Table4.16presents the numbers and proportions of DEA-efficient units by
university locations. According to the table, the number of DEA-efficient units of
eastern 211Us reaches its maximum in 2006, with the peak value of 26, or 46% of
all eastern 211Us. This number doesn’t change much in 2007–2010, and always
around 20. Inside eastern 211Us, the number of DEA-efficient units of OUs is
substantially lower than that of JUs or HSZUs. The number of DEA-efficient units
of central 211Us is similar with that of the eastern 211Us, approaching its peak
value in 2006 and then staying stable in 2007–2010. Moreover, this number of
central 211Us is relatively stable in thefive years. From thefive-year means in the
last column, It can be found that eastern 211Us have higher DEA-efficient pro-
portion of which JUs and HSZUs are extraordinary high, approaching 44 and 43%
respectively, while OUs is the smallest, only 24%.
Table4.17presents the means and standard deviations of TE scores of eastern,
central and western 211Us in 2006–2010. During thefive-year period, the means of
TE scores for eastern, central, and western 211Us are around 0.80–0.87, 0.76–0.81,
and 0.73–0.81 respectively, and the technical efficiency status of eastern 211Us is
better than that of central or western 211Us. The technical efficiency of central
211Us is in the steady uptrend, while that of western 211Us is in the downtrend.
There are obvious differences inside eastern 211Us, where the technical efficiency
of JUs and HSZUs are considerably larger than that of OUs, and that of OUs is not
at an ideal level, which is lower than the means of central and western 211Us after
2008 (see Fig.4.8).
Table 4.16 Distribution of DEA-efficient units for NEAM disciplines by university location
(2006–2010)
Number of DEA-efficient units (%)
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Mean
East 26 (46%) 22 (39%) 19 (34%) 21 (38%) 21 (38%) 21.8 (39%)
JJJ 13 (57%) 10 (43%) 9 (39%) 9 (39%) 10 (43%) 10.2 (44%)
HSZ 8 (42%) 9 (47%) 8 (42%) 9 (47%) 7 (37%) 8.2 (43%)
Other 5 (36%) 3 (21%) 2 (14%) 3 (21%) 4 (29%) 3.4 (24%)
Central 9 (41%) 5 (23%) 6 (27%) 5 (23%) 7 (32%) 6.4 (29%)
West 8 (36%) 9 (41%) 8 (36%) 8 (36%) 7 (32%) 8 (36%)Table 4.17 TE for NEAM disciplines by university location (2006–2010)
TE mean (SD)
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
East 0.869 (0.161) 0.838 (0.173) 0.802 (0.194) 0.832 (0.181) 0.826 (0.186)
JJJ 0.899 (0.137) 0.880 (0.150) 0.843 (0.180) 0.872 (0.154) 0.848 (0.168)
HSZ 0.892 (0.140) 0.859 (0.157) 0.832 (0.185) 0.865 (0.159) 0.843 (0.174)
Other 0.834 (0.165) 0.791 (0.169) 0.726 (0.182) 0.770 (0.187) 0.763 (0.231)
Central 0.811 (0.222) 0.781 (0.186) 0.763 (0.187) 0.766 (0.182) 0.756 (0.213)
West 0.732 (0.283) 0.778 (0.226) 0.802 (0.200) 0.807 (0.206) 0.807 (0.182)4.2 Overall Status and Change of 211Us’Research Production... 133