Xue, X; Shen, Q; Wang, Y and Lu, J (2008) Measuring the productivity of the construction industry in China by using DEA-based malmquist productivity indices. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(1), pp. 64-71. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Data envelopment analysis (DEA) measures the relative efficiency of decision-making units and avoids any functional specification to express production relationship between inputs and outputs. DEA-based Malmquist productivity index (MPI) measures the productivity change over time. In this paper, the MPI is used to measure the productivity changes of Chinese construction industry from 1997 to 2003. The results of analyses indicate that productivity of the Chinese construction industry experienced a continuous improvement from 1997 to 2003 except for a decline from 2001 to 2002. It is found that there are gaps in productivity development level among western, midland, eastern, and northeastern regions in the Chinese construction industry. The DEA-based MPI approach provides a good tool to support setting up policies and strategic decisions for improving the performance of the Chinese construction industry and promoting the sustainable development of the industry between different regions.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | China; data analysis; measurement; productivity |
| Index terms: | efficiency, productivity, continuous improvement, construction industry, data envelopment analysis, data analysis, specification, sustainable development, decision-making, China |
| Subjects: | performance management, management, performance measurement, health safety and environment, contractual condition, Geography, decision analysis, industry analysis, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Quality Management, Risk Management, Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here