EVALUATION OF EFFICIENCY MEASUREMENT OF SELECTED TECHNOPARKS WITH DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS (DEA)

Abstract

Technology Development Zone (Technopark) are units that focuses on working effectively and producing productive works due to their structures. It is known that each technopark differs in terms of its production method and the benefits it provides. This research respond to give information about the general conditions of the Technoparks whose data were shared publicly and they were valuated within the scope of expected and realized benefits. Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), one of the Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Methods is applied in the study. DEA is considered as one of the most frequently preferred analysis methods to measure efficiency, especially in structures with economic decision-making mechanisms. This paper includes 9 Technoparks, which share the data of the determined performance indicators up-to-date, according to the analysis of efficiency measurements performed with 3 inputs and 2 outputs. Collaboration and patent numbers among the variables used in the study are the output variables; infrastructure, offered advantages and proximity to the university refer to the input variables. The efficiency of the technoparks was measured with CCR Input and Output Oriented Models, the issues deemed to increase the benefits provided by the technoparks are evaluated, and suggestions are made within the scope of the findings.

Keywords

• Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods (MCDM)
• Technoparks
• Mathematical Models
• Efficiency Measurement
• Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA)

References

1. 1. AKBULUT, K. (2020), Extension of Technopark Boundaries to Include Free Zone, Financial Solution, 30(162), 255-260.
2. 2. AKTAS, A. and KABAK, M. (2020), Analysis of GDP Contribution of NUTS – 2 Regions via Data Envelopment Analysis, Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli University Journal of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Special Volume, 191-206.
3. 3. ALKIBAY, S., ORHANER, E., KORKMAZ, S. and SERTOGLU, A. E. (2012), Technoparks within the Framework of University-Industry Cooperation, Managerial Problems and Suggested Solutions, Ataturk University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 26(2), 65-90.
4. 4. BATTAL, U. (2020), Measurement of Financial Performance of Airport Groups Companies in Europe: Data Envelopment Analysis Method, Academic Review of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 13(1) 171-184.
5. 5. BAYCAN, T. and ARKALI OLCAY, G. (2021), Linking the Performance of Entrepreneurial Universities to Technoparks and University Characteristics in Turkey, Region, 8(1), 97-117. DOI: 10.18335/region.v8i1.300.
6. 6. BAYKUL, A., SUNGUR, O. and DULUPCU, M.A. (2016), Evaluation of Management Efficiencies of Technology Development Zones Managing Company Using Data Envelopment Analysis, Suleyman Demirel University The Journal of Visionary, 7 (15), 70-82.
7. 7. BAYZIN, S. and SENGUR, M. (2019), Role of Technoparks In University-Industry Cooperation, The International Journal of Economic and Social Research, 15(3), 299-314.
8. 8. BIGLIARDI, B., DORMIO, AI., NOSELLA, A. and PETRONI, G. (2006) Assessing science parks' performances: Directions from selected Italian case studies, Technovation, 26(4). 489-505.

