臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

過去對清廉印象指數(Corruption Perception Index,CPI)的研究，大多著重在其與經濟成長或政府治理間之關係，甚少從效率的觀點進行探討。因此，本研究試圖從能源耗用與生態平衡的觀點下所建構出的國家動態效率，探究清廉印象指數對其之影響。本文以全球49個國家為分析對象，並以政府治理變數，作為CPI之代理變數，以逐步迴歸方式對2007至2016年資料進行分析。實證結果顯示，若將樣本國家依地理位置及所得高低區分的話，可以發現，歐洲國家及高所得國家不論是在動態效率值或CPI表現上，均是群體中表現最佳者，且具顯著差異，整體而言，CPI與國家動態效率值具顯著正相關。此外，政府治理相關代理變數對CPI影響均達正向且顯著，而對國家動態效率值除官僚主義為負向顯著外，其餘亦為正向顯著，表示，若要提升國家動態效率，就必須對僵固、保守的官僚主義進行改革。最後，CPI在政治穩定度、個人安全與私人財產等變數與國家動態效率值間為完全中介效果，而在官僚主義變數則為負向部分中介效果，顯示政府在廉能政策推動上，若能依其影響效果之不同而有所調整，將更能進一步提升整體國家動態效率。

In the past, research on the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) mostly focused on its relationship with economic growth or government governance, and was rarely discussed in terms of efficiency. Therefore, this study attempts to explore the dynamic efficiency of the country constructed from the viewpoint of energy consumption and ecological balance and to explore the impact of the CPI on it. This paper uses 49 countries around the world as the analysis object, and uses government governance variables as proxy variables of CPI to analyze the data from 2007 to 2016 in a stepwise regression manner. The empirical results show that if the sample countries are distinguished by geographical location and level of income, it can be found that European countries and high-income countries are the best performers in terms of dynamic efficiency values or CPI performance, and they have significant differences. Overall, the CPI has a significant positive correlation with the national dynamic efficiency value. In addition, the impact of government-government-related agency variables on CPI has been positive and significant. In terms of national dynamic efficiency, bureaucracy is negatively significant, and other variables are positive. To improve the dynamic efficiency of the country, it is necessary to reform the rigid bureaucracy. Finally, CPI has a complete mediating effect between variables such as political stability, personal security and private property, and national dynamic efficiency, while bureaucratic variables are negatively mediating effects. It indicates that if the government promotes the probity policy according to the results of its influences . it will be able to further improve the overall national dynamic efficiency .

誌謝 I
摘要 II
Abstract III
目錄 V
圖目錄 VIII
表目錄 IX
第一章 緒論 1
1.1研究背景與動機 1
1.2研究目的 4
1.3研究範圍與限制 6
1.4研究流程 8
1.5章節架構 9
第二章 文獻探討 10
2.1環境生態與能源效率 10
2.2清廉印象指數與經濟成長 15
2.3政府治理與清廉印象指數 21
2.4政府治理與經濟成長 22
第三章 研究設計 24
3.1研究架構 24
3.2國家動態效率評估架構 27
3.3樣本資料來源 28
3.4變數操作定義 28
3.5方法論 30
3.5.1資料包絡分析法 31
3.5.2動態資料包絡分析 32
3.5.3無母數統計 36
第四章 實證分析 39
4.1國家動態效率值分析 40
4.2清廉印象指數對國家動態效率值的影響 48
4.3政府治理對清廉印象指數的影響 53
4.4政府治理對國家動態效率值的影響 56
4.5清廉印象指數扮演的中介角色 58
第五章 結論與建議 66
參考文獻 70

