Modal choice between air and rail: A social efficiency benchmarking analysis that considers CO2 emissions

被引：37

作者：

Fukuyama H. ^{[1
]}

Yoshida Y. ^{[2
]}

Managi S. ^{[3
,4
]}

机构：

[1] Faculty of Commerce, Fukuoka University, Fukuoka 814-0180, 8-19-1 Nanakuma, Jonan-Ku

[2] National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies, Tokyo 106-8677, 7-22-6 Roppongi, Minato-ku

[3] Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Tohoku University, Sendai 980-8579, 6-6-20 Aramaki-Aza Aoba, Aoba-Ku

[4] Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, Hayama

来源：

Environmental Economics and Policy Studies | 2011年 / 13卷 / 2期

基金：

日本学术振兴会;

关键词：

Air and rail; Bad (undesirable) output; Directional technology distance function; Slacks-based inefficiency; Social efficiency;

D O I：

10.1007/s10018-010-0006-7

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

The problem of modal choice between rail and air arises as public awareness of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by the transportation sector rises. In this paper, we answer this question quantitatively by performing an efficiency benchmarking analysis that takes into account life-cycle CO2 emission due to transport service provision. The paper employs nonparametric efficiency estimation methods, namely a slacks-based inefficiency measure, as well as a more conventional directional distance function approach. We apply them to a panel data set for three major railway companies and the aviation sector in Japan for the period from 1999 to 2007. Results shows that, contrary to the common argument, air transport can still be more socially efficient than rail transport, even when the environmental load due to CO2 emission is incorporated. This is due to the aviation sector's extremely low user cost, measured in terms of in-vehicle time. In other words, aviation is a necessary transportation mode for those with a very high willingness to pay for their time. © 2011 Springer.

引用

页码：89 / 102

页数：13

共 20 条

[1]

Atkinson A.E., Dorfman J.H., Bayesian measurement of productivity and efficiency in the presence of undesirable outputs: crediting electric utilities for reducing air pollution, J Economet, 126, pp. 445-468, (2005)

[2]

Chambers R.G., Chung Y., Fare R., Benefit and distance functions, Journal of Economic Theory, 70, pp. 407-419, (1996)

[3]

Chambers R.G., Chung Y., Fare R., Profit, directional distance functions and Nerlovian efficiency, J Optim Theory Appl, 98, pp. 351-364, (1998)

[4]

Charnes A., Cooper W.W., Rhodes E., Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units, Eur J Oper Res, 2, 6, pp. 429-444, (1978)

[5]

Chung Y.H., Fare R., Grosskopf S., Productivity and undesirable outputs: a directional distance function approach, J Environ Manage, 51, pp. 229-240, (1997)

[6]

Cooper W.W., Seiford L.M., Tone K., Data envelopment analysis, A comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software, (2007)

[7]

Fare R., Grosskopf S., Nonparametric productivity analysis with undesirable outputs: comments, Am J Agric Econ, 85, 4, pp. 1070-1074, (2003)

[8]

Fare R., Grosskopf S., Noh D.W., Weber W.L., Characteristics of a polluting technology: theory and practice, J Econom, 126, pp. 469-492, (2005)

[9]

Fujimoto H., Ha H.K., Yoshida Y., Zhang A., Social efficiency benchmarking of Japanese domestic transport services, A comparison of rail and air (Mimeo), (2010)

[10]

Fukuyama H., Weber W.L., A directional sacks-based measure of technical inefficiency, Socio Econ Plann Sci, 43, pp. 274-287, (2009)

← 1 2 →