Factors affecting the technical efficiency of production of the Brazilian banking system : a comparison of four statistical models in the context of data envelopment analysis

This paper uses an output oriented Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) measure of technical efficiency to assess the technical efficiencies of the Brazilian banking system. Four approaches to estimation are compared in order to assess the significance of factors affecting inefficiency. These are nonparametric Analysis of Covariance, maximum likelihood using a family of exponential distributions, maximum likelihood using a family of truncated normal distributions, and the normal Tobit model. The sole focus of the paper is on a combined measure of output and the data analyzed refers to the year 2001. The factors of interest in the analysis and likely to affect efficiency are bank nature (multiple and commercial), bank type (credit, business, bursary and retail), bank size (large, medium, small and micro), bank control (private and public), bank origin (domestic and foreign), and non-performing loans. The latter is a measure of bank risk. All quantitative variables, including non-performing loans, are measured on a per employee basis. The best fits to the data are provided by the exponential family and the nonparametric Analysis of Covariance. The significance of a factor however varies according to the model fit although it can be said that there is some agreements between the best models. A highly significant association in all models fitted is observed only for nonperforming loans. The nonparametric Analysis of Covariance is more consistent with the inefficiency median responses observed for the qualitative factors. The findings of the analysis reinforce the significant association of the level of bank inefficiency, measured by DEA residuals, with the risk of bank failure.

Are CGE Models still useful in economic policy making?

This paper develops background considerations to help better framing the results of a CGE exercise. Three main criticisms are usually addressed to CGE efforts. First, they are too aggregate, their conclusions failing to shed light on relevant sectors or issues. Second, they imply huge data requirements. Timeliness is frequently jeopardised by out-dated sources, benchmarks referring to realities gone by. Finally, results are meaningless, as they answer wrong or ill-posed questions. Modelling demands end up by creating a rather artificial context, where the original questions lose content. In spite of a positive outlook on the first two, crucial questions lie in the third point. After elaborating such questions, and trying to answer some, the text argues that CGE models can come closer to reality. If their use is still scarce to give way to a fruitful symbiosis between negotiations and simulation results, they remain the only available technique providing a global, inter-related way of capturing economy-wide effects of several different policies. International organisations can play a major role supporting and encouraging improvements. They are also uniquely positioned to enhance information and data sharing, as well as putting people from various origins together, to share their experiences. A serious and complex homework is however required, to correct, at least, the most dangerous present shortcomings of the technique.