Shipping sources

7/24/2019 Shipping sources

1/13

Mexican Journal of Operations Research, Vol. 2, No. 2, Jul-Dec 2013, pp. 29-41. ISSN: 2007-5138.

Received Jul 6, 2013 / Accepted Sep 25, 2013

Editorial Acadmica Dragn Azteca (EDITADA.ORG)

Measuring the operational efficiency of selected Major Ports in India

T. Rajasekar

Ph. D Scholar

Department of Commerce, Pondicherry University

Pondicherry605014

[email protected]

Malabika Deo

Professor & Head

Department of Commerce, Pondicherry University

Pondicherry605014

[email protected]

Abstract

The present research work examine the operational efficiency of

selected major ports in India during the study period 1993-2011through

data envelopment analysis. Hypothesis tested in this study is, size not a

determinant factor for port efficiency. Based on the results it is found that

both bigger ports i.e. Mormugao, Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust and smaller

ports Ennore, Tuticorin were proved to have efficient port operations all

through. The result of super efficiency analysis, the study found that JNPT

port rated as super efficient port among the selected major ports in India.

Keywords: Major Ports in India, Data Envelopment Analysis, Operational

efficiency, Super efficiency model


2/13

Rajasekar and Deo / Measuring the operational efficiency of selected Major Ports in India. MJOR, Vol. 2, No. 2,

Jul-Dec 2013, pp. 29-41. EDITADA. ISSN: 2007-5138.

30

1. Preamble

India being surrounded by ocean in three sides, it is clearly states that Indias economic development is

extremely depend upon external trade and 90% of the Indias export and import were carried through seaports.

Among this major ports plays an important role for export and import transacted in the country, this major ports

carries more than 75% of total Indias trade. The goods being transacted through logistics chain movement, this

logistics become important for any country for its competitiveness in industry. Based on the report of Asian

Development Bank (2007), if the current trend flows out to the future, around 2 billion tons of cargo will be

passed through Indian ports during the year 2015-16. This shows that measuring efficiency of the ports should

be given priority and the facilities of the ports over looked. To improve the efficiency and cargo volume traded

the hub-strategy should be implemented every port i.e. the place enchanting all types of container traffics, this

will improve the trade capacity of the port. The study consider the hypothesis is to test size is not a contributing

factor for port efficiency, some of the studies supporting our hypothesis that bigger ports is a source of

inefficiency for example Coto-Millan et al. 2000 and Cullinane et al. 2004. When some of the studies having

different opinion about the size and efficiency. So here the question arises whether size determines the

efficiency of major ports in India? To answer the above question, the present study carried out the aspect of

operational evaluation of selected major ports in India.

2. Literature Review

The performance of port efficiency has been measured by many researchers such as Roll and Hayuth measured

the port efficiency through data envelopment analysis. Martinez Budria et al. (1999) considered the Spanish

port performance through DEA. Tongzon (2001) evaluated the port performance of 16 container terminals invarious countries in the world. Greek and major four Portuguese ports have been measured by Barros and

Athanssiou (2004). The study made by Cullinane et al (2005) studied privatization and port performance of

worlds top 30 container terminals.

There are few studies taking the issue of the efficiency is based on size? The following studies major aim to

study the relationship between efficiency and size. Al Eraqi A.S. et al (2008) find out the efficiency of 22

major seaports in the region of Middle Eastern and East African and it found that bigger ports are efficient.

Coto-Millan, P (2000) measured 27 Spanish ports performance and it found that smaller ports are efficient while

compare with bigger ports. Sohn, J and Jung, G (2009) find out operational efficiency of 16 Asian ports and the

study concluded that larger ports shows better efficiency. Finally Turner, H et al (2004) analysed top 26 ports in

the region of United States and Canada and it is found that bigger ports are efficient. From the literature review

it is found that most of the studies are used data envelopment analysis (DEA) for measuring its efficiency, Itoh

(2002) suggested that DEA is the suitable model for measuring port efficiency. In this direction this study is also

try to measure the operational performance of selected major ports in India during 1993 2011 with DEA

models.


