Next Article in Journal
Analysis and Evaluation of Multi-Energy Cascade Utilization System for Ultra-Supercritical Units
Next Article in Special Issue
Performance Assessment of the Semiconductor Industry: Measured by DEA Environmental Assessment
Previous Article in Journal
Control System Development for the Three-Ports ANPC Converter
Article

Operational Performance of Electric Power Firms: Comparison between Japan and South Korea by Non-Radial Measures

1
Department of Management, New Mexico Institute of Mining & Technology, 801 Leroy Place, Socorro, NM 87801, USA
2
School of Environment and Society, Tokyo Tech World Research Hub Initiative, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 3-3-6 Shibaura, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-0023, Japan
3
College of Professional Studies, Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2020, 13(15), 3968; https://doi.org/10.3390/en13153968
Received: 6 July 2020 / Revised: 27 July 2020 / Accepted: 28 July 2020 / Published: 2 August 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Challenges in Energy and Environment)
This study compares the electric power sectors between Japan and South (S) Korea. Both nations have been under a global trend of deregulation. To assess their progress due to industrial change and technology development, we use Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) as an assessment tool that enables us to evaluate the level of simultaneous achievements on economic and technological measures, so assessing the degree of holistic development. DEA has been widely applied for performance assessment in the past decades. In this study, the method compares electric power firms by their operational efficiencies. To compare their achievements, it is necessary to develop a new type of DEA application for performance measurement. The proposed approach adds two analytical capabilities. First, the approach needs to handle “zero” in a data set and then restrict multipliers (i.e., weights among inputs and outputs) without any prior information to increase our empirical reliability. No study has simultaneously explored the two capabilities in DEA. Using the proposed method, our empirical study identifies two findings. One of the two is that the electric power industry of S. Korea outperformed that of the Japanese industry in the observed periods (2014–2018) because the Japanese power sector still suffered from an occurrence of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant disaster which occurred on 1 March 2011. However, the difference has been gradually diminishing because the Japanese electricity industry has been gradually recovering from the huge disaster. The other is that the S. Korean power industry has been in a descending trend because the nation has shown technical regress as a result of inconsistent technology development (e.g., shifting its R&D: Research and Development) focus from electrical engineering to chemistry). The former R&D area is essential in maintaining the technical level of S. Korea′s electric power industry. View Full-Text
Keywords: electric power industry; Japan; South Korea; DEA electric power industry; Japan; South Korea; DEA
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Sueyoshi, T.; Ryu, Y.; Goto, M. Operational Performance of Electric Power Firms: Comparison between Japan and South Korea by Non-Radial Measures. Energies 2020, 13, 3968. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13153968

AMA Style

Sueyoshi T, Ryu Y, Goto M. Operational Performance of Electric Power Firms: Comparison between Japan and South Korea by Non-Radial Measures. Energies. 2020; 13(15):3968. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13153968

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki, Youngbok Ryu, and Mika Goto. 2020. "Operational Performance of Electric Power Firms: Comparison between Japan and South Korea by Non-Radial Measures" Energies 13, no. 15: 3968. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13153968

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop