A Model for the Distribution of Construction Credits Based on Network Data Envelopment Analysis

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Industrial Management, Faculty of Economics, Management, and Accounting, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran.

2 Associate Professor, Department of Industrial Management, Faculty of Economics, Management, and Accounting, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran.

3 Ph.D., Department of Industrial Management, Faculty of Economics, Management, and Accounting, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran.

10.48308/jimp.15.1.193

Abstract

Introduction and Objectives: Public budget allocation refers to the process by which governments determine how to distribute their financial resources among various social needs and priorities. It is a complex and multifaceted process that involves decisions with profound consequences for citizens' welfare and the overall functioning of society. Budget allocation influences the amount and quality of public services such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure and can also affect economic development and the distribution of wealth within a country. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in examining how public budgets are allocated and whether current methods and priorities align with societal needs and values. Continuous fluctuations in budget allocation policies in Iran, especially in critical areas such as education and healthcare, have led to regional inequalities. To address this issue, a planned and sustainable approach to credit distribution is required—one based on the actual needs of each province and aimed at balanced development. In this context, the present study aims to propose a performance-based planning model tailored to the nature of the problem for the distribution of provincial capital credits. The objective is to achieve macroeconomic and social goals, including reducing income inequality, alleviating deprivation, increasing production and employment, lowering unemployment rates, and enhancing social well-being, all based on the performance of the provinces.
Methodology: The approach used in this research is mathematical modeling based on a conceptual framework that applies data envelopment analysis (DEA) in a novel way. As a case study, the model has been tested in the education and healthcare sectors. In the proposed model, specific values of deviation in variable values (delta) are determined by experts based on national and provincial credit distribution policies. Additionally, the allocation of budgetary resources is determined based on the performance evaluation and ranking of provinces to achieve predefined goals.
Findings: The implementation of the model using 1401 data demonstrates its efficiency compared to conventional and previous capital credit distribution methods employed by Iran's Planning and Budget Organization. The results indicate that the proposed method not only enhances accountability for achieving set goals but also facilitates continuous improvement by enabling provinces to learn from past experiences and make informed decisions for future activities.
One of the most significant features of this model is its adaptability to budgetary changes. The model’s inputs can always be modified based on new policies, ensuring its relevance and applicability over time.
Conclusion: The proposed two-phase approach begins with the DEA model to align with the nature of the problem and assess provincial performance. In the second phase, a credit change management approach is employed for sensitivity analysis. A key distinguishing feature of this model is the expert-driven determination of delta values based on national and provincial credit distribution policies. Additionally, each province’s optimal share of total allocated credits can be calculated and received, providing policymakers with a crucial tool to enhance the efficiency of provinces and guide them toward an optimal state.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Azar, A.,Amini, M., Ahmadi, P. (2014). Performance-based budgeting model: robust optimization approach (case study: Tarbiat Modares University). Planning and Budget Quarterly, year 19, number 1, pages 53-84. (In Persian).
  2. Torabandeh, M. A., Dorri Nokorani, B., Motameni, A., Rabieh, M. (2021). Comparative-fuzzy Analysis of National Innovation Capability Based on Results of Dynamic Network DEA Model. Industrial Management Perspective, 11(2), 207-246. (In Persian).
  3. Taqwai-Najib, A., Rezaeian, A., Rabiei Mandejin, M.R. (2022). A comparative study of the supervisory role of the parliament in the budgeting process and its place in the implementation of the general policies of the legislative system. Strategic and Macro Policy Quarterly, 10(1), 132-163. (In Persian).
  4. Jahanian, R. (2012). Review and analysis of the development policies of Iran's education in the contemporary period. Political Science Quarterly, 19, 93-116. (In Persian).
  5. Khezri, M. (2008). The political economy of rent-seeking in Iran's government budgeting. Political Science Research Journal, 12, 72-39. (In Persian).
  6. Rahimi, M., Kakadezfuli, A., Kakadezfuli, A. (2016). Measuring the level of development of the country's provinces in terms of educational index using multi-indicator decision-making techniques. Educational Planning Studies bi-quarterly, 6(10), 11-29. (In Persian).
  7. Qanbari, H., Ebrahimi Sarv Olya, M. H., Amiri, M., Boulou, Q., Ghorbani Zadeh, V. (2020). Designing a Performance Evaluation Model for the Technical and Vocational Education Organization of Iran with an Emphasis on the Financial Approach. Industrial Management Perspective, 10(4), 9-40. (In Persian).
  8. Karimzadeh, M., Karimzadeh, B. (2021). Measuring the degree of development and educational deprivation of the cities of Sistan and Baluchistan province. Scientific Journal of Education Technology, 15(2), 418-409. (In Persian).