3/13



31

3. Methodology

3. 1. Objective and Data

The aim of the study is to measuring the operational performance of selected major ports in India during 1993-

2011. This analysis is closely related whether size influencing operational efficiency of selected major ports.

The study used input variables like land, labour and equipments whereas outputs are used container traffic and

total cargo traffic of the selected major ports. This study is entirely based on secondary data which was collected

from the port authorities, CMIE data bases and India Stat websites.

3. 2. Data Envelopment Analysis Overview

The journey of data envelopment analysis (DEA) has been invented by Charnes et al (1978), this technique is

based on linear programming and it will convert the input and output variable to linearity technique for

measuring the efficiency. This conversion is based on the inputs and outputs for its decision making units

(DMU). According to Thanassoulis (2003) data envelopment analysis will give relative efficiency of decision

making units instead of absolute efficiency. Data envelopment analysis is based on mathematical calculation and

also it is called as non-parametric test because it is not following any distribution method. According to

Athanassopoulos and Curram, 1996 studied the bank and restaurant efficiency, through that the author suggested

that DEA is not only suitable for public sector companies but also it will be suitable to measure the efficiency of

private sector firms. Soares de Mellor et al, 2003 highlighted DEA not only measuring the efficiency but also it

identifies the inefficiencies and making benchmark for the efficient and inefficient units. The study done by

Borenstein et al, 2004 state that DEA can differentiate both efficient and inefficient and it will suggest the

adjustment needed for efficient. Siems, 1992 point out measurement of efficiency is based on weighted sum of

inputs and outputs. Based on Saha and Ravisankar, 2000 DEA cannot produce negative weight and the efficient

ratio is restricted to 1 or 100%. DEA set score for each decision making units for its relative performance. In

general, DEA scores is restricted from 0 to 1% or 0 to 100% but the efficient unit obtains the value equal to 1 or

100% (Marinho, 2003).

In DEA model, standard CCR measures the constant returns to scale whereas standard BCC measures the

variable return to scale efficiencies. The application of DEA can be classified into input-oriented and output-

oriented. Input-oriented model minimize the inputs where desire level of output will be achieved, output

oriented model maximize the outputs while input keep as constant level. Both the input and output oriented

model seeks maximize the outputs, minimize the inputs and maximize the efficiency level. Input oriented model

closely related to operational and managerial issues, output oriented model associated with planning and

strategy (Cullinane et al, 2005). In the competition world and port sector reforms most of the ports continuously

review their capacity in order to make sure they can give better services to the society and port users. Taking

this think in the consideration the present study used output oriented DEA models for measuring the efficiency

of selected major ports in India.


4/13



32

3. 3. Compilation of Input and Output Variables

Variables Contents Relevant Literature

InputVariable

No of Berth Rios and Macada (2006), Liu (2008)

Berth Length

Al-Eraqi A. Salem (2008), Cullinane K et. al

(2006), Cullinane and Wang (2006),

No of EquipmentsAl-Eraqi A. Salem (2008), Rios and Macada(2006), Wu and Lin (2008), Cullinane and Wang(2006), Liu (2008)

No of EmployeesRoll and Hayuth (1993), Rios and Macada(2006),

OutputVariable

Container Throughput (TEU)Valentine and Gray, Wu and Lin (2008),Cullinane K et. al (2006), Cullinane and Wang

(2006),

Total TrafficCoto-Millan et. al. (2000), Valentine and Gray,

Al-Eraqi A. Salem (2008), Liu (2008)

Before select the input and output variable the research have gone thoroughly all the earlier literature which was

studied in the port sector. In the above table the input variables have been selected based on land, labour and

equipments are given priority. Because these thinks are most important for any organization and data

envelopment analysis also supporting for the above issues while selecting the input data. The study has been

collected the above data personally all the major ports. After checking the multicollinearity through correlation

test the above variables like number of berths, berth length, number of equipments and number of employees

were selected. The reason behind selecting the input variables number of berth, berth length is playing vital role

for cargo handling whereas number of equipments and number of employees is important for its loading and

unloading activities, keeping in these thinks the above variable has been given priority for selecting as input

variables. For measuring the efficiency of port sector container throughput in TEU and total traffic were

considered as the output variables for this study.

