Bibliographic review of Data Envelopment Analysis applications in Olympic Games
Keywords:Olympics; Efficiency analysis; Literature review.
The objective of this study is to perform a systematic review of the literature on the performance evaluation of countries in Olympic Games, specifically analyzing studies that encompass the non-parametric technique Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA). The scientific articles are dated from 2002 to 2018. It was necessary to organize the evolution of applied mathematical models and analyze the results in the game evaluation process. In addition, it was observed that the variables used and other techniques that helped the authors in the evaluation performed. A trend has been identified in the most recent literature for the use of the DEA model in networks. In general, countries are found to suffer from higher efficiency scores, especially at the administrative level. Therefore, after this type of dissemination of knowledge, it is possible to identify the need to remodel and implement new resource allocation strategies in order to obtain better performance indices in games of this magnitude.
Churilov, L., & Flitman, A. (2006). Towards fair ranking of Olympics achievements: The case of Sydney 2000. Computers & Operations Research, 33(7), 2057-2082.
Emrouznejad, A., & Yang, G. L. (2018). A survey and analysis of the first 40 years of scholarly literature in DEA: 1978–2016. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 61, 4-8.
Jablonsky, J. (2018). Ranking of countries in sporting events using two-stage data envelopment analysis models: a case of Summer Olympic Games 2016. Central European Journal of Operations Research, 26(4), 951-966.
Kao, C. (2014). Network data envelopment analysis: A review. European journal of operational research, 239(1), 1-16.
Lampe, H. W., & Hilgers, D. (2015). Trajectories of efficiency measurement: A bibliometric analysis of DEA and SFA. European Journal of Operational Research, 240(1), 1-21.
Lei, X., Li, Y., Xie, Q., & Liang, L. (2015). Measuring Olympics achievements based on a parallel DEA approach. Annals of Operations Research, 226(1), 379-396.
Li, Y., Lei, X., Dai, Q., & Liang, L. (2015). Performance evaluation of participating nations at the 2012 London Summer Olympics by a two-stage data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 243(3), 964-973.
Li, Y., Liang, L., Chen, Y., & Morita, H. (2008). Models for measuring and benchmarking Olympics achievements. Omega, 36(6), 933-940.
Lins, M. P. E., Gomes, E. G., de Mello, J. C. C. S., & de Mello, A. J. R. S. (2003). Olympic ranking based on a zero sum gains DEA model. European Journal of Operational Research, 148(2), 312-322.
Liu, J. S., Lu, L. Y., Lu, W. M., & Lin, B. J. (2013). A survey of DEA applications. Omega, 41(5), 893-902.
Liu, J. S., Lu, L. Y., & Lu, W. M. (2016). Research fronts in data envelopment analysis. Omega, 58, 33-45.
Lozano, S., Villa, G., Guerrero, F., & Cortés, P. (2002). Measuring the performance of nations at the Summer Olympics using data envelopment analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53(5), 501-511.
Soares de Mello, J. C. C. B., Angulo-Meza, L., & Branco da Silva, B. P. (2009). A ranking for the Olympic Games with unitary input DEA models. IMA Journal of Management Mathematics, 20(2), 201-211.
Soares de Mello, J. C. C. B., Gomes, E. G., Meza, L. A., & Neto, L. B. (2008). Cross evaluation using weight restrictions in unitary input DEA models: Theoretical aspects and application to Olympic Games ranking. WSEAS Transactions on Systems, 7(1), 31-39.
Soares de Mello, J. C. C. B., Angulo-Meza, L., & Lacerda, F. G. (2012). A dea model with a non discritionary variablefor olympic evaluation. Pesquisa Operacional, 32(1), 21-30.
Shirouyehzad, H., & Yazdani, F. (2014). Performance evaluation and ranking of participation Asian countries in 2012 London Olympic Games through Data Envelopment Analysis. Journal of Data Envelopment Analysis and Decision Science, 2014, 1-11.
Wu, H., Chen, B., Xia, Q., & Zhou, H. (2013). Ranking and benchmarking of the Asian games achievements based on DEA: The case of Guangzhou 2010. Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research, 30(06), 1350028.
Wu, J., & Liang, L. (2009). Cross-efficiency evaluation approach to Olympic ranking and benchmarking: the case of Beijing 2008. International Journal of Applied Management Science, 2(1), 76-92.
Wu, J., Liang, L., & Chen, Y. (2009). DEA game cross-efficiency approach to Olympic rankings. Omega, 37(4), 909-918.
Wu, J., Liang, L., Wu, D., & Yang, F. (2008). Olympics ranking and benchmarking based on cross efficiency evaluation method and cluster analysis: the case of Sydney 2000. International Journal of Enterprise Network Management, 2(4), 377-392.
Wu, J., Liang, L., & Yang, F. (2009). Achievement and benchmarking of countries at the Summer Olympics using cross efficiency evaluation method. European Journal of Operational Research, 197(2), 722-730.
Wu, J., Zhou, Z., & Liang, L. (2010). Measuring the performance of nations at Beijing Summer Olympics using integer-valued DEA model. Journal of Sports Economics, 11(5), 549-566.
Yang, F., Ling, L., Gou, Q., & Wu, H. (2009, December). Olympics performance evaluation and competition strategy based on data envelopment analysis. In 2009 International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Software Engineering (pp. 1-4). IEEE.
Yang, F., Wu, D. D., Liang, L., & O’Neill, L. (2011). Competition strategy and efficiency evaluation for decision making units with fixed-sum outputs. European Journal of Operational Research, 212(3), 560-569.
Zhang, D., Li, X., Meng, W., & Liu, W. (2009). Measuring the performance of nations at the Olympic Games using DEA models with different preferences. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 60(7), 983-990.
How to Cite
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.