324700_Print.indd

4.2.10 NEAM Disciplines...............................

4.2.10.1 Analysis on the Redundancy of Inputs in DEA-Inefficient

211Us

The detailed results for each DEA-inefficient 211Us are presented in Tables4.57,

4.58, 4.59, 4.60 and 4.61 in Appendix, here we summarize the results in

Tables4.20,4.21,4.22and4.23.

(1) Analysis on the full sample

It can be seen from Table4.20that the redundant proportions of T&R Staff and

R&D Gants in DEA-inefficient universities are high across all years, withfive-year

means at−34.5 and−35.23%. And from Fig.4.20, we can observe a downward

trend on the indicator of T&R Staff, and some rise and fall on the indicator of R&D

Grants (Fig.4.10).

Table 4.20 Average redundant proportion of research inputs of DEA-inefficient universities

(NEAM)

2006 (%) 2007 (%) 2008 (%) 2009 (%) 2010 (%) Mean (%)

T&R staff −35.43 −34.92 −34.89 −33.30 −33.97 −34.50

R&D grants −35.39 −34.36 −35.99 −35.08 −35.31 −35.23

Table 4.21 Average redundant proportion of research inputs of DEA-inefficient units by

university type (NEAM)

Types 2006 (%) 2007 (%) 2008 (%) 2009 (%) 2010 (%) Mean (%)

T&R

staff

985Us −25.48 −29.61 −29.49 −30.58 −29.39 −28.91

Non-985Us −40.02 −37.58 −37.50 −34.61 −36.50 −37.24

R&D

grants

985Us −29.76 −26.05 −34.24 −27.85 −28.17 −29.21

Non-985Us −37.98 −38.52 −36.84 −38.56 −39.24 −38.23

Table 4.22 Average redundant proportion of T&R staff of DEA-inefficient units by university

location (NEAM)

T&R staff

2006 (%) 2007 (%) 2008 (%) 2009 (%) 2010 (%) Means (%)

East −26.90 −29.70 −32.69 −30.99 −31.44 −30.34

JJJ −22.96 −24.17 −25.01 −21.49 −26.49 −24.02

HSZ −31.79 −33.31 −39.76 −36.69 −31.85 −34.68

Other −26.34 −32.03 −36.67 −39.21 −38.02 −34.45

Central −46.90 −40.05 −40.27 −33.53 −40.22 −40.19

West −43.91 −43.88 −35.70 −39.21 −34.05 −39.35

4.2 Overall Status and Change of 211Us’Research Production... 137