3. 4. Pearson Correlation results

Totaltraffic

No ofequipment

No ofemployees

No ofberth

ContainerBerthlength

Total traffic 1.000

No of equipment 0.265 1.000No of employees 0.356 0.208 1.000

No of berth 0.438 0.217 0.936 1.000Container 0.473 0.737 0.060 0.004 1.000

Berth length 0.507 0.245 0.882 0.970 0.045 1.000


5/13



33

The selection of input and output variable should be reflecting the efficiency of port operations. To make it

confirm in the statistical analysis Pearson correlation test has been conducted. From the test results the

independent variables having reasonable relationship with other variables. According to Jenkins and Anderson,

2003 the variables showing below 0.6 in the correlation test indicating that there is no need for variable

elimination. The variables have chosen in the above aspects and more or less it will reflect the efficiency of port

sector.

4. Results & Discussion

Table1 Standard DEACCR

Mormugao Chennai Paradip Tuticorin Cochin Ennore Mumbai JNPT

1993 1.000 0.797 0.753 1.000 0.512 - 1.000 1.000

1994 1.000 0.748 0.719 1.000 0.501 - 1.000 1.000

1995 1.000 0.636 0.866 1.000 0.577 - 1.000 1.0001996 1.000 0.632 0.862 1.000 0.500 - 1.000 1.000

1997 1.000 0.728 0.926 1.000 0.535 - 1.000 1.000

1998 1.000 0.692 0.773 1.000 0.416 - 1.000 1.000

1999 1.000 0.741 0.951 1.000 0.501 - 0.900 1.000

2000 1.000 0.742 0.978 1.000 0.480 - 0.641 1.000

2001 1.000 0.767 1.000 1.000 0.429 - 0.451 1.000

2002 1.000 0.508 0.824 1.000 0.297 1.000 0.336 1.000

2003 1.000 0.641 0.708 1.000 0.263 1.000 0.277 1.000

2004 1.000 0.674 0.663 1.000 0.253 1.000 0.277 1.000

2005 1.000 0.797 0.745 1.000 0.283 1.000 0.306 1.000

2006 1.000 0.922 0.812 1.000 0.230 1.000 0.318 1.000

2007 1.000 1.000 0.871 1.000 0.254 1.000 0.317 1.000

2008 1.000 1.000 0.932 1.000 0.238 1.000 0.324 1.000

2009 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.249 1.000 0.286 1.000

2010 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.242 1.000 0.242 1.000

2011 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.228 1.000 0.296 1.000

Mean 1.000 0.791 0.862 1.000 0.368 1.000 0.577 1.000

Rank 1 6 5 1 8 1 7 1

Note: Ennore port stated its operations in 2002only.

Table1, shows standard CCR results and its ranking for selected major ports in India, this model result which

is obtained exactly 1.00 will be treated as efficient and other values are treated as inefficient. From the table it is

evident that the ports of Mormugao, Tuticorin, Ennore and JNPT were proved to have efficient port operation

during 1993-2011, whereas Chennai port shows inefficient throughout the study period except in the year 2007 -

2011under standard CCR model. The other ports like Mumbai and Paradip shows fluctuating efficiency during

the study period, the port of Mumbai had efficient in the first six years rest it was operated as inefficient same

time Paradip shows efficient in the year 2001, 2009, 2010 and 2011 rest of the years it was inefficient. The port

of Cochin were operated inefficient throughout the study period. From the above results the selected major ports


6/13



34

could be ranked according to its scores. The ports of Mormugao, Tuticorin, Ennore and JNPT jointly occupied

first position. Followed by Paradip port ranked fifth position among the selected ports, the port Chennai were

occupied sixth position. The other ports like Mumbai and Cochin were occupied last two position among the

selected major ports in India.

