Modelling Carbon Emissions Efficiency from UK Higher Education Institutions Using Data Envelopment Analysis

Main Article Content

Adefarati Oloruntoba
Japhet Tomiwa Oladipo

Abstract

Aims: To correlate the energy and carbon emission efficiency relative to research income, gross internal area, and population for all the Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in the UK and to assess the comparative carbon emission efficiency of HEIs relative to economic metrics.

Study Design:  Analytical panel data study.

Place and Duration of Study: This paper evaluates the energy efficiency of 131 HEIs in the UK subdivided into Russell and non-Russell groups from 2008 to 2015.

Methodology: Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and Malmquist productivity indexes (MPI) are used for the efficiency calculations.

Results: The empirical results indicate that UK HEIs have relatively high energy efficiency scores of 96.9% and 77.6% (CRS) and 98.5%, 86.3% (VRS) for Russell and non-Russell groups respectively.

Conclusion: The evidence from this study reveals that HEIs are not significantly suffering from scale effects, hence, an increase in energy efficiency of these institutions is feasible with the present operating scale but would need to work on their technical improvements in energy use. Malmquist index analysis confirms the lack of substantial technological innovation, which impedes their energy efficiency and productivity gain. Findings show that pure technical efficiency accounts for the annual efficiency obtained in the DEA model, the technological progress in contrast is the source of their energy inefficiency.

Keywords:
Data envelopment analysis, energy efficiency, malmquist, carbon emissions, greenhouse gases.

Article Details

How to Cite
Oloruntoba, A., & Oladipo, J. T. (2019). Modelling Carbon Emissions Efficiency from UK Higher Education Institutions Using Data Envelopment Analysis. Journal of Energy Research and Reviews, 3(3), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.9734/jenrr/2019/v3i330097
Section
Original Research Article

References

Al-Shemmeri T, Naylor L. Energy saving in UK FE colleges: The relative importance of the socio- economic groups and environmental attitudes of employees. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2017;68:1130-1143.

Darby H, Elmualim A, Clements-Croome, D, Yearley T. and Box, W. Influence of occupants' behaviour on energy and carbon emission reduction in a higher education building in the UK. Intelligent Buildings International. 2016;8(3):157-175.

HEFCE. Carbon reduction target and strategy for higher education in England, Higher Education Funding Council for England, Bristol;2010.

Universities UK 2016 [online]. Patterns and trends in UK higher education; 2016. available:http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/facts-and-stats/data-andanalysis/Pages/ patterns-and-trends-uk-higher-education-2016.aspx ;
[Accessed: Mar 2018]

Bailey G, LaPoint T. Comparing greenhouse gas emissions across texas Universities. Sustainability. 2016;8(1):80.

Brite Green 2016. Carbon emissions in higher education, 2020 carbon target progress report for the academic year; 2014/2015.

Roy I. Green house gas warming. Climate Variability and Sunspot Activity. Springer. 2018;187-195.

Adan H, Fuerst F. Do energy efficiency measures really reduce household energy consumption? A difference-in-difference analysis. Energy Efficiency. 2016;9:1207–1219

Chou J, Bui D. Modeling heating and cooling loads by artificial intelligence for energy-efficient building design. Energy and Buildings. 2014;82:437-446.

Filippini M, Hunt LC. Energy demand and energy efficiency in the OECD Countries. A Stochastic Demand Frontier Approach. The Energy Journal. 2011;32(2):59-80.

Zhou P, Poh KL, Ang BW. A non-radial DEA approach to measuring environmental performance. European Journal of Operational Research. 2007;178:1-9.

Mukherjee K. Energy use efficiency in US manufacturing: A nonparametric analysis. Energy Economics. 2008;30:76-96

Bian Y, Hu M, Wang Y, Xu H. Energy efficiency analysis of the economic system in China during 1986–2012: A parallel slacks-based measure approach. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2016:55:990-998.

Athanassopoulos AD, Shale E. Assessing the comparative efficiency of higher education institutions in the UK by the means of data envelopment analysis, Educ. Econ. 1997;5:117-134.

Johnes G, Tone K. The efficiency of higher education institutions in England revisited: Comparing alternative measures, Tertiary Education and Management. 2017;23(3): 191-205.

Agasisti T, Johnes G. Beyond frontiers: Comparing the efficiency of higher education decision‐making units across more than one country. 2009;17(1):59-79.

Flegg AT, Allen DO, Field K, Thurlow TW. Measuring the efficiency of British universities: A multi-period data envelopment analysis, Education Economics. 2004;12:231–249.

Peter B, Jesper W. Benchmarking of elementary and lower secondary schools in Denmark Temanord, Nordic Economic Policy. 2011;257-294.

Banker RD, Charnes A, Copper WW. Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science. 1984; 30(9):1078-1092.

Yang L, Zhang X. Assessing regional eco-efficiency from the perspective of resource, environmental and economic performance in China: A bootstrapping approach in global data envelopment analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018;173:100-111.

Zhou P, Ang BW, Han JY. Total factor carbon emission performance: A Malmquist index analysis. Energy Economics. 2010;32(1):194-201.

Said K, Hammami S. The impact of CO2 emissions and economic growth on energy consumption in 58 countries. Energy Reports. 1. 2015;62-70.

H.E.S.A, Higher Education Student Statistics: UK 2016/17, HESA Promenade; 2018.

Chang YTN. Zhang D. Danao, N. Zhang. Environmental efficiency analysis of transportation system in China: A non-radial DEA approach. Energy Policy. 2013;58:277-283. DOI:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.03.011

Fetcher N. OOS 12-3: Scaling of greenhouse gas emissions with institution size for colleges and universities in the United States. In 95th ESA Annual Meeting. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 2010;4.

Klein-Banai C, Theis T. Quantitative analysis of factor affecting greenhouse gas emissions at institutions of higher education. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2013;48:10.

Disli M, Ng A, Askari H. Culture, income and CO2 emission. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2016;62:11.

Martínez-Zarzoso I, Maruotti A. The impact of urbanization on CO2 emissions: Evidence from developing countries. Ecol. Econ. 2011;70:1344-1353.

Coelli T, Rao DSP, Battase GE. An introduction to Efficiency and Productivity Analysis. Kluwer, Boston; 1998.

Färe R, Grosskopf S, Norris M, Zhang Z. Productivity Growth, technical Progress, and efficiency change in industrialized countries. The American Economic Review, 1994:84(1):66-83.
Available:http://www.jstor.org/stable/2117971

Zefeng D, Zhengfei G, Kelly GA, Theodoros S. Energy and environmental efficiency of greenhouse growers in michigan. Southern Agricultural Economics Association (SAEA)> 2015 Annual Meeting. Atlanta, Georgia; 2015.

Nguyen HO, Nguyen HV, Chang YT, Chin ATH, Tongzon J. Measuring port efficiency using bootstrapped DEA: The case of Vietnamese ports. The Flagship Journal of International Shipping And Port Research. 2016;43(5):644-659.

Li K, Lin B. Metafroniter energy efficiency with CO2 emissions and its convergence analysis for China. Energy Economics. 2015;48: 230-241.

Yang H. Carbon efficiency, carbon reduction potential, and economic development in the People’s Republic of China: A total factor production model. Mandaluyong City, Philippines: Asian Development Bank; 2010.