The Non-Parameter Evaluation of the Quality of Education in European Countries Based on Panel Data
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15678/PG.2024.69.3.02Keywords:
sustainability development goals, quality of education, performance, efficiency, data envelopment analysisAbstract
Objective: The aim of this paper is to evaluate the performance of sustainable development in the education sector through a relative comparison of thirty-five European countries in the period of 2013–2021. Sustainable Development Goal number 4, namely the quality of education, was taken as a benchmark for evaluation.
Research Design & Methods: The performance of the countries was evaluated using the combined Slack Based Measure DEA Window model, which has a higher discriminating power than the standard DEA model and a dynamic dimension of observation. Finally, the robustness and sensitivity of the results was tested using bootstrapping methods.
Findings: The results showed that the performance of the quality of education, measured in terms of the DEA concept of efficiency, in the period 2013–2021, was at a relatively low but stable level overall. It was shown that, above all, the observed countries that are not members of the EU achieved a far worse level of the quality of education in the observed period, including the United Kingdom.
Contribution / Value Added: The obtained results are important in terms of benchmarking public policies related to sustainable development, especially in terms of contributing to discussions regarding the evaluation of countries’ performance, especially in the field of education, as one of the key goals of sustainable development. Also, the results refer to the sources of the inefficiency of educational policies, primarily in countries that are not members of the European Union, but also in some of the member countries.
Article classification: research article
JEL classification: C61, H52, I25
Downloads
References
Agbedahin, A. V. (2019). Sustainable development, Education for Sustainable Development, and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: Emergence, efficacy, eminence, and future. Sustainable Development, 27(4), 669–680. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1931
Ahmad, S. Z. (2015). Evaluating student satisfaction of quality at international branch campuses. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(4), 488–507. 10.1080/02602938.2014.925082
Becket, N., & Brookes, M. (2006). Evaluating quality management in university departments. Quality Assurance in Education, 14(2), 123–142.
Boyer, R. H., Peterson, N., Arora, P., & Caldwell, K. (2016). Five Approaches to Social Sustainability and an Integrated Way Forward. Sustainability, 8(9), 878. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8090878
Brooks, C. (2021). The quality conundrum in initial teacher education. Teachers and Teaching, 27(1–4), 131–146.
Brundtland Report (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development – Our Common Future. Available at: https://gat04-live-1517c8a4486c41609369c68f30c8-aa81074.divio-media.org/filer_public/6f/85/6f854236-56ab-4b42-810f-606d215c0499/cd_9127_extract_from_our_common_future_brundtland_report_1987_foreword_chpt_2.pdf
Camilleri, M. A., &Camilleri, A. C. (2020). The Sustainable Development Goal on Quality Education. In S. Idowu, R. Schmidpeter, & L. Zu (Eds.), The Future of the UN Sustainable Development Goals: CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance (pp. 261–277). Springer.
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operations Research, 2(6), 429–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8
Cervelló-Royo, R., Moya-Clemente, I., Perelló-Marín, M.R., & Ribes-Giner, G. (2020). Sustainable development, economic and financial factors, that influence the opportunity-driven entrepreneurship. An fsQCA approach. Journal of Business Research, 115, 393–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.10.031
Cooper, W., Seiford, L., & Tone, K. (2007). Data Envelopment Analysis: A Comprehensive Text with Models, Applications, References and DEA-Solver Software. Springer.
Diaz‐Sarachaga, J. M., Jato‐Espino, D., & Castro‐Fresno, D. (2018). Is the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) index an adequate framework to measure the progress of the 2030 Agenda? Sustainable Development, 26(6), 663–671. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1735
Elshaer, I. (2012). What is the Meaning of Quality? Munich Personal RePEc Archive.
European Commission (2022). Sustainable development in the European Union Monitoring report on progress towards the SDGs in an EU context. Brussels. http://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_22_3212 [accessed: 26.07.2022].
Ferguson, T., & Roofe, C. G. (2020). SDG 4 in higher education: Challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 21(5), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-12-2019-0353
Franco, I. B., Derbyshire, E., Chatterji, T., & Tracey, J. (2020). SDG4 Quality Education. In I. B. Franco & E. Derbyshire (Eds.), Actioning the Global Goals for Local Impact Towards Sustainability, Science, Policy, Education and Practice (pp. 57–68). Springer.
