Revisiting weight-restricted DEA models: A modified single-stage approach and an application to school efficiency evaluation

Kwame Mensah *

          Department of Mathematics, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana

Abstract

Dynamic educational systems require continuous evaluation of performance and efficiency to respond effectively to structural, managerial, and social changes. Educational organizations can be assessed based on their objectives and missions, as well as how efficiently they use available resources. This study employs multiplier Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) models to examine computational and conceptual issues that arise when very small lower bounds are imposed on input and output weights. It is shown that the conventional single-stage DEA approach, particularly under weight restrictions, may generate efficiency targets with negative input values, which are theoretically and practically invalid. To address this limitation, a modified single-stage formulation inspired by the two-stage framework of Ali and Seiford is proposed, allowing for the simultaneous and consistent evaluation of radial and non-radial inefficiencies while preventing infeasible efficiency targets. An empirical application to non-profit schools in Fars Province demonstrates that arbitrarily small weight bounds can lead to misleading efficiency projections, whereas the proposed model produces more realistic and interpretable results, highlighting the need to revise standard single-stage DEA formulations when weight restrictions are applied in educational performance assessment.

Keywords

Data envelopment analysis, Weight restrictions, Efficiency evaluation, Educational performance, Non-profit schools

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

https://doi.org/10.21833/AEEE.2025.01.001

Article history

Received 11 October 2024, Received in revised form 19 June 2025, Accepted 25 October 2025

Full text

DownloadAvailable in PDF
Portable Document Format

How to cite

Mensah K (2025). Transient wavelet energy-based protection in microgrid power system. Annals of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, 4(1): 1-4

References (25)

  1. Ali AI and Seiford LM (1993). The mathematical programming approach to efficiency analysis. In: Fried HO, Lovell CAK, and Schmidt SS (Eds.), The measurement of productive efficiency: 120–159. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195072181.003.0003

  2. Allen R, Athanassopoulos A, Dyson RG, and Thanassoulis E (1997). Weight restrictions and value judgements in data envelopment analysis: Evolution, development and future directions. Annals of Operations Research, 73: 13–34. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018968909638

  3. Asil HRB and Rashidi S F (2015). Weight control with using goal programming in data envelopment analysis. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 2(3): 1–5.

  4. Banker RD, Charnes A, and Cooper WW (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30(9): 1078–1092. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.30.9.1078

  5. Bessent A, Bessent W, Charnes A, Cooper WW, and Thorogood N (1982). Evaluation of educational program proposals by means of DEA. Educational Administration Quarterly, 18(2): 82–107.       https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X82018002006

  6. Charnes A, Cooper WW, and Rhodes E (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6): 429–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8

  7. Charnes A, Cooper WW, and Rhodes E (1981). Evaluating program and managerial efficiency: An application of data envelopment analysis to program follow through. Management Science, 27(6): 668–697. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.27.6.668

  8. Cook WD and Zhu J (2008). Data envelopment analysis: Modeling operational processes and measuring productivity. CreateSpace, Boston, USA.

  9. Fanati Rashidi S (2019). Determination of right/left return to scale in two-stage processes based on dual simplex. International Journal of Data Envelopment Analysis, 4(3): 1–10. 

  10. Fanati Rashidi S (2020). Studying productivity using a synergy between the balanced scorecard and analytic network process. OPSEARCH, 57(4): 1404–1421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12597-020-00466-5

  11. Hosseini H, Noura AA, and Rashidi SF (2018). Applications of data envelopment analysis in development and assessment of sustainability across economic, environmental and social dimensions. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 9(7): 52–60. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2018.090722

  12. Hosseini H, Rashidi SF, and Hamzehee A (2020). Study of the impact of environmental pollution on efficiency and sustainable development using data envelopment analysis. Matematika, 36: 157–179.  https://doi.org/10.11113/matematika.v36.n2.1224

  13. Johnes J (2006). Data envelopment analysis and its application to the measurement of efficiency in higher education. Economics of Education Review, 25(3): 273–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2005.02.005

  14. Johnes J and Yu L (2008). Measuring the research performance of Chinese higher education institutions using data envelopment analysis. China Economic Review, 19(4): 679–696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2008.08.004

  15. Kao C and Hung HT (2008). Efficiency analysis of university departments: An empirical study. Omega, 36(4): 653–664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2006.02.003

  16. Podinovski VV (1999). Weight restrictions in data envelopment analysis: A review of recent developments. European Journal of Operational Research, 116(1): 1–22. 

  17. Podinovski VV (2004). Production trade-offs and weight restrictions in data envelopment analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 55(12): 1311–1322. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601781

  18. Podinovski VV (2007). Improving data envelopment analysis estimates of technical efficiency. European Journal of Operational Research, 183(1): 338–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2006.10.036

  19. Rashidi SF (2023). Interval congestion in commercial bank branches. Journal of Mathematical Extension, 17: 1–15.

  20. Rashidi SF, Barati R, and Kamali Z (2014). Measurement efficiency by Malmquist method in data envelopment analysis. Trends in Applied Sciences Research, 9(1): 54–60. https://doi.org/10.3923/tasr.2014.54.60

  21. Rashidi SF, Olfati M, Mirjalili S, Platoš J, and Snášel V (2025). A comprehensive DEA-based framework for evaluating sustainability and efficiency of vehicle types: Integrating undesirable inputs and social-environmental indicators. Cleaner Engineering and Technology, 27: 100989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clet.2025.100989

  22. Ruggiero J (1996). On the measurement of technical efficiency in the public sector. European Journal of Operational Research, 90(3): 553–565. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(94)00346-7

  23. Ruggiero J (2004). Data envelopment analysis with stochastic data. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 55(9): 1008–1012. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601767

  24. Thanassoulis E (1996). Assessing the effectiveness of schools with pupil attainment and other factors. Omega, 24(2): 229–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(95)00060-7

  25. Thanassoulis E, Portela MCS, and Allen R (2004). Incorporating value judgements in DEA. In: Cooper WW, Seiford LM, and Zhu J (Eds.), Handbook on data envelopment analysis: 99–138. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-7798-X_4