Table2 Standard DEABCC


1993 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.613 - 1.000 1.000

1994 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.595 - 1.000 1.000

1995 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.666 - 1.000 1.000

1996 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.626 - 1.000 1.000

1997 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.655 - 1.000 1.000

1998 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.542 - 1.000 1.000

1999 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.596 - 1.000 1.000

2000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.567 - 1.000 1.000

2001 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.508 - 0.972 1.000

2002 1.000 0.465 0.939 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.868 1.000

2003 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.485 1.000 0.795 1.000

2004 1.000 1.000 0.902 1.000 0.440 1.000 0.827 1.000

2005 1.000 1.000 0.973 1.000 0.419 1.000 0.802 1.000

2006 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.370 1.000 0.935 1.000

2007 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.360 1.000 0.980 1.000

2008 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.329 1.000 0.998 1.000

2009 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.299 1.000 0.902 1.000

2010 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.296 1.000 0.893 1.000

2011 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.300 1.000 0.909 1.000

Mean 1.000 0.972 0.990 1.000 0.509 1.000 0.941 1.000

Rank 1 6 5 1 8 1 7 1


Standard DEA BCC model and it results were obtained in the table 2. The port of Mormugao, Tuticorin,

Ennore and JNPT were again being rated as efficient port operations in India, while Chennai also showsefficient score all the years except in the year 2002 were it was inefficient. Paradip port also rated as efficient

ports all the year except in the year 2002, 2004 and 2005 were it was rated as inefficient. Mumbai port had

efficient operations in the first eight years after that it was operated as inefficient. Cochin port were again rated

as inefficient throughout the study period. While the results of DEA-BCC shows more efficient years compare

with DEA CCR results, the reason for this DEA-CCR based on constant return to scale whereas DEA-BCC

results based on variable return to scale.

The port of Mormugao, Tutiocorin, Ennore and JNPT were again occupied the first position with

efficient throughout the years. The ports of Chennai and Paradip has occupied the positions of fifth and sixth


7/13



35

respectively. The least efficient ports like Mumbai and Cochin were occupied the last two positions among the

selected major ports in India.

Table3, Relative Efficiency of Major Ports in India

Chennai Cochin JNPT Mormugao Mumbai Paradip Tuticorin Ennore

1993Scale

Inefficient

Pure Technical

InefficientEfficient Efficient Efficient Efficient Efficient

Not in

Operating

1994Scale

Inefficient

Pure Technical

InefficientEfficient Efficient Efficient Efficient Efficient

Not in

Operating

1995Scale

InefficientPure Technical

InefficientEfficient Efficient

ScaleInefficient

Efficient EfficientNot in

Operating

1996Scale

Inefficient

Pure Technical


Scale


Not in

Operating

1997Scale

Inefficient

Pure Technical


Scale


Not in

Operating

1998Scale

Inefficient

Pure Technical


Scale


Not in

Operating

1999 ScaleInefficient

Pure TechnicalInefficient

Efficient Efficient ScaleInefficient

Efficient Efficient Not inOperating

2000Scale



ScaleInefficient

Efficient EfficientNot in

Operating

2001Scale

Inefficient

Pure Technical


Scale


Not in

Operating

2002Scale

Inefficient

Pure Technical


Scale

Inefficient

Pure

Technical

Inefficient

Efficient Efficient

2003Scale

Inefficient

Pure Technical


Scale

Inefficient

Pure

Technical

Inefficient

Efficient Efficient

2004 ScaleInefficient

Scale Inefficient Efficient Efficient ScaleInefficient

Pure

Technical

Inefficient

Efficient Efficient

2005Scale

InefficientScale Inefficient Efficient Efficient

Scale

Inefficient

Scale


2006Scale

Inefficient

Pure Technical


Scale

Inefficient

Scale


2007Scale

Inefficient

Pure Technical


Scale

Inefficient

Pure

TechnicalInefficient

Efficient Efficient

2008Scale

Inefficient

Pure Technical


Scale

Inefficient

Pure

Technical

Inefficient

Efficient Efficient

2009Scale



ScaleInefficient

PureTechnical

Inefficient

Efficient Efficient

2010Scale

Inefficient

Pure Technical


Scale

Inefficient

Pure

TechnicalInefficient

Efficient Efficient

2011

Pure

Technical

Inefficient

Scale Inefficient Efficient EfficientScale

Inefficient

Pure

Technical

Inefficient

Efficient Efficient

Note: Ennore Port started its operations in 2002 only ***** - represents efficient units