Grobler, S. (2022). Quality Education in the Context of the Sustainable Development Goals: An Interpretation Model. Forum Oświatowe, 34(1), 153–164.
Grochová, L. I., & Litzman, M. (2021). The efficiency in meeting measurable sustainable development goals. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 28(8), 709–719. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2021.1882606
Hanushek, E., & Woessmann, L. (2008). The Role of Cognitive Skills in Economic Development. Journal of Economic Literature, 46(3), 607–668.
Jakšić, M., Krstić Srejović, A., Milanović, M., & Mimović, P. (2024). Measuring the economic performance of transition economies: DEA-bootstrapping approach. Journal of Economic Studies, 51(1), 238–260. https://doi.org/10.1108/JES-01-2023-0037
Johnes, J., Portela M., & Thanassoulis, E. (2017). Efficiency in Education. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 68, 331–338.
Jorgenson, A. K., & Dietz, T. (2015). Economic growth does not reduce the ecological intensity of human well-being. Sustainability Science, 10, 149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-014-0264-6
Kang, H. J., Kim, C., & Kanghwa, C. (2024). Combining bootstrap data envelopment analysis with social networks for rank discrimination and suitable potential benchmarks. European Journal of Operational Research, 312(1), 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2023.06.038
Ko, J. W. (2017). Quality Assurance System in Korean Higher Education: Development and Challenges. In M. Shah & Q. T. N. Do (Eds.), The Rise of Quality Assurance in Asian Higher Education (pp. 109–125). Elsevier.
Krstić Srejović, A., Rejman-Petrović, D., Nedeljković, I., Mimović, P. (2022). Efficiency of the use of information and communication technologies as a determinant of the digital business transformation process. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 30(10), 3860–3883. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-07-2022-0439
Krstic Srejovic, A., Stamenkovic M., & Vuksanovic, N. (2024). Monitoring Sustainable Development Goals: Stepwise Benchmarking Approach. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 31(3–4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/mcda.1838
Lee, C. T., Hu, J. L., & Kung, M. H. (2022). Economic Resilience in the Early Stage of the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Across-Economy Comparison. Sustainability, 14(8), 4609. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084609
Leicht, A., Combes, B., Byun, W. J., & Agbedahin, A. V. (2018). From Agenda 21 to Target 4.7: The development of education for sustainable development. In UNESCO (Eds.), Issues and Trends in Education for Sustainable Development (pp. 25–38). Available at: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000261801 [accessed: 18.09.2023].
Li, D., Wang, M., & Lee, C. (2019). The waste treatment and recycling efficiency of industrial waste processing based on two-stage data envelopment analysis DEA with undesirable inputs. Journal of Cleaner Production, 242, 118279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118279
Long, Lj. (2021). Eco-efficiency and effectiveness evaluation toward sustainable urban development in China: A super-efficiency SBM–DEA with undesirable outputs. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23(10), 14982–14997. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01282-7
Mimović, P., Krstić, A., & Jakšić, M. (2019). Dynamic analysis of the efficiency of research and development systems of South-european countries. Yugoslav Journal of Operations Research, 29(3), 415–431. https://doi.org/10.2298/YJOR180815013M
Muhammad, A., Rao, T., & Farooq, Q. (2018). DEA window analysis with slack-based measure ofefficiency in Indian cement industry. Statistics, Optimization and Information Computing, 6(2), 291–301.
Odeck, J. (2009). Statistical precision of DEA and Malmquist indices: A bootstrap application to Norwegian grain producers. Omega, 37(5), 1007–1017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2008.11.003
Olawumi, T. O., & Chan, D. W. (2018). A scientometric review of global research on sustainability and sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 183, 231–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.162
Purvis, B., Mao, J., & Robinson, D. (2019). Three pillars of sustainability: In search of conceptual origins. Sustainability Science, 14, 681–695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0627-5
Rodriguez, J. V., Rodado, D. N., Borrero, T. C., & Parody, A. (2022). Multidimensional indicator to measure quality in education. International Journal of Educational Development, 89, 102541. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0738059321001942 [accessed: 28.09.2023].
Ropero, A., Dominguez, I., & Jimenez, M. (2018). Bootstrapped operating efficiency in container ports: A case study in Spain and Portugal. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 119(4), 924–948. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-03-2018-0132
Saini, M., Sengupta, E., Singh, M., Singh, H., & Singh, J. (2023). Sustainable Development Goal for Quality Education (SDG 4): A study on SDG 4 to extract the pattern of association among the indicators of SDG 4 employing a genetic algorithm. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 2031–2069. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11265-4
Sallis, E. (2002). Total Quality Management in Education. Routledge.
