Journal of Rural Development

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Technical Efficiency of Microfinance Institutions in India:Data Envelopment Analysis


Affiliations
1 Department of Business Management, CCS HAU, Hisar (Haryana), PIN– 125004, India
 

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


In the present study the average data of six consecutive years have been used to measure the technical efficiency of Microfinance Institutions (MFIs). The study revealed that there were three efficient MFIs under Constant Returns to Scale (CRS) and five efficient MFIs under Variable Returns to Scale (VRS) assumption. Average input-oriented Technical Efficiency (TE), Pure Technical Efficiency (PTE) and Scale Efficiency (SE) worked out to be 37.4, 52.5 and 70.2 per cent, respectively. The corresponding figures under output- oriented measures were estimated to be 37.4, 45.3 and 85 per cent, respectively. It was found that 84 per cent of the MFIs studied in India were enjoying economies of scale under input-oriented measure, whereas only 36 per cent MFIs studied experienced economies of scale under output-oriented measure. Further it was found that majority of the selected MFIs, i.e., more than 3/4 MFIs have PTE less than or equal to 70 per cent under both the input and output oriented measures. Only 28 per cent of the selected units have PTE above 80 per cent efficiency level under input-oriented measures and 20 per cent under output measures. Tobit model, to explain the variability of individual efficiency measures, shows that 65 per cent of the variation in the technical efficiency is explained by the independent variables included in the model.
User
Subscription Login to verify subscription
Notifications
Font Size

  • Banker, R.D, A Charnes and W.W. Cooper (1984), “Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis”, Management Science: 30, pp. 1078-1092.

  • Banker, R. D. and Thrall, R. M (1992), “Estimation of Returns to Scale Using Data Envelopment Analysis”, European Journal of Operational Research, 62: pp. 74-84.

  • Berger, Allen and Humphrey, David B (1997), “Efficiency of Financial Institutions: International Survey and Direction for Future Research, European Journal of Operational Research, 98: pp. 175-212.

  • Brau, J. C., & Woller, G. M (2004), “Microfinance: A Comprehensive Review of the Existing Literature, Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance and Business Ventures, 9: pp. 1–26.

  • Charnes, A, W.W. Cooper and W.E. Rhodes (1978), “Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units”, European Journal of Operational Research, 2: pp. 429-444.

  • Coelli, T. A., P. D.S. Rao and G. E. Battese (2002), “An Introduction to Efficiency and Production Analysis”, Kluwer Academic Publishers, London.

  • Fare, R., S. Grosskpf and Lovell, C. A. K (1985), “The Measurement of Efficiency of Production”, Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing, Boston.

  • Farrell, M.J. (1957), “Measurement of Productive Efficiency”, Journal of Royal Statistical Society, Series A, General, 120: pp. 253-282.

  • Hung, D.V (1998), “Study Case: People’s Credit Funds in Vietnam”, Report Presented to Development International Desjardins, Quebec, Canada.

  • McCarty, A (2001), “Microfinance in Vietnam: A Survey of Schemes and Issues”, Paper Presented to State Bank of Vietnam and Department for International Development.

  • Murdoch, J (2000), “The Microfinance Schism”, World Development, 28: pp. 617–629.

  • Norman, M. and B. Stocker (1991), “Data Envelopment Analysis: The Assessment of Performance”, Jon Wiley & Sons, New York, pp. 9-16.

  • Seibel, H.D. and C. R. Kunkel (1997), “National Consultation Workshop on Alternative Mechanisms for the Promotion of Microfinance in Vietnam”, Asia Pacific Rural Finance, April-December, pp.119- 23.

  • Sherman, H. D. & Gold, F (1985), “Bank Branch Operating Efficiency- Evaluation with Data Envelopment Analysis”, Journal of Banking and Finance, 9: pp. 297-315.

  • Shiu, A (2002), “Efficiency of Chinese Enterprises, The Journal of Productivity Analysis, 8: pp. 255-267.

  • Topuz, J. C, Darrat, A. F. and Cshelor, R. M (2005), “Technical, Allocative and Scale Efficiencies of REITs: An Empirical Inquiry”, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 32.

  • UNDP (1996), “Microfinance in Vietnam: A Collaborative Study Based upon the Experiences of NGOs”, UN Agencies and Bilateral Donors, Hanoi.

  • Woller, G Dunford, C & Woodworth, W (1999), “Where to Microfinance”, International Journal of Economic Development, 1: pp. 29–64.

  • Worthington, AC (1999), “Measuring Technical Efficiency in Australian Credit Unions”, The Manchester School, 67.


Abstract Views: 256

PDF Views: 205




  • Technical Efficiency of Microfinance Institutions in India:Data Envelopment Analysis

Abstract Views: 256  |  PDF Views: 205

Authors

S. K. Goyal
Department of Business Management, CCS HAU, Hisar (Haryana), PIN– 125004, India
Subodh Agarwal
Department of Business Management, CCS HAU, Hisar (Haryana), PIN– 125004, India

Abstract


In the present study the average data of six consecutive years have been used to measure the technical efficiency of Microfinance Institutions (MFIs). The study revealed that there were three efficient MFIs under Constant Returns to Scale (CRS) and five efficient MFIs under Variable Returns to Scale (VRS) assumption. Average input-oriented Technical Efficiency (TE), Pure Technical Efficiency (PTE) and Scale Efficiency (SE) worked out to be 37.4, 52.5 and 70.2 per cent, respectively. The corresponding figures under output- oriented measures were estimated to be 37.4, 45.3 and 85 per cent, respectively. It was found that 84 per cent of the MFIs studied in India were enjoying economies of scale under input-oriented measure, whereas only 36 per cent MFIs studied experienced economies of scale under output-oriented measure. Further it was found that majority of the selected MFIs, i.e., more than 3/4 MFIs have PTE less than or equal to 70 per cent under both the input and output oriented measures. Only 28 per cent of the selected units have PTE above 80 per cent efficiency level under input-oriented measures and 20 per cent under output measures. Tobit model, to explain the variability of individual efficiency measures, shows that 65 per cent of the variation in the technical efficiency is explained by the independent variables included in the model.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.25175/jrd.v36i1.141869