China has attracted the attention of the world owing its significant economic achievements, which are supported significantly by its booming industry. However, the issues of energy and pollutants have severely challenged the sustainability of the industry. The efficiency measurement is the premise intended to realize sustainability within the Chinese industry. Because the industry is a complex production system, there exists uncertainties and fuzziness regarding its inputs and outputs. This study proposes the application of an interval to describe these fuzzy data and employ the Enhanced Russell Measure to assess the performance of the Chinese industry, accounting for undesirable output such as pollution. In addition, for the ranking between interval efficiencies, a novel ranking approach based on the holistic acceptability of a possibility degree is proposed. The proposed method provides advice and guidance for decision makers to make appropriate and effective policies to balance industrial development and environmental protection in spite of uncertain and fuzzy data.
CharnesA., CooperW.W. and RhodesE., Measuring the efficiency of decision making units, European Journal of Operational Research2(6) (1978), 429–444.
2.
AdesinaK.S., Bank technical, allocative and cost efficiencies in Africa: The influence of intellectual capital, The North American Journal of Economics and Finance48 (2019), 419–433.
3.
AghayiN. and MalekiB., Efficiency measurement of dmus with undesirable outputs under uncertainty based on the directional distance function: application on bank industry, Energy112 (2016), 376–387.
4.
ZhouX., XuZ., ChaiJ., YaoL., WangS. and LevB., Efficiency evaluation for banking systems under uncertainty: A multi-period three-stage DEA model, Omega85 (2019), 68–82.
5.
ZhaY., LiangN., WuM. and BianY., Efficiency evaluation of banks in China: A dynamic two-stage slacks-based measure approach, Omega60 (2016), 60–72.
6.
LeeB.L. and WorthingtonA.C., A network dea quantity and quality-orientated production model: an application to australian university research services, Omega60 (2016), 26–33.
7.
AparicioJ., CorderoJ.M. and OrtizL., Measuring efficiency in education: The influence of imprecision and variability in data on DEA estimates, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 2019.
8.
QueirozM.V.A.B., SampaioR.M.B. and SampaioL.M.B., Dynamic efficiency of primary education in Brazil: Socioeconomic and infrastructure influence on school performance, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, (2019), 100738.
9.
GanjiS.S., RassafiA. and XuD.L., A double frontier DEA cross efficiency method aggregated by evidential reasoning approach for measuring road safety performance, Measurement136 (2019), 668–688.
10.
HerrerarestrepoO., TriantisK., TrainorJ., MurraytuiteP. and EdaraP., A multi-perspective dynamic network performance efficiency measurement of an evacuation: a dynamic network-dea approach, Omega60(Online Version) (2016), 45–59.
11.
YuM.M., ChenL.H. and BoH., Dynamic performance assessment of bus transit with the multi-activity network structure, Omega60 (2016), 15–25.
12.
CarayannisE.G., GrigoroudisE. and GoletsisY., A multilevel and multistage efficiency evaluation of innovation systems: a multi-objective dea approach, Expert Systems with Applications62 (2016), 63–80.
13.
ChowdhuryH. and ZelenyukV., Performance of hospital services in ontario: dea with truncated regression approach, Omega63 (2016), 111–122.
14.
SultanW. and CrispimJ., Measuring the efficiency of palestinian public hospitals during 2010-2015: an application of a two-stage dea method, Bmc Health Services Research18(1) 381.(2018).
15.
KaoC. and HwangS.N., Multi-period efficiency and Malmquist productivity index in two-stage production systems, European Journal of Operational Research232(3) (2014), 512–521.
16.
CooperW.W., ParkK.S. and YuG., Idea and ar-idea: models for dealing with imprecise data in dea, Management Science45(4) (1999), 597–607.
17.
OlfatL., AmiriM., SoufiB. and Jahanyar, et al., A dynamic network efficiency measurement of airports performance considering sustainable development concept: a fuzzy dynamic network-dea approach, Journal of Air Transport Management57 (2016), 272–290.
18.
ZhouX., PedryczW., KuangY. and ZhangZ., Type-2 fuzzy multi-objective dea model: an application to sustainable supplier evaluation, Applied Soft Computing, (2016). S1568494616301946.
19.
PeykaniP., MohammadiE., EmrouznejadA., PishvaeeM.S. and Rostamy-MalkhalifehM., Fuzzy Data Envelopment Analysis: An Adjustable Approach, Expert Systems with Applications, 2019.
20.
JradiS. and RuggieroJ., Stochastic data envelopment analysis: A quantile regression approach to estimate the production frontier, European Journal of Operational Research278(2) (2019), 385–393.
21.
HuangT.H., ChenK.C. and LinC.I., An extension from network dea to copula-based network sfa: evidence from the u.s. commercial banks in 2009, Quarterly Review of Economics & Finance67 (2017).
22.
MitropoulosP., TaliasM.A. and MitropoulosI., Combining stochastic dea with bayesian analysis to obtain statistical properties of the efficiency scores: an application to greek public hospitals, European Journal of Operational Research243(1) (2015), 302–311.
23.
ZhouX., WangY., ChaiJ., WangL., WangS. and LevB., Sustainable supply chain evaluation: A dynamic double frontier network DEA model with interval type-2 fuzzy data, Information Sciences504 (2019), 394–421.
24.
