{"title":"处理随机前沿模型的内生性:估计量的比较评估","authors":"Zheng Hou , Joaquim J.S. Ramalho , Catarina Roseta-Palma","doi":"10.1016/j.eneco.2025.108922","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Endogeneity poses a major challenge for Stochastic Frontier Analysis, as input choices may be endogenous to unobserved components of the error term, resulting in biased efficiency estimates. This paper compares leading estimators that address this issue, including control-function estimator (Kutlu, 2010), Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) (Tran and Tsionas, 2013) and copula (Tran and Tsionas, 2015) approaches, as well as the instrumental variable based maximum likelihood estimator (Karakaplan and Kutlu, 2017a,b; Karakaplan, 2022). Monte Carlo simulations reveal distinct bias–variance trade-offs: likelihood-based estimators provide more precise efficiency scores, while GMM and copula can be advantageous in specific contexts. An empirical application to the Portuguese thermal power subsector (2006-2021) shows that accounting for endogeneity significantly alters coefficients and efficiency distributions. These results demonstrate that estimator choice affects policy-relevant indicators such as efficiency scores and determinants of cost performance. Despite data limitations, the study underscores the importance of treating endogeneity and provides methodological guidance for applied efficiency analysis.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11665,"journal":{"name":"Energy Economics","volume":"151 ","pages":"Article 108922"},"PeriodicalIF":14.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dealing with endogeneity in stochastic frontier models: A comparative assessment of estimators\",\"authors\":\"Zheng Hou , Joaquim J.S. Ramalho , Catarina Roseta-Palma\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.eneco.2025.108922\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Endogeneity poses a major challenge for Stochastic Frontier Analysis, as input choices may be endogenous to unobserved components of the error term, resulting in biased efficiency estimates. This paper compares leading estimators that address this issue, including control-function estimator (Kutlu, 2010), Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) (Tran and Tsionas, 2013) and copula (Tran and Tsionas, 2015) approaches, as well as the instrumental variable based maximum likelihood estimator (Karakaplan and Kutlu, 2017a,b; Karakaplan, 2022). Monte Carlo simulations reveal distinct bias–variance trade-offs: likelihood-based estimators provide more precise efficiency scores, while GMM and copula can be advantageous in specific contexts. An empirical application to the Portuguese thermal power subsector (2006-2021) shows that accounting for endogeneity significantly alters coefficients and efficiency distributions. These results demonstrate that estimator choice affects policy-relevant indicators such as efficiency scores and determinants of cost performance. Despite data limitations, the study underscores the importance of treating endogeneity and provides methodological guidance for applied efficiency analysis.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11665,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Energy Economics\",\"volume\":\"151 \",\"pages\":\"Article 108922\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":14.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Energy Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988325007492\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988325007492","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Dealing with endogeneity in stochastic frontier models: A comparative assessment of estimators
Endogeneity poses a major challenge for Stochastic Frontier Analysis, as input choices may be endogenous to unobserved components of the error term, resulting in biased efficiency estimates. This paper compares leading estimators that address this issue, including control-function estimator (Kutlu, 2010), Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) (Tran and Tsionas, 2013) and copula (Tran and Tsionas, 2015) approaches, as well as the instrumental variable based maximum likelihood estimator (Karakaplan and Kutlu, 2017a,b; Karakaplan, 2022). Monte Carlo simulations reveal distinct bias–variance trade-offs: likelihood-based estimators provide more precise efficiency scores, while GMM and copula can be advantageous in specific contexts. An empirical application to the Portuguese thermal power subsector (2006-2021) shows that accounting for endogeneity significantly alters coefficients and efficiency distributions. These results demonstrate that estimator choice affects policy-relevant indicators such as efficiency scores and determinants of cost performance. Despite data limitations, the study underscores the importance of treating endogeneity and provides methodological guidance for applied efficiency analysis.
期刊介绍:
Energy Economics is a field journal that focuses on energy economics and energy finance. It covers various themes including the exploitation, conversion, and use of energy, markets for energy commodities and derivatives, regulation and taxation, forecasting, environment and climate, international trade, development, and monetary policy. The journal welcomes contributions that utilize diverse methods such as experiments, surveys, econometrics, decomposition, simulation models, equilibrium models, optimization models, and analytical models. It publishes a combination of papers employing different methods to explore a wide range of topics. The journal's replication policy encourages the submission of replication studies, wherein researchers reproduce and extend the key results of original studies while explaining any differences. Energy Economics is indexed and abstracted in several databases including Environmental Abstracts, Fuel and Energy Abstracts, Social Sciences Citation Index, GEOBASE, Social & Behavioral Sciences, Journal of Economic Literature, INSPEC, and more.