Published date: Nov 19 2024

Journal Title: KnE Social Sciences

Issue title: The 1st International Conference on Creative Design, Business and Society (1st ICCDBS) 2023

Pages: 56–70

DOI: 10.18502/kss.v9i32.17426

Syarifa Hanoumsyarifa.hanoum@gmail.comDepartment of Business Management, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya

Tifany Hasyana PutriDepartment of Business Management, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya

Sardar M.N. IslamInstitute for Sustainable Industries & Liveable Cities (ISILC), Victoria University, Melbourne

Electricity resources have emerged as a global necessity, with increased demand coinciding with the issue of global warming and the resulting surge in greenhouse gas emissions. Improving power generation efficiency is crucial to addressing this critical problem. This article compiles and analyzes published research focused on efficiency measurement using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) in power plants, drawing data from two major journal databases: Web of Science and Scopus. A comprehensive screening process yielded a dataset comprising 162 articles within the realm of DEA in power plant analysis. A bibliometric analysis reveals interesting findings: the most prolific journal in this domain is “Energy Economy,” while “Energy Policy” holds the utmost influence. Notable contributors include China, Iran, and the United States, and an in-depth examination of the ten most impactful articles is also provided. Further scrutiny of citation networks and bibliographic coupling unveils various clusters with distinct thematic areas.

Keywords: Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), power generation, bibliometric

[1] International Energy Agency. Electricity Market Report - July 2022 [Internet]. 2022. Available from: https://www.iea.org/reports/electricity-market-report-july-2022

[2] Newell R, Raimi D, Aldana G. Global energy outlook 2019: The next generation of energy. Resources for the Future. 2019;1:8–19.

[3] Yang K, Meho LI. Citation analysis: A comparison of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2006;57(1):1–15.

[4] Falagas ME, Pitsouni EI, Malietzis GA, Pappas G. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: Strengths and weaknesses. FASEB J. 2008;22(2):338–42.

[5] Van Eck JN, Waltman L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics. 2010;84(2):523–38. doi: 10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3.

[6] Zeitsch J, Lawrence D. Decomposing economic inefficiency in base-load power plants. J Prod Anal. 1996;7(4):359–78.

[7] Athanassopoulos AD, Lambroukos N, Seiford L. Data envelopment scenario analysis for setting targets to electricity plants. Eur J Oper Res. 1999;115(3):413–28.

[8] Galindo P, Schäffer A, Brechtel K, Unterberger S, Scheffknecht G. Experimental research on the performance of CO2-loaded solutions of MEA and DEA at regeneration conditions. Fuel. 2012;101:2–8.

[9] Sengupta IN. Bibliometrics, informetrics, scientometrics and librametrics: An overview. Libri. 1992;42(2):75–84. doi: 10.1515/libr.1992.42.2.75.

[10] Zhao D, Strotmann A. Analysis and visualization of citation networks. Synthesis Lectures on Information Concepts, Retrieval, and Services. 2015;7(1):1–201.

[11] Korhonen PJ, Luptacik M. Eco-efficiency analysis of power plants: An extension of data analysis. Eur J Oper Res. 2004;154(2):437–46.

[12] Dyckhoff H, Allen K. Measuring ecological efficiency with Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA). Eur J Oper Res. 2001;132(2):312–25.

[13] Färe R, Grosskopf S, Knox Lovell CA, Pasurka C. Multilateral productivity comparisons when some outputs are undesirable: A nonparametric approach. Rev Econ Stat. 1989;71(1):90–8.

[14] Gai R, et al. Health resource allocation and productive efficiency of Chinese county hospitals: Data from 1993 to 2005. Biosci Trends. 2010;4:118–22.

[15] Banker RD, Charnes A, Cooper WW. Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manage Sci. 1984;30(9):1078–92.

[16] Tone K. Slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res. 2001;130(3):498–509.

[17] Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E. Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units. Eur J Oper Res. 1978;2(6):429–44. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/0377221778901388

[18] Yang H, Pollitt M. The necessity of distinguishing weak and strong disposability among undesirable outputs in DEA: Environmental performance of Chinese-fired power plants. Energy Policy. 2010;38(8):4440–4.

[19] Yang H, Pollitt M. Incorporating both undesirable outputs and uncontrollable variables into DEA: The performance of Chinese coal-fired power plants. Eur J Oper Res. 2009;197(3):1095–105.

[20] Liu WB, Meng W, Li XX, Zhang DQ. DEA models with undesirable inputs and outputs. Ann Oper Res. 2010;173(1):177–94. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-009-0587-3

[21] Sarica K, Or I. Efficiency assessment of Turkish power plants using data envelopment analysis. Energy. 2007;32(8):1484–99.

[22] Sueyoshi T, Goto M. DEA approach for unified efficiency measurement: Assessment of Japanese fuel power generation. Energy Econ. 2011;33(2):292–303.

[23] Sueyoshi T, Goto M, Snell MA. DEA environmental assessment: Measurement of damages to scale with unified efficiency under managerial disposability or environmental. Appl Math Model. 2013;37(12–13):7300–14.

[24] Sueyoshi T, Yuan Y, Goto M. A literature study for DEA applied to energy and environment. Energy Econ. 2017;62:104–24.