8/13



36

Relative efficiency analysis of selected major ports in Indi during 1993 2011were taken place in the table3,

this table measuring the efficient as well as inefficient units and the reasons for the inefficient unit. The score

report indicates that the ports like Mormugao, Tuticorin, Ennore and JNPT operated as efficient ports among

selected major ports in India. The ports of Chennai and Paradip were showed inefficiency because of utilization

of its resources i.e. scale inefficient in most of the years except in the year 2007-11 and 2009-11 respectively.

This inefficient ports need to improve its utilization capacity to become efficient one. The port of Cochin shows

pure technical inefficient throughout the study period, this indicates technologically this port behind while

compare with other selected ports. So the technological up gradation should be taken care to become efficient

unit. Port of Mumbai has operated efficient in the initial years and latterly it was inefficient because of lack of

utilization capacity. Properties of scaling techniques four ports are constant return to scale prevails and two ports

are increasing returns to scale and rest two ports show decreasing returns to scale.

Table4, DEAAdditive Constant Return to Scale


1993 1.000 0.611 0.607 1.000 0.455 - 1.000 1.000

1994 1.000 0.597 0.573 1.000 0.484 - 1.000 1.000

1995 1.000 0.611 0.861 1.000 0.547 - 1.000 1.000

1996 1.000 0.608 0.855 1.000 0.443 - 1.000 1.000

1997 1.000 0.676 0.915 1.000 0.491 - 1.000 1.000

1998 1.000 0.626 0.759 1.000 0.390 - 1.000 1.000

1999 1.000 0.621 0.928 1.000 0.390 - 0.725 1.000

2000 1.000 0.582 0.955 1.000 0.339 - 0.469 1.000

2001 1.000 0.545 1.000 1.000 0.316 - 0.375 1.000

2002 1.000 0.437 0.516 1.000 0.260 1.000 0.294 1.000

2003 1.000 0.492 0.479 1.000 0.252 1.000 0.255 1.000

2004 1.000 0.488 0.458 1.000 0.242 1.000 0.257 1.000

2005 1.000 0.735 0.539 1.000 0.277 1.000 0.268 1.000

2006 1.000 0.837 0.804 1.000 0.229 1.000 0.227 1.000

2007 1.000 1.000 0.858 1.000 0.248 1.000 0.187 1.000

2008 1.000 1.000 0.917 1.000 0.230 1.000 0.161 1.000

2009 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.230 1.000 0.133 1.000

2010 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.208 1.000 0.080 1.000

2011 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.207 1.000 0.270 1.000Mean 1.000 0.709 0.791 1.000 0.328 1.000 0.511 1.000

Rank 1 6 5 1 8 1 7 1

DEAAdditive models measures how the firms are efficiently using their resources. Standard DEA- BCC and

DEA CCR models measures input and output oriented models for separately whereas DEA-Additive model

measures the combination of input and output oriented model. From the table it is revealed that the ports like

Mormugao, Tuticorin, Ennore and JNPT using their resources efficiently throughout the study period. The ports

of Chennai shows inefficient utilization during all the years except in the year 2007-2011 it was inefficient.

Paradip also found to be inefficient utilization all the years except 2001, 2009 2011. Mumbai port shows


9/13



37

efficient utilization during first six years and latterly it went to inefficient. The port of Cochin shows inefficient

utilization throughout the study period. The efficient utilization ports having acceptable technology so that the

utilization has been successful with out delay but the same time inefficient ports should concentrate on its

technological up gradation to become efficient utilization. The port of Mormugao, Tuticorin, Ennore and JNPT

were ranked as first positions followed by Paradip has occupied fifth position among selected major ports. The

port of Chennai rated as six position in utilization capacity and lease perform ports like Mumbai and Cochin has

occupied last two positions during the study period.