  9. Moghimi, S. M., Pourezzat, A. A., Danai-Fard, H., Ahmadi, H. (2016). Explaining the elements of good governance in the policy-making of the country's budget system. Quarterly Journal of Strategic Studies of Public Policy, 6th period, No. 21. Pages 31-52. (In Persian).
  10. Mirzaei, M. R., Afshar Kazemi, M. A., Tolouei Ashlaghi, A. (2019). Designing a new hybrid model based on data envelopment analysis, artificial neural network, genetic algorithm, and particle swarm optimization for evaluating efficiency and modeling efficient and inefficient units. Industrial Management Perspective, 9(2), 107-129. (In Persian).
  11. Nouri, A. H., Sarlak, A., Rahmati, M. H. (2021). Optimal allocation of public budget resources of the government by estimating the welfare function by the method of generalized moments. Planning and Budgeting Quarterly, 26(4), 65-91. (In Persian).
  12. Afonso, A., Schuknecht, L., Tanzi, V. (2005). Public sector efficiency: an international comparison. Public choice, 123(3-4), 321-347.
  13. An, Q., Zhu, K., Xiong, B. (2024). Investment allocation in an adjustment-cost production technology framework for two-stage network structures. European Journal of Operational Research, 319(3), 808-819.
  14. Andrews, M., Hill, H. (2003). The impact of traditional budgeting systems on the effectiveness of performance‐based budgeting: a different viewpoint on recent findings. International Journal of Public Administration, 26(2), 135-155.
  15. Arora, N., Talwar, S. J. (2020). Modelling efficiency in budget allocations for Indian states using window based non-radial non-concave metafrontier data envelopment analysis. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 70, 100735.
  16. Beasley, J. E. (2003). Allocating fixed costs and resources via data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 147(1), 198-216.
  17. Blazey, A. (2018). OECD Best Practices for Performance Budgeting. OECD Publishing, Paris.
  18. Carvalho, F. F. B. D., Loch, M. R., Sposito, L. A. C., Andrade, D. R., Vieira, L. A. (2024). Federal government budgetary and financial resources for body practices and physical activities in the Unified Health System: analysis of the 2019-2022 governmental cycle. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 29, e19352022.
  19. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units. European journal of operational research, 2(6), 429-444.
  20. Cook, W. D., & Kress, M. (1999). Characterizing an equitable allocation of shared costs: A DEA approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 119(3), 652-661.
  21. Danar, O. R. (2023). The Efficiency of Public Sector Programs and Budget Allocation: Evidence from Indonesian Local Government. International Journal of COMADEM, 26(4), 33-38.
  22. Du, J., Cook, W. D., Liang, L., & Zhu, J. (2014). Fixed cost and resource allocation based on DEA cross-efficiency. European Journal of Operational Research, 235(1), 206-214.
  23. Fang, L., Zhang, C. Q. (2008). Resource allocation based on the DEA model. Journal of the operational Research Society, 59(8), 1136-1141.
  24. Ghiyasi, M. (2018). Performance assessment and capital budgeting based on performance. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 25(6), 1729-1745.
  25. Lee, J. Y. J., Wang, X. (2009). Assessing the impact of performance‐based budgeting: A comparative analysis across the United States, Taiwan, and China. Public Administration Review, 69, S60-S66.
  26. Li, F., Liang, L., Li, Y., & Emrouznejad, A. (2018). An alternative approach to decompose the potential gains from mergers. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 69(11), 1793-1802.
  27. Liao, L. H., Chen, L., Wang, J. (2024). A New Resource Allocation Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Method in a Two-Stage Inverse Data Envelopment Analysis Framework for the Sustainable Development of Chinese Commercial Banks. Sustainability, 16(4), 1383.
  28. Lozano, S. (2023). Bargaining approach for efficiency assessment and target setting with fixed-sum variables. Omega, 114, 102728.
  29. Lytvynchenko, G. (2014). Programme management for public budgeting and fiscal policy. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 119, 576-580.
  30. Mihaiu, D. M., Opreana, A., Cristescu, M. P. (2010). Efficiency, effectiveness and performance of the public sector. Romanian journal of economic forecasting, 4(1), 132-147.
  31. Moraes, D. T. C., Neto, J. I. C., De Franca, F. S., Oliveira, F. R. D. S., de Melo, R. A., de Lima Neto, F. B. (2023, June). Smooth management-a preference-based strategic approach to making budget adjustments. In 2023 18th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), 1-6, IEEE.
  32. Petraglia, C., Pierucci, E., Scalera, D (2020). Interregional redistribution and risk sharing through public budget, The case of Italy in times of crisis. Structural Change and Economic Dynamycs, 53, 162-169.
  33. Premchand, A. (1969). Performance Budgeting in Public Sector. Economic and Political Weekly, M13-M17.
  34. Pourghaffar, J., Mohammadzadeh Salteh, H., Zeynali, M., Mehrani, S. (2023). The Relationship between Performance-based Budgeting Characteristics with the Integrated Reporting Approach in the Public Sector. Iranian Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 7(4), 57-75.
  35. Sadeghi, J., Dehnokhalaji, A. (2019). A comprehensive method for the centralized resource allocation in DEA. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 127, 344-352.
  36. Sedghi, S., Azizi, S., Canada, K., Charles, V., Trapp, A. C. (2025). Performance evaluation of child welfare departments using Data Envelopment Analysis: A comparative study across US states. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 97, 102101.
  37. Shah, A. (Ed.). (2007). Budgeting and Budgetary Institutions. World Bank Publications.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics