Evaluating Technical Efficiency of Firms of Different Sizes: A Case Study of Nigerian Upstream Players
- Adekunle J. Idowu (African University of Science and Technology) | Omowunmi O. Iledare (University of Port Harcourt) | Bamidele G. Dada (Federal Ministry of Petroleum Resources, Nigeria)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
- Publication Date
- May 2019
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 775 - 788
- 2019.Society of Petroleum Engineers
- Relative Technical Efficiency, Data Envelopment Analysis, Constant Return to Scale, cDEA, Upstream Operators
- 20 in the last 30 days
- 53 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 10.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 30.00|
Technological advancements in the exploration and production (E&P) of oil and gas have been on the increase worldwide in recent decades. Nigeria, being one of the major oil and gas producers in the world, has become a hub of international oil and gas investors since the early 1960s. Nigeria hosts more than 80 oil and gas companies in its upstream sector, including international oil companies (IOCs), indigenous oil companies (IndOCs), marginal-field operators (MFOs). and a national oil company (NOC). However, there is an increasing concern from policy makers over scanty quantitative information on the relative technical efficiency (RTE) of these operators for effective upstream performance analysis. This paper attempts to cover this gap by providing estimates of the RTE index for upstream operators in Nigeria from 2010 to 2016. An output-oriented data-envelopment-analysis (DEA) framework is adopted that is based on constant-return-to-scale (CRTS) assumptions. For a CRTS-DEA model (cDEA model), three input and two output variables were considered. Empirical results show that approximately 19% of the operators perform along the CRTS efficient-production frontier. Consequently, it is recommended that policy makers formulate upstream policies that encourage aggressive reserves growth and ensure an optimal reserves/production ratio.
|File Size||735 KB||Number of Pages||14|
Al-Najjar, S. M. and Al-Jaybajy, M. A. 2012. Application of Data Envelopment Analysis to Measure the Technical Efficiency of Oil Refineries: A Case Study. Int. J. Bus. Admin. 3 (5): 64–77. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijba.v3n5p64.
Andersen, P. and Petersen, N. C. 1993. A Procedure for Ranking Efficient Units in Data Envelopment Analysis. Management Science. 39 (10): 1261–1264. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2632964.
Asayesh, R. and Raad, Z. F. 2014. Evaluation of the Relative Efficiency of Gas Stations by Data Envelopment Analysis. Int. J. Data Envelop. Anal. Oper. Res. 1 (1): 12–15. https://doi.org.10.12691/ijdeaor-1-1-2.
BP. 2017. BP Statistical Review ofWorld Energy, https://www.bp.com/.../bp/.../energy.../statistical-review-2017/bp-statistical-review (accessed 3 August 2017).
Business News. 2014. Nigeria’s Oil Sector Contribution to GDP Lowest in OPEC. Business News 25 December 2014, http://businessnews.com.ng/2014/12/25/nigerias-oil-sector-contribution-gdp-lowest-opec/ (accessed 2 November 2017).
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., and Rhode, E. 1978. Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2 (6): 429–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8.
Chidi, B. I. and Hyunjung, L. 2014. Measurement of the Efficiency and Productivity of National Oil Companies and Its Determinants. Geosyst. Eng. 17 (1): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/12269328.2014.887045.
Coelli, T. and Perelman., S. 1999. Comparison of Parametric and Non-Parametric Distance Functions: With Application to European Railways. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 117 (2): 326–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(98)00271-9.
Cook, W. D., Tone, K., and Zhu, J. 2014. Data Envelopment Analysis: Prior to Choosing a Model. Omega 44 (April): 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2013.09.004.
Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., and Tone, K. 2006. Introduction to Data Envelopment Analysis and Its Uses, 354, p. 67. New York: Springer US.
Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., and Zhu, J. 2011. Handbook of Data Envelopment Analysis. Norwell, Massachusetts: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR). 2016. Oil and Gas Annual Report, https://dpr.gov.ng/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/2016-Oil-Gas-Industry-Annual-Report.pdf (accessed 3 June 2017).
Ebrahimnejad, A. and Lotfi, F. H. 2012. Equivalence Relationship Between the General Combined-Oriented CCR Model and the Weighted Minimax MOLP Formulation. J. King Saud Univ. Sci. 24 (1): 47–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksus.2010.08.007.
Echendu, J. C., Iledare, O. O. and Onwuka, E. I. 2015. Comparative Economic-Performance Analysis of Production-Sharing Contracts in Angola, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, and Nigeria. SPE Econ & Mgmt 7 (4): 157–166. SPE-162990-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/162990-PA.
Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., Norris, M. et al. 1994. Productivity Growth, Technical Progress, and Efficiency Change in Industrialized Countries. Am. Econ. Rev. 84 (1): 66–83. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2951341.
Farell, M. J. 1957. The Measurement of Productive Efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A. 120 (3): 253–290. https://doi.org/10.2307/2343100.
Hardon, D. 2003. Efficiency and Performance in the Gas Industry. SEEDS Paper 106, Surrey Energy Economics Discussion Paper Series, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
Hwang, S.-N., Lee, H.-S., and Zhu, J. eds. 2016. Handbook of Operations Analytics Using Data Envelopment Analysis. New York City: Springer.