Table5, DEAAdditive Variable Return to Scale


1993 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.467 - 1.000 1.000

1994 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.479 - 1.000 1.000

1995 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.571 - 1.000 1.000

1996 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.701 - 1.000 1.000

1997 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.720 - 1.000 1.000

1998 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.638 - 1.000 1.000

1999 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.352 - 1.000 1.000

2000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.317 - 1.000 1.000

2001 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.305 - 1.000 1.000

2002 1.000 1.000 0.813 1.000 0.262 1.000 1.000 1.000

2003 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.259 1.000 1.000 1.000

2004 1.000 1.000 0.715 1.000 0.249 1.000 1.000 1.000

2005 1.000 1.000 0.831 1.000 0.281 1.000 1.000 1.000

2006 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.231 1.000 1.000 1.000

2007 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.260 1.000 0.226 1.000

2008 1.000 1.000 0.167 1.000 0.242 1.000 1.000 1.000

2009 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.236 1.000 0.136 1.000

2010 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.211 1.000 0.082 1.000

2011 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.213 1.000 0.099 1.000

Mean 1.000 1.000 0.922 1.000 0.368 1.000 0.818 1.000

Rank 1 1 6 1 8 1 7 1


Table 5 results measures the utilization capacity under variable returns to scale for selected major ports in

India during 1993 2011. The port operation of Mormugao, Chennai, Tuticorin, Ennore and JNPT were

efficiently utilizing it resources throughout the study period. Paradip port rated as efficient port operations all

the years except in the year 2002, 2004, 2005 and 2008 during the period it was operated as inefficient. Mumbai

port shows efficient utilization in the initial years but latterly it went to inefficient. The port of Cochin rated

again inefficient utilization through variable returns to scale during all the years. Rank wise classification the

ports like Mormugao, Chennai, Tuticorin, Ennore and JNPT shared first positions during the study period. The

ports like Paradip and Mumbai ranked sixth and seventh positions during 1993 2011. The lease efficient port

Cochin rated last rank among selected major ports in India.


10/13



38

Table6, DEAA&P Super Efficiency Model


1993 3.141 0.797 0.753 2.063 0.512 - 1.032 6.446

1994 3.296 0.748 0.719 2.143 0.504 - 1.073 5.190

1995 2.144 0.636 0.866 2.248 0.577 - 1.171 6.0631996 2.650 0.632 0.862 1.983 0.500 - 1.119 7.043

1997 2.448 0.728 0.926 1.962 0.535 - 1.101 6.945

1998 2.672 0.692 0.773 2.093 0.416 - 1.078 7.824

1999 2.300 0.741 0.951 1.882 0.501 - 0.900 10.000

2000 2.208 0.742 0.978 2.152 0.480 - 0.641 10.000

2001 2.402 0.767 1.076 2.182 0.429 - 0.451 10.000

2002 3.789 0.508 0.824 2.124 0.297 10.000 0.336 10.000

2003 2.255 0.641 0.708 1.731 0.263 10.000 0.275 10.000

2004 2.496 0.674 0.663 1.727 0.253 10.000 0.277 10.000

2005 2.452 0.797 0.745 1.916 0.283 10.000 0.306 10.000

2006 2.084 0.922 0.812 1.805 0.230 10.000 0.318 8.389

2007 1.945 1.027 0.871 1.634 0.254 10.000 0.317 8.756

2008 1.835 1.157 0.932 1.407 0.238 8.091 0.324 9.802

2009 2.358 1.253 1.101 1.420 0.249 5.370 0.286 9.647

2010 2.243 1.258 1.193 1.183 0.242 3.543 0.242 9.857

2011 2.337 1.467 1.168 1.179 0.228 3.344 0.296 9.209

Mean 2.477 0.852 0.891 1.833 0.368 4.229 0.608 8.693

Rank 3 6 5 4 8 2 7 1

DEA Anderson & Peterson model measures super efficiency among selected major ports in India. Super