Savović, S., & Mimović, P. (2022). Effects of cross-border acquisitions on efficiency and productivity of acquired companies: evidence from cement industry. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 71(4), 1099–1125. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-07-2020-0372
Savović, S., Mimović, P., & Domanović, V. (2023). International acquisitions and efficiency and productivity of the Serbian cement industry. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 18(10), 4014–4036. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-03-2021-0350
Scheerens, J., Luyten, H., &van Ravens, J. (2011). Measuring Educational Quality by Means of Indicators. In J. Scheerens, H. Luyten & J. van Ravens (Eds.), Perspectives on Educational Quality. SpringerBriefs in Education, 1 (pp. 35–50). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0926-3_2
Shah, M. (2012). Ten years of external quality audit in Australia: Evaluating its effectiveness and success. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(6), 761–772. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2011.572154
Simar, L., & Wilson, P. W. (1998). Sensitivity analysis of efficiency scores: How to bootstrap in nonparametric frontier models. Management Science, 44(1), 49–61. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.44.1.49
Simar, L., & Wilson, P. W. (2000). A general methodology for bootstrapping in non-parametric frontier models. Journal of Applied Statistics, 27(6), 779–802. https://doi.org/10.1080/02664760050081951
Song, M-L., Zhang, L-L., Liu, W., & Fisher, R. (2013). Bootstrap-DEA analysis of BRICS’ energy efficiency based on small sample data. Applied Energy, 112, 1049–1055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.02.064
Staat, M. (2006). Efficiency of hospitals in Germany: A DEA-bootstrap approach. Applied Economics, 38, 2255–2263. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840500427502
Stevens, C., & Kanie, N. (2016). The transformative potential of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 16, 393–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-016-9324-y
Sustainable Development Goals. Available at: https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/sustainable-development-goals_en [accessed: 19.08.2023].
Tian, N., Tang, S., Che, A., & Wu, P. (2019). Measuring regional transport sustainability using super-efficiency SBM-DEA with weighting preference. Journal of Cleaner Production, 242, 118474. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118474
Toma, P., Miglietta, P. P., Zurlini, G., Valente, D., & Petrosillo, I. (2017). A non-parametric bootstrap-data envelopment analysis approach for environmental policy planning and management of agricultural efficiency in EU countries. Ecological Indicators, 83, 132–143. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.07.049
Tone, K. (2001). A slacks: based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 130(3), 498–509. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00407-5
UN (2012). The future we want. Resolution adopted by the general assembly on 27 July 2012 (A/RES/66/288).
Wang, K., Shiwei, Y., & Zhang, W. (2013). China’s regional energy and environmental efficiency: A DEA window analysis based dynamic evaluation. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 58(5–6), 1117–1127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2011.11.067
Wang, K., Wei, Y., & Huang, Z. (2018). Environmental efficiency and abatement efficiency measurements of China’s thermal power industry: A data envelopment analysis based materials balance approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 269(1), 35–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2017.04.053
Wichaisri, S., & Sopadang, A. (2018). Trends and Future Directions in Sustainable Development. Sustainable Development, 26, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1687
Yang, H-H., & Chang, C-Y.(2009). Using DEA window analysis to measure efficiencies of Taiwan’s integrated telecommunication firms. Telecommunications Policy, 33(1–2), 98–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2008.11.001
Zhang, B., Bi, J., Fan, Z., Yuan, Z., & Ge, J. (2008). Eco-efficiency analysis of industrial system in China: A data envelopment analysis approach. Ecological Economics, 68(1–2), 306–316. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.03.009
Zhang, Z., Zhu, H., & Zhou, Z. (2022). Kai Zou How does innovation matter for sustainable performance? Evidence from small and medium-sized enterprises. Journal of Business Research, 153, 251–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.08.034
Zurano-Cervelló, P., Pozo, C., Mateo-Sanz, J. M., Jiménez, L., & Guillén-Gosálbez, G. (2019). Sustainability efficiency assessment of the electricity mix of the 28 EU member countries combining data envelopment analysis and optimized projections. Energy Policy, 134, 110921. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.110921
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Krakow University of Economic
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
