4.2.2 HSS Disciplines
Similar with NEAM disciplines, in this subsection, we will do the estimation of
HSS research efficiency of 211Us in two ways (original data and MA data with
one-period lag).
4.2.2.1 Results with Original Data
Applying CRS and VRS DEA models to our original data, we calculate the research
production efficiency scores of the full HSS sample for thefive-year period from
2006 to 2010. See Tables4.49,4.50,4.51,4.52and4.53in Appendix for details.
Table4.8presents the numbers of DEA-efficient DMUs and their operation
stages for HSS research production of 211Us. In thefive-year period, there are
around 5 universities (or 4.8% of all 211Us) achieving technical efficiency. From
the view of returns to scale, there are around 8% of all universities achieving
optimum scale (or CRS), and 40–50% of all universities operating in the area of
increasing returns to scale (IRS), and the rest operating in the area of decreasing
returns to scale (DRS).
It can be found in Table4.9that, in 2009–2010, the averages of TE, PTE, and
SE scores are 0.33–0.42, 0.42–0.56, 0.72–0.81 respectively in HSS research pro-
duction of 211Us. TE and PTE scores are on a relatively low level, while SE scores
are on a fairly good level. The changes of each indicator in thesefive years are
relatively small, TE and PTE scores are in the uptrend with minorfluctuations, and
Table 4.8 Distribution of TE, PTE and SE for HSS disciplines (2006–2010)
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Overall technical efficiency
TE = 1 4 (4%) 6 (6%) 5 (5%) 6 (6%) 6 (6%)
TE < 1 101 (96%) 99 (94%) 100 (95%) 99 (94%) 99 (94%)
Scale efficiency
IRS 46 (44%) 52 (50%) 39 (37%) 39 (37%) 50 (48%)
DRS 51 (49%) 45 (43%) 60 (57%) 58 (55%) 47 (45%)
CRS 8 (8%) 8 (8%) 6 (6%) 8 (8%) 8 (8%)Table 4.9 TE, PTE and SE for HSS disciplines (2006–2010)
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
TE mean
(SD)0.330
(0.231)
0.413
(0.249)
0.336
(0.227)
0.381
(0.243)
0.424
(0.236)
PTE mean
(SD)0.424
(0.269)
0.530
(0.291)
0.492
(0.294)
0.513
(0.273)
0.564
(0.276)
SE mean
(SD)0.804
(0.211)
0.810
(0.202)
0.716
(0.228)
0.750
(0.230)
0.771
(0.211)
126 4 Evaluation on Research Efficiency of 211Us: The DEA Approach