Examining Efficiency Differentials by Council Type in South Australian Local Government: An Environmentally Adjusted Meta-Frontier Data Envelopment Approach
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online June, 2020
Examining Efficiency Differentials by Council Type in South Australian Local Government: An Environmentally Adjusted Meta-Frontier Data Envelopment Approach
The empirical analysis of local government performance has spawned a voluminous international research effort. While some of this literature has focused on the impact of non-discretionary factors on municipal performance, to date the efficiency differentials between discrete types of local authority contingent on non-discretionary factors has yet to be investigated. In an endeavour to address this gap in the literature, as well as some of the shortcomings of extant studies on the impact of non-discretionary environmental factors on municipal performance, in this paper we investigate the meta-frontier technological efficiency gap between four categories of local councils in South Australian (SA) local government by placing them all in a common framework using a data envelopment analysis approach. The effects of the non-discretionary factors on the individual efficiency of each council group are filtered out to obtain robust meta-frontier technological gap ratios and thereby evaluate the managerial (in)efficiency of SA municipal sub-categories.
AfonsoA. and FernandesS. (2008), ‘Assessing and explaining the relative efficiency of local government’, Journal of Socio-Economics37(5), 1946–1979.
2.
AllersM. A. and GeertsemaJ. B. (2016), ‘The effects of local government amalgamation on public spending, taxation, and service levels: Evidence from 15 years of municipal consolidation’, Journal of Regional Science56(4), 659–682.
3.
BankerR. D, CharnesA. and CooperW. W. (1984), ‘Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis’, Management Science30(9), 1078–1092.
4.
BelG. and GradusR. (2018), ‘Privatisation, contracting-out and inter-municipal cooperation: new developments in local public service delivery’, Local Government Studies, 44(1), 11–21.
5.
BenitoB., BastidaF. and VicenteC. (2013), ‘Municipal elections and cultural expenditure’, Journal of Cultural Economics, 37(1), 3–32.
6.
BenitoB., GuillamónM. D., and RíosA. M. (2017). ‘The electoral budget cycle on municipal waste collection expenditure’, Applied Economics, 49(41), 4161–4179.
7.
CepikuD., MussariR. and GiordanoF. (2016), ‘Local governments managing austerity: Approaches, determinants and impact’, Public Administration, 94(1), 223–243.
8.
CharnesA., CooperW. W., and RhodesE. (1978). ‘Measuring the efficiency of decision making units’, European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429–444.
9.
CorderoJ. M., Pedraja-ChaparroF., PisafloresE. C., and PoloC. (2017), ‘Efficiency assessment of Portuguese municipalities using a conditional nonparametric approach”, Journal of Productivity Analysis, 48(1), 1–24.
10.
Da CruzN.F. and MarquesR.C. (2014), ‘Revisiting the determinants of local government performance’, Omega, 44, 91–103.
11.
DentersB. and RoseL. E. (eds.) (2005), Comparing Local Governance: Trends and Developments.Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke.
DolleryB. E., CraseL. and JohnsonA. (2006), Australian Local Government Economics, Sydney, University of New South Wales Press: Sydney.
14.
DolleryB. E., WallisJ. L. and AllanP. (2006), ‘The debate that had to happen but never did: The changing role of Australian local government’, Australian Journal of Political Science41(4), 553–567.
15.
DolleryB. E., KorttM. and GrantB. (2013), Funding the Future: Financial Sustainability and Infrastructure Finance in Australian Local Government, Sydney, Federation Press.
16.
DolleryB.E., GrantB. and KorttM. (2012), Councils in Cooperation: Shared Services in Australian Local Government, Sydney: Federation Press.
17.
DrewJ., and DolleryB. (2014). ‘The impact of metropolitan amalgamations in Sydney on municipal financial sustainability’, Public Money & Management, 34(4), 281–288.
18.
DrewJ., KorttM. A. and DolleryB. (2017). ‘No Aladdin's Cave in New South Wales? Local government amalgamation, scale economies, and data envelopment analysis specification’, Administration & Society, 49(10), 1450–1470.
19.
Farvacque-VitkovicC. D. and KopanyiM. (eds.) (2014), Municipal finances: A handbook for local governments, World Bank: Washington, DC.
20.
FerryL. and MurphyP. (2018), ‘What about financial sustainability of local government! A critical review of accountability, transparency, and public assurance arrangements in England during austerity’, International Journal of Public Administration, 41(8), 619–629.
21.
FogartyJ. and MugeraA. (2013), ‘Local government efficiency: evidence from Western Australia’, Australian Economic Review, 46(3), 300–311.
22.
FriedH.O., SchmidtS.S. and YaisawarngS. (1999) ‘Incorporating the operating environment into a nonparametric measure of technical efficiency’, Journal of Productivity Analysis, 12, 249–267.
23.
GeysB., HeinemannF. and KalbA. (2010), ‘Voter involvement, fiscal autonomy and public sector efficiency: Evidence from German municipalities’, European Journal of Political Economy, 26, 265–78.
