Publications

Many people interpret the efficiency of the Oil and Gas Working Area by viewing two factors: cost recovery size and oil level production. Other factors are not considered although they may have a significant role in measuring the efficiency. For example, the amount of gas production is not a factor even though the cost of recovery is calculated from both oil and gas production. Field age is also ignored, but many theories explain how an older field has bigger operational costs than a younger field. Errors in analyzing the efficiency levels could result in errors in decision-making. To analyze the efficiency level of the management of oil and gas working areas in Indonesia, we used Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA). This method was chosen because it can be used to make efficiency comparisons between working areas by using multiple variable inputs and outputs simultaneously. The samples were 24 units of working areas for 2005–2013. The writers divided the working areas into two groups based on the amount of production in 2009. The output variable was the level of oil and gas production and the input variables were production costs, administrative costs, amount of oil and gas reserves earlier in the year, and value of fixed asset book (as a proxy for field age). To see the consistency level of efficiency between samples, we used the window analysis of the DEA Method. The results of the study show that during 2005–2009, the level of efficiency in the management of the oil and gas working area tended to decrease but increased in the years 2009–2013. Overall, the level of efficiency of the management of upstream oil and gas working areas during 2005–2013 showed an increasing trend.