9. 9. BOWLIN, W. F. (1998). Measuring Performance: An Introduction to Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), The Journal of Cost Analysis, 15(2), 3-27. 10. CANSIZ, M. (2017), Turkey Technoparks to 2023, Republic of Turkey Ministry of Development of Social Sectors and Coordination General Directorate, Publication No: 2972, December.
10. 11. CHAN, K., OERLEMANS, L. and PRETORIUS, M. (2010), Knowledge flows and innovative performances of NTBFs in Gauteng, South Africa: An attempt to explain mixed findings in science park research, International Journal of Social, Behavioral, Educational, Economic, Business and Industrial Engineering. 4(6), 1440-1454.
11. 12. CHEN, C. J. and HUANG, C. C. (2004), A Multiple Criteria Evaluation of High-Tech Industries for The Science-Based Industrial Park in Taiwan, Information & Management, 41, 839–851.
12. 13. COELLI, T.J., PRASADA RAO, D.S., O’Donnell, C.J. and Battase, G.E. (2005), An Introduction to Efficiency and Productivity Analysis, 2nd Edition, Springer Science + Business Media Inc.
13. 14. COOK, D., TONE, K. and ZHU, J. (2014), Data envelopment analysis: Prior to choosing a model, Omega. 44. 1-4.
14. 15. ÇARIKÇI, O. and AKBULUT, F. (2020), Measurement of the Efficiency of Turkish Banking Sector with Data Envelopment Analysis, Journal of Business Research-Turk, 12(1), 215-226.
15. 16. DEGIRMENCI, N. (2021), Evaluation of Health Effıciency of OECD Countries with Data Envelopment and Inverse Data Envelopment Analyses, UİİİD-IJEAS, (30), 171-182.
16. 17. DEMIREL, A.C. and HAZAR, A. (2020), An Application for Efficiency Measurement of Commercial Banks via Data Envelopment Analysis, Journal of Commercial Sciences, 4(1), 43-58.
17. 18. DERELI, D. (2019), The Relationship Between High-Technology Exports, Patent and Economic Growth in Turkey (1990-2015), Journal of Business, Economics and Finance, 8(3), 173-180.
18. 19. ERNST, H. (2003), Patent Information for Strategic Technology Management, World Patent Information. 25. 233-242.
19. 20. ESENLIK TELATAR, D. and SARI, K. (2020), A Data Envelopment Analysis Model for the Efficiency Measurement of Facilities Providing Oral and Dental Health Services: The Case of Istanbul, Pamukkale University Journal of Engineering Sciences, 26(4), 768-778.
20. 21. ETZKOWITZ, H. (1998), The Norms of Entrepreneurial Science: Cognitive Effects of the New University–Industry Linkages, Research Policy, 27(8), 823–833. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00093-6.
21. 22. ETZKOWITZ, H., WEBSTER, A., GEBHARDT, C. and TERRA, B. (2000), The future of the university and the University of the Future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy. 29. 313-330.
22. 23. GULER, M. and KIRBASLAR, S. İ. (2020), The Role of Technology Transfer Offices in University-Industry Collaboration, İksad Publishing House, Adıyaman.
23. 24. GUNER ERTEMOGLU, H., ERTEMOGLU, S. and PEKER, I., (2021), Performance Evaluation of Provincial Directorates of Commerce by Data Envelopment Analysis, Ataturk University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 35(1) 291-317.
24. 25. HALILOGLU, E. Y. (2021), Efficiency Assessment of University-Industry Collaboration, University-Industry Collaboration Strategies in the Digital Era, DOI: 10.4018/ 978-1-7998-3901-9.ch008.
25. 26. KARA, O. and USLU, M. (2020), Efficiency of Electricity Distribution Companies: Bootstrap Estimated Two-Stage DEA Analysis, Nigde Omer Halisdemir University Journal of Social Sciences Institutes, 2(2), 189-206.
26. 27. KELEŞ, M. and TUNCA, M. (2009), University-Industry Cooperation and the Role of Technopark in Turkey. University Industry Collaboration Centers Platform (UICCP) Proceedings of the National Congress of University-Industry Cooperation, Eskişehir, 7-8 May, 311-322.
27. 28. KUBAS, A. and OZMEN, N. B. (2020), Entrepreneurship and Technoparks, Balkan and Near Eastern Journal of Social Sciences, 6(4), 104-109.
28. 29. LINDELOF, P. and LOFSTEN, H. (2003), Science Park Location and New Technology-Based Firms in Sweden-Implications for Strategy and Performance, Small Business Economics, 20, 245-258.