24.
HolcombeR. G., and WilliamsD. W. (2008), ‘The impact of population density on municipal government expenditures’, Public Finance Review, 36(3), 359–373.
25.
Hortas-RicoM., and Solé-OlléA. (2010). ‘Does urban sprawl increase the costs of providing local public services? Evidence from Spanish municipalities’, Urban studies, 47(7), 1513–1540.
26.
HoodC., and DixonR. (2015). A government that worked better and cost less? Evaluating three decades of reform and change in UK central Government. OUP Oxford.
27.
HayR., and MartinS. (2014). ‘Controlling local government spending: the implementation and impact of capping council taxes’, Local Government Studies, 40(2), 224–239.
28.
KalbA., GeysB. and HeinemannF. (2012), ‘Value for money? German local government efficiency in a comparative perspective’, Applied Economics, 44(2), 201–218.
29.
KellyJ. M., and RivenbarkW. C. (2014), Performance budgeting for state and local government. Routledge.
30.
KuhlmannS. and BouckaertG. (eds.) (2016), Local public sector reforms in times of crisis: national trajectories and international comparisons, Amsterdam: Springer.
31.
KushnerJ., and OgwangT. (2017), ‘Why Do Per-Household Expenditures Differ between Municipalities?’Public Finance and Management, 17(4), 303–324.
32.
Lago-PeñasS. and Martinez-VasquezJ. (eds). (2013), Challenge of Local Government Size. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
33.
LessmannC., and MarkwardtG. (2010), ‘One size fits all? Decentralization, corruption, and the monitoring of bureaucrats’, World Development, 38(4), 631–646.
34.
LienS. and PettersenP.A. (2004). ‘Local government and welfare generosity: Municipality spending on social welfare’, Scandinavian Political Studies, 27(4), 343–365.
Narbón-PerpiñáI. and De WitteK. (2018a). ‘Local governments’ efficiency: a systematic literature review—part I’, International Transactions in Operational Research, 25(2), 431–468.
38.
Narbón-PerpiñáI. and De WitteK. (2018b), ‘Local governments’ efficiency: a systematic literature review—part II’, International Transactions in Operational Research, 25(4), 1107–1136.
39.
O'DonnellC. J.; RaoD. S. P. and BatteseG. E. (2008), ‘Metafrontier frameworks for the study of firm-level efficiencies and technology ratios’, Empirical Economics, 34, 231–255.
40.
ParkJ., ParkS. and MaherC. S. (2018), ‘The effects of tax and expenditure limitations (TELs) on municipal fiscal outcomes during a period of fiscal distress’, Public Finance and Management, 18(1), 84–110.
41.
RamalhoE.A., RamalhoJ.J.S., and HenriquesP.D.. (2010), ‘Fractional regression models for second stage DEA efficiency analyses’, Journal of Productivity Analysis, 34, 239–55.
42.
RoggeN., AgasistiT. and De WitteK. (2017), ‘Big data and the measurement of public organizations' performance and efficiency: The state-of-the-art’, Public Policy and Administration, 32(4), 263–281.
43.
SimarL. and WilsonP.W. (2007). ‘Estimation and inference in two-stage, semi-parametric models of production processes’, Journal of Econometrics, 136, 31–64.
44.
South Australian Local Government Association (SALGA) (2017), Local Government Finances, SALGA: Adelaide.
45.
South Australian Local Government Grants Commission (SALGGC) (2017), Annual Report 2014/1, SALGGC: Adelaide.
ThanassoulisE., PortelaM.C.S and DespićO. (2008). ‘The mathematical programming approach to efficiency analysis’, In the Measurement of Productive Efficiency and Productivity Growth, edited by FriedH. O., LovellC. A. K. and SchmidtS. S., 251–420, New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.
48.
TranC-D.T.T and VillanoR.A. (2018). ‘Financial efficiency of tertiary education institutions: A second-stage dynamic network data envelopment analysis method’, The Singapore Economic Review, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217590818500133.
49.
VillanoR. A. and TranC-D.T.T (2018). ‘Performance of private higher education institutions in Vietnam: evidence using DEA-based bootstrap directional distance approach with quasi-fixed inputs’, Applied Economics, 50(55), 5966–5978.
50.
WorthingtonA. C. (2000). ‘Cost efficiency in Australian local government: a comparative analysis of mathematical programming and econometrical approaches’, Financial Accountability & Management, 16(3), 201–223.
51.
WorthingtonA. C. and DolleryB.E. (2001). ‘Measuring efficiency in local government: an analysis of New South Wales municipalities' domestic waste management afunction’, Policy Studies Journal, 29(2), 232–249.
52.
WorthingtonA. C. and DolleryB.E. (2002). ‘Incorporating contextual information in public sector efficiency analyses: a comparative study of NSW local government’, Applied Economics, 34(4), 453–464.
53.
WorthingtonA.C. and DolleryB.E. (2000). ‘An empirical survey of frontier efficiency measurement techniques in local government’, Local Government Studies, 26(2), 23–52.