efficiency ranking method developed by Anderson and Peterson in the year 1993, is the most widespread

method and the model was followed by many of the researchers for measuring the super efficiency on decision

making units. Super efficiency measures can be calculated both the efficient and inefficient observations, in

efficient observations may obtain higher value were inefficient observation the measure of efficiency score do

not change. From the table it is found that the port of JNPT shows higher efficiency among selected major ports

in India with 8.693 followed by Ennore port shows super efficient during the study period with 4.229 and placed

in the second position. Mormugao port also rated as super efficient with 2.477 among selected major ports in

India. The port of Tuticorin shows super efficient during the study period with the value of 1.833. Other ports

like Chennai, Paradip, Mumbai and Cochin were rated as inefficient ports, because DEA A & P do not

measure inefficient observations.


11/13



39

4. Concluding remarks

Measuring the relative efficiency of ports data envelopment analysis has been used. The present study has been

employed DEA models for measuring the relative efficiency of selected major ports in India during 1993

2011. The selection of input and output variables are based on the variable having close relationship with the

efficiency of ports were considered. The input variables has been selected for this study is number of berths,

berth length, number of equipments and number of employees whereas output variables are considered in this

study is container throughput and total traffic. Based on the results the ports like Mormugao, Tuticorin, Ennore

and JNPT rated as efficient ports under the standard DEA-CCR, BCC and DEA Additive CRS and VRS

methods. The study also shows that size is not a determinant factor for port efficiency i.e. bigger ports like

Mormugao, JNPT and smaller ports Ennore, Tuticorin were proved to be efficient ports all though. It can be

concluded that there is no difference between size and efficiency of the port. Based on the results some of the

ports are operated as inefficiency, so it is necessary to strengthen the operation of the Indian ports. Few

suggestions can be made through this study to reinforce the performance of major ports in India.

From the study it can be understood that some of the ports are operating inefficiently so this is the time to think

about longterm plan for boost up the upgrade of infrastructure facilities in the major ports.

The inefficiencies mostly in terms of scale inefficient and the port of Cochin shows pure technical inefficient,

for scale inefficient it is time to modernize the ports to become efficient port. For improving technical efficiency

the technological up gradation should be taken care for the particular ports. However, the caution should be

taken care when interpreting the efficient ports like Mormugao, Tuticorin, Ennore and JNPT, they may be better

when comparison of the ports but not the best one, where there exists little room for further betterment.

References

1. Al-Eraqi, A, S., Mustaffa, A., Khader, A, T., and Barros, C, P.: Efficiency of middle Eastern and East

African seaports: application of DEA using Window analysis, European Journal of Scientific Research,

Vol. 23, No. 4 (2008) 597-612.

2. Athanassopoulos, A, D., and Curram, S.: A comparison of data envelopment analysis and artificial

neural networks as tools for assessing the efficiency of decision making units, Journal of Operational

Research Society, Vol. 47, No. 8 (1996) 1000-1017.3. Barros, C, P., Athanassiou, M.: Efficiency in European seaports with DEA: evidence from Greece and

Portugal, Maritime Economics & Logistics, Vol. 6, No. 2 (2004) 122-140.

4. Borenstein, D., Becker, J, L., and Prado, J, V.: Measuring the Efficiency of Brazilian Post Office Stores

Using Data Envelopment Analysis, International Journal of Operations & Production Management,

Vol. 24, No. 9 (2004) 1055-78.

5. Charnes, A., Cooper, W, W., and Rhodes, E.: Measuring the efficiency of decision making units,

European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 2, No. 6 (1978) 119-140.

6. Cullinane, K., Song, D, W., Wang, T, F.: An application of DEA window analysis to container port

production efficiency, Review of Network Economics, Vol. 3, No. 2 (2004) 184-206.


12/13



40

7. Cullinane, K., Wang, T, F., Ji, P.: The relationship between privatization and DEA estimates of

efficiency in the container port industry, Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. 57, No. 5 (2005)

433-462.

