（1.Guangzhou Sport University，Guangzhou 510500，China；2.Henan Insititue of Science and Technology，Xingxiang 453003，China) Abstract: Through the CCR model, the BCC model, the SE-DEA model and the Malmquist model in the DEA model, the authors comprehensively evaluated the sports public service performance of different provinces in China from the hori-zontal and vertical dimensions, and revealed the following findings: 1) the sports public service efficiency of 17 provinces or cities such as Beijing, Tianjin and Shanghai was relatively high, the sports public service performance of 14 provinces or cities such as Hebei, Inner Mongolia and Qinghai was relatively low; 2) the technical efficiency of provinces or cities such as Yunnan, Shanxi and Guizhou was on the low side, the scale efficiency of Qinghai was the lowest; 3) all the DEA weak effective provinces or cities had different signs of index input redundancy, having a bigger redundancy in such two indexes as sports administrative personnel number and employee number, and all the output indexes had the sign of output defi-ciency; 4) the order of comprehensive efficiency rankings based on sports public service effective provinces or cities is as follows: Beijing, Heilongjiang, Jiangxi, Shanxi, Henan, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Anhui, Liaoning, Zhejiang, Ningxia, Guangxi, Tianjin, Shandong, Hubei, Gansu, Jilin; 5) China’s sports public service efficiency between 2009 and 2015 showed a trend of slight increasing, increased by 2.4%, while technical advancement increased by 2.9%.
Key words: sports public service；performance comprehensive evaluation；DEA model |