29. 30. MOELIODIHARDJO, B., SOEMARDI, B., BRODJONEGORO, S. and HATAKENAKA, S. (2012), University, Industry and Government partnership: its present and future challenges in Indonesia, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 52, 307-316.
30. 31. NALDOKEN, U. and KAYA, M. V. (2020), In Turkey Health Insurance Companies Efficiencies Measurement with Data Envelopment Analysis, Dumlupınar University Journal of Social Sciences, 65, 21-33.
31. 32. NG, W. K. B., APPEL-MEULENBROEK, R., CLOODT, M. and ARENTZE, T. (2021), Perceptual Measures of Science Parks: Tenant Firms’ Associations Between Science Park Attributes and Benefits, Technological Forecasting & Social Bowlinige, (163), 1-15.
32. 33. NIETO, J., CRECENTE, F., SARABIA, M. and DEL VAL, M. (2021), The Habitat of University and Non-University Startups, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, DOI: 10.1080/08985626.2021.1872938.
33. 34. OZDEMİR, Y. (2020), Determination of AHP and Importance Coefficients of Variables Which Effective in the Establishment Choice of Technoparks Supported by Innovation-Focused Initiatives, International Journal of Management Information Systems and Computer Science, 4(1), 74-83.
34. 35. OZDEN, U. H. (2008), Efficiency Evaluation of Foundation Universities in Turkey by Using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), Istanbul University Journal of the School Business Administration, 37(2), 167-185.
35. 36. OZKAN AKSU, E. ve TEMEL GENCER, C. (2018), Investigating of Environmental Performance of OECD Countries By Data Envelopment Analysis, UIIID-IJEAS, 18. EAS Özel Sayısı, 191-206.
36. 37. OZKAN, T. (2021), Evaluating The Efficiency of Enterprises Traded in Borsa Istanbul IT Sector, Journal of Finance Letters, (115), 253-268.
37. 38. OZSOY, V. S., ORKCU, M. and ORKCU, H. (2020), The Most Efficient Supplier Selection with Mixed-İnteger Two-Stage Data Envelopment Analysis Model, Pamukkale University Journal of Engineering Sciences, 26(4), 758-767.
38. 39. RAMANATHAN, R. (2003), An Introduction to Data Envelopment Analysis: A Tool For Performance Measurement, New Delphi: Sage Publications.
39. 40. RIBEIRO, J. A., LADEIRA, M. B., FARIA, A. F. and BARBOSA, M. W. (2021), A Reference Model For Science and Technology Parks Strategic Performance Management: An Emerging Economy Perspective, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 59, 1-16.
40. 41. RIKALOVIC, A., COSIC, I., LABATI, R. and PIURI, V. (2015), A Comprehensive Method for Industrial Site Selection: The Macro-Location Analysis. IEEE, DOI: 10.1109/JSYST.2015.2444471.
41. 42. SOZEN, A., MİRZAPOUR, A., CAKIR, M., ISKENDER, U. and CIPIL, F. (2015). Selecting Best Location of Wind Plants Using DEA and TOPSIS Approach In Turkish Cities, Gazi Journal of Engineering Sciences, 1(1), 173-194.
42. 43. TASDEMIR, M. and AYDIN, E. (2020), Determining the Efficiency Scores of EUROCONTROL Member European Air Navigation Service Provider Organizations by Data Envelopment Analysis Method, Journal of Business Research, 12(4), 4305-4322. DOI: 10.20491/isarder.2020.1106.
43. 44. TELES, M., KONCA, M. and CAKMAK, C. (2021), Evaluating the Health System Performance of OECD Countries with Malmquist Index, Journal of Health and Social Welfare Research, 3(1), 67-76.
44. 45. ULUDAG, A. S and DOGAN, H. (2021), Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods, Literature, Theory and Practice in Production Management, 1st Edition, Nobel Publication, Ankara.
45. 46. UMARUSMAN, N. (2019), An Integrated Solution Proposak for Supplier Selection Problems: Data Envelopment Analysis and Global Criteria Method, 1st Edition, Bilgin Culture and Art Publications, 301-315.
46. 47. USTUNDAG, A. and KILINC, M. (2012), Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Selection of Science Parks for Start-up Companies, International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 4(2), 217-227.
47. 48. YANG, C. H. and LEE, W. C. (2021), Establishing Science Parks Everywhere? Misallocation in R&D and Its Determinants of Science Parks in China, China Economic Review, 67, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2021.101605.