8. Itoh, H.: Efficiency changes at major container ports in Japan: a window application of data

envelopment analysis, Review of Urban & Regional Development Studies, Vol. 14, No. 2 (2002) 133-

152.

9. Sohn, J, R., and Jung, C.: The size effect of a port on the container handling efficiency level and market

share in international transshipment flow, Maritime Policy Management, Vol. 36, No. 2 (2009) 117-

129.

10. Marinho, A.: Avaliac da eficincia tcnica nos services de sade nos municicpios do Estado do Rio

de janeiro, Rveista Brasileira de Economia, Vol. 57 (2003) 515-534.

11. Martinez-Budria, E., Diaz-Armas, R., Navarro-Ibanez, M., and Ravelo-Mesa, T.: A study of the

efficiency of Spanish port authorities using data envelopment analysis, International Journal of

Transport Economics, Vol. 26, No. 2 (1999) 237-253.

12. Coto-Millan, P., Banos-Pino, J., and Rodriguez-Alvarez, A.: Economic Efficiency in Spanish Ports:

Some Empirical Evidence, Maritime Policy Management, Vol. 27, No. 2 (2000) 169-174.

13. Rios, L.R., and Maada, A.C.G.: Analyzing the relative efficiency of container terminals of

MERCOSUR using DEA, Maritime Economics & Logistics,Vol. 8 (2006) 331-346.

14. Saha, A., and Ravishankar, T.S.: Rating of Indian Commercial Banks: A DEA Approach, European

Journal of Operational Research,Vol. 124, No. 1 (2000) 187-203.

15. Siems, T.: Quantifying managements role in bank survival, Economic Review, Vol. 20 (1992) 29-41.

16. Thanassoulis, E.: Introduction to the theory and application of data envelopment analysis: a foundation

text with integrated software, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, 2003.

17. Tongzon, J.: Efficiency measurement of selected Australian and other international ports using data

envelopment analysis, Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 35, No. 2 (2001) 107-122.

18. Turner, H., Windle, R., Dresner, M.: North American container port productivity: 19841997,

Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 40, No. 4 (2004) 339-356.

19. Soares, M., and Angulo, G.: Efficiency index in Fuzzy DEA Frontier, Anais do XXXV Simposio

Brasileiro deo Pesquisa Operational, Natal, RN, November, Protuguese, 2003.

20. Cullinane, K.., Ji, P., and Wang, T.F.: The efficiency of European container ports: A cross sectional

data envelopment analysis (CDEA), International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications,Vol.

9, No. 1 (2006)19-31.

21. Liu, C.: Evaluating the operational efficiency of major ports in the Asia-Pacific region using data

envelopment analysis, Applied Economics, Vol. 40 (2008) 1737-1743.

22. Cullinane, K.., and Song, D.W.: Estimating the relative efficiency of European container ports: A

stochastic frontier analysis, Port Economics,Vol. 16 (2006) 85-115.

23. Wu, J., & Lin, C.: National port competitiveness: Implications for India, Management Decisions, Vol.

46, No. 10 (2008) 1482-1507.


13/13



41

24. Valentine, V.F., & Gray, R.: The measurement of port efficiency using data envelopment analysis",

Special Interest Group on Maritime Transport and Ports a member of the WCTR Society. International

Workshop, Genoa, 2000.

25. Roll, Y., and Hayuth, Y.: Port Performance Comparison Applying Data Envelopment Analysis,

Maritime Policy and Management, Vol. 20, No. 2 (1993) 1-12.

26. Andersen, P., and Petersen, N.C.: A procedure for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis,

Management Science, Vol. 39 (1993) 1261-1264.

27. Banker, R.D., Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W.: Model for estimating technical and scale efficiencies in data

envelopment analysis, Management Science, Vol. 30, No. 9 (1984) 1078-1092.

Date post:	23-Feb-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	dvenkatesaneil
View:	217 times
Download:	0 times

Shipping sources

Documents