YuQ. and HouF., A cross evaluation-based measure of super efficiency in dea with interval data, Kybernetes the International Journal of Systems & Cybernetics45(4) (2016), 666–679.
25.
ShirdelG.H., Ramezani-TarkhoraniS. and JafariZ., A method for evaluating the performance of decision making units with imprecise data using common set of weights, International Journal of Applied & Computational Mathematics3(2) (2016), 1–13.
26.
ToneK., A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis, European Journal of Operational Research130(3) (2001), 498–509.
27.
FäreR. and LovellC.A.K., Measuring the technical efficiency of production, Journal of Economic theory19(1) (1978), 150–162.
28.
WuJ., XiongB., AnQ., ZhuQ. and LiangL., Measuring the performance of thermal power firms in china via fuzzy enhanced russell measure model with undesirable outputs, Journal of Cleaner Production102 (2015), 237–245.
29.
PastorJ.T., RuizJ.L. and SirventI., An enhanced dea russell graph efficiency measure, European Journal of Operational Research115(3) (1999), 596–607.
30.
AshrafiA., JaafarA., LeeL.S., et al., An enhanced russell measure of super-efficiency for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis, American Journal of Applied Sciences8(1) (2011), 92–96.
31.
ChenP.C., YuM.M., ChangC.C., HsuS.H. and ManagiS., The enhanced russell-based directional distance measure with undesirable outputs: numerical example considering CO2 emissions, Omega53(Complete) (2015), 30–40.
32.
EsmaeiliM., An enhanced russell measure in dea with interval data, Applied Mathematics & Computation219(4) (2012), 1589–1593.
33.
FaereR., GrosskopfS., LovellC.A.K. and PasurkaC., Multilateral productivity comparisons when some outputs are undesirable: a nonparametric approach, The Review of Economics and Statistics71(1) 90.(1989).
34.
LiuJ., ZhengY., JinF., LiH. and ChenH., Dea cross-efficiency and fuzzy preference relation based on semi-disposability of undesirable outputs for environmental assessments, Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems 38(2) (2020), 1–10.
35.
HalkosG. and PetrouK.N., Assessing 28 EU member states’ environmental efficiency in national waste generation with DEA, Journal of Cleaner Production208 (2019), 509–521.
36.
YangZ. and WeiX., The measurement and influences of China’s urban total factor energy efficiency under environmental pollution: Based on the game cross-efficiency DEA, Journal of Cleaner Production209 (2019), 439–450.
37.
WangK., WeiY.M. and HuangZ., Potential gains from carbon emissions trading in china: a dea based estimation on abatement cost savings, Omega63 (2016), 48–59.
38.
LiuX., JiX., ZhangD., YangJ. and WangY., How public environmental concern affects the sustainable development of Chinese cities: An empirical study using extended DEA models, Journal of Environmental Management251 109619.(2019).
39.
ChenL., WangY.M. and LaiF., Semi-disposability of undesirable outputs in data envelopment analysis for environmental assessments, European Journal of Operational Research260(2) (2017), 655–664.
40.
WuJ., YinP., SunJ., ChuJ. and LiangL., Evaluating the environmental efficiency of a two-stage system with undesired outputs by a dea approach: an interest preference perspective, European Journal of Operational Research254(3) (2016), 1047–1062.
41.
SueyoshiT. and YuanY., Returns to damage under undesirable congestion and damages to return under desirable congestion measured by dea environmental assessment with multiplier restriction: economic and energy planning for social sustainability in china, Energy Economics56 (2016), 288–309.
42.
SongM., PengJ., WangJ. and DongL., Better resource management: an improved resource and environmental efficiency evaluation approach that considers undesirable outputs, Resources Conservation & Recycling128 (2018), 197–205.
43.
EsmaeiliM., An enhanced russell measure in dea with interval data, Applied Mathematics & Computation219(4) (2012), 1589–1593.
44.
ChenL. and JiaG., Environmental efficiency analysis of China’s regional industry: a data envelopment analysis (DEA) based approach, Journal of Cleaner Production142 (2017), 846–853.
45.
AziziH., KordrostamiS. and AmirteimooriA., Slacks-based measures of efficiency in imprecise data envelopment analysis: An approach based on data envelopment analysis with double frontiers, Computers & Industrial Engineering79 (2015), 42–51.
46.
SenguptaA. and PalT.K., On comparing interval numbers, European Journal of Operational Research127(1) (2000), 28–43.
47.
LiD., HanG., ZhuZ., YiW. and YuX., Interval number ranking method based on Boolean matrix,(04), Control and Decision31 (2016), 629–634.
48.
LiD. and GuY., An interval number ranking method based on possibility, Journal of Systems Engineering23(2) (2008), 243–246.
49.
LanY., WangX. and WangY., Study on DEA Malmquist productivity index and its application under interval output, Systems science and mathematics37(06) (2017), 1494–1508.
50.
CharnesA. and CooperW.W., Programming with linear fractional functionals, Naval Research Logistics9(3-4) (1962), 181–186.
51.
BarronF.H. and BarrettB.E., Decision quality using ranked attribute weights, Management Science42(11) (1996), 1515–1523.
52.
AicheF., AbbasM. and DuboisD., Chance-constrained programming with fuzzy stochastic coefficients, Fuzzy Optimization & Decision Making12(2) (2013), 125–152.
