD)0.901
(0.125)
0.910
(0.126)
0.917
(0.113)
Fig. 4.3 Changes of TE,
PTE and SE for NEAM
disciplines (2007–2009, MA)
4.2 Overall Status and Change of 211Us’Research Production... 125