Iskakov, S. and Yilmaz, N. K. 2015. Performance Evaluation of Major Integrated Oil and Gas Companies. Int. J. Econ. Comm. Mgmt. 3 (6): 332–361.
Kocisova, K. 2014. Application of Data Envelopment Analysis to Measure Cost, Revenue and Profit Efficiency. Statistika 94 (3): 47–57.
Li, L., Li, M. and Wu, C. 2013. Production Efficiency Evaluation of Energy Companies Based on the Improved Super-Efficiency Data Envelopment Analysis Considering Undesirable Outputs. Math. Comput. Model. 58 (5–6): 1057–1067. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2012.07.001.
Lotfi, F. H., Jahanshahloo, G. R., Ebrahimnejad, A. et al. 2010. Target Setting in the General Combined-Oriented CCR Model Using an Interactive MOLP Method. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 234 (1): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2009.11.045.
Malhotra, R., Malhotra, D. K., and Harvey, L. 2009. Using Data Envelopment Analysis to Analyze the Performance of North American Class I Freight Railroads. In Financial Modeling Applications and Data Envelopment Applications, ed. K. D. Lawrence and G. Kleinman, Vol. 13, 113–131. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Martínez, P. I. 2010. Energy Efficiency Development in German and Colombian Non-Energy-Intensive Sectors: A Non-Parametric Analysis. Energy Efficiency 4 (1): 115–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-010-9078-2.
Nigeria National Gas Policy (NNGP). 2017. Policy document, Federal Republic of Nigeria, Ministry of Petroleum Resources, http://www.petroleumindustrybill.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/National-Gas-Policy-Approved-By-FEC-in-June-2017.pdf (accessed 15 February 2017).
Nigeria National Oil Policy (NNOP). 2017. Policy document, Federal Republic of Nigeria, Ministry of Petroleum Resources, http://www.petroleumindustrybill.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/National-Gas-Policy-Approved-By-FEC-in-June-2017.pdf (accessed 15 February 2017).
Nigerian Bureau of Statistics (NBS). 2016. NBS GDP Q3 2016 Full Report, http://www.nigerianstat.gov.ng/download/518.www.nigerianstat.gov.ng/download/518 (accessed 16 March 2018).
Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC). 2017. NNPC Annual Statistical Bulletin, 2010–2017, http://www.nnpcgroup.com/PublicRelations/OilandGasStatistics/AnnualStatisticsBulletin/MonthlyPerformance.aspx (accessed 2 January 2017).
Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). 2017. OPEC Annual Statistical Bulletin 2017, http://www.opec.org/opec_web/static_files_project/media/downloads/publications/ASB2017_13062017.pdf (accessed 17 May 2017).
Osahon, G. 2013. Marginal Field Development: Best Practices & Lessons Learned. Presented at the SPE Nigeria Annual International Conference and Exhibition (NAICE 2013), Lagos, 30 July–1 August.
Proudlove, N. C. 2000. Using Excel for Data Envelopment Analysis, Manchester School of Management Working Paper Series. Manchester, UK: University of Manchester.
Raheli, H, Rezaei, R. M., Jadidi, M. R. et al. 2017. A Two-Stage DEA Model to Evaluate Sustainability and Energy Efficiency of Tomato Production. Inform. Process. Agricult. 4 (4): 342–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inpa.2017.02.004.
Repková, I. 2015. Banking Efficiency Determinants in the Czech Banking Sector. Procedia Econ. Financ. 23: 191–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00367-6.
Sarkis, J. 2002. Preparing Your Data for DEA. In Modeling Data Irregularities and Structural Complexities in Data Envelopment Analysis, ed. J. Zhu and W. D. Cook, 305–320. New York City: Springer.
Seiford, L. M. and Zhu, J. 1999. An Investigation of Returns to Scale in Data Envelopment Analysis. Omega 27 (1): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0483(98)00025-5.
Sepehrdoust, H. 2011. Housing Production and Determination of Technical Efficiency. Trend. Appl. Sci. Res. 6 (7): 686–699. https://doi.org/10.3923/tasr.2011.686.699.
Song, C., Li, M., Zhang, F. et al. 2014. Analysis of Energy Efficiency for Coal-Fired Power Units Based on Data Envelopment Analysis Model. Energy Procedia 61: 904–909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.992.
Zarepisheh, M., Soleimani-Damaneh, M., and Pourkarimi. L. 2006. Determination of Returns to Scale by CCR Formulation Without Chasing Down Alternative Optimal Solutions. Appl. Math. Lett. 19 (9): 964–967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aml.2005.09.008.
Zheng, X. B. and Park, N. K. 2016. A Study on the Efficiency of Container Terminals in Korea and China. Asian J. Ship. Logist. 32 (4): 213–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajsl.2016.12.004.
Zhou, P., Poh, K. L., and Ang, B. W. 2006. A Non-Radial DEA Approach to Measuring Environmental Performance. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 178 (1): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2006.04.038.
Zionts, S. and Wallenius, J. 1976. An Interactive Programming Method for Solving the Multiple Criteria Problem. Management Science 22 (6): 629–725. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.22.6.652.