1.Acemoglu, D., & Verdier, T. (1998). Property rights, corruption and the allocation of talent: a general equilibrium approach. The economic journal, 108(450), 1381-1403.
2.Ahlerup, P., Baskaran, T., & Bigsten, A. (2016). Government impartiality and sustained growth in sub-Saharan Africa. World Development, 83, 54-69.
3.Ahmad, N., & Ali, S. (2010). Corruption and financial sector performance: A cross-country analysis. Economics Bulletin, 30(1), 303-308.
4.Ajie, H., & Wokekoro, O. (2012). The impact of corruption on sustainable economic growth and development in Nigeria. International Journal of Economic Development Research and Investment, 3(1), 91-109.
5.Bampatsou, C., Papadopoulos, S., & Zervas, E. (2013). Technical efficiency of economic systems of EU-15 countries based on energy consumption. Energy Policy, 55, 426-434.
6.Bardhan, P. (1997). Corruption and development: a review of issues. Journal of economic literature, 35(3), 1320-1346.
7.Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51(6), 1173.
8.Barreto, R. A. (2000). Endogenous corruption in a neoclassical growth model. European economic review, 44(1), 35-60.
9.Barreto, R. A. (2001). Endogenous corruption, inequality and growth: econometric evidence.
10.Boyd, G. A., & Pang, J. X. (2000). Estimating the linkage between energy efficiency and productivity. Energy Policy, 28(5), 289-296.
11.Brockett, P. L., & Golany, B. (1996). Using rank statistics for determining programmatic efficiency differences in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 42(3), 466-472.
12.Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European journal of operational research, 2(6), 429-444.
13.Crompton, P., & Wu, Y. (2005). Energy consumption in China: past trends and future directions. Energy economics, 27(1), 195-208.
14.d’Agostino, G., Dunne, J. P., & Pieroni, L. (2016). Government spending, corruption and economic growth. World Development, 84, 190-205.
15.Delgado, M. S., McCloud, N., & Kumbhakar, S. C. (2014). A generalized empirical model of corruption, foreign direct investment, and growth. Journal of Macroeconomics, 42, 298-316.
16.Dimakou, O. (2015). Bureaucratic corruption and the dynamic interaction between monetary and fiscal policy. European Journal of Political Economy, 40, 57-78.
17.Dreher, A., & Gassebner, M. (2013). Greasing the wheels? The impact of regulations and corruption on firm entry. Public Choice, 155(3-4), 413-432.
18.Färe, R., & Grosskopf, S. (2000). Network dea. Socio-economic planning sciences, 34(1), 35-49.
19.Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., & Tyteca, D. (1996). An activity analysis model of the environmental performance of firms—application to fossil-fuel-fired electric utilities. Ecological economics, 18(2), 161-175.
20.Farooq, A., Shahbaz, M., Arouri, M., & Teulon, F. (2013). Does corruption impede economic growth in Pakistan? Economic Modelling, 35, 622-633.
21.Farrell, M. J. (1957). The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General), 120(3), 253-290.
22.Gupta, S., Davoodi, H., & Alonso-Terme, R. (2002). Does corruption affect income inequality and poverty? Economics of governance, 3(1), 23-45.
23.Haass, F., & Ottmann, M. (2017). Profits from Peace: The Political Economy of Power-Sharing and Corruption. World Development, 99, 60-74.
24.Habib, M., & Zurawicki, L. (2002). Corruption and foreign direct investment. Journal of international business studies, 33(2), 291-307.
25.Hamilton, J. D. (1983). Oil and the macroeconomy since World War II. Journal of political economy, 91(2), 228-248.
26.Hatfield-Dodds, S., Schandl, H., Newth, D., Obersteiner, M., Cai, Y., Baynes, T., . . . Havlik, P. (2017). Assessing global resource use and greenhouse emissions to 2050, with ambitious resource efficiency and climate mitigation policies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 144, 403-414.
27.Holmbeck, G. N. (2002). Post-hoc probing of significant moderational and mediational effects in studies of pediatric populations. Journal of pediatric psychology, 27(1), 87-96.
28.Hu, J.-L., & Kao, C.-H. (2007). Efficient energy-saving targets for APEC economies. Energy Policy, 35(1), 373-382.
29.Hu, J.-L., & Wang, S.-C. (2006). Total-factor energy efficiency of regions in China. Energy Policy, 34(17), 3206-3217.
30.Huynh, K. P., & Jacho-Chávez, D. T. (2009). Growth and governance: A nonparametric analysis. Journal of comparative economics, 37(1), 121-143.
31.Jebali, E., Essid, H., & Khraief, N. (2017). The analysis of energy efficiency of the Mediterranean countries: A two-stage double bootstrap DEA approach. Energy, 134, 991-1000.
32.Kaufmann, D. (1997). Corruption: the facts. Foreign policy, 114-131.
33.Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Zoido-Lobatón, P. (1999). Aggregating governance indicators (Vol. 2195): world Bank publications.
34.Kaufmann, D., & Wei, S.-J. (1999). Does" grease money" speed up the wheels of commerce? : National bureau of economic research.
35.Knack, S., & Keefer, P. (1995). Institutions and economic performance: cross‐country tests using alternative institutional measures. Economics & Politics, 7(3), 207-227.
36.Lambsdorff, J. G. (2003). How corruption affects productivity. Kyklos, 56(4), 457-474.
37.Leff, N. H. (1964). Economic development through bureaucratic corruption. American behavioral scientist, 8(3), 8-14.
38.Li, H., Xu, L. C., & Zou, H. f. (2000). Corruption, income distribution, and growth. Economics & Politics, 12(2), 155-182.
39.Li, Y., Sun, L., Feng, T., & Zhu, C. (2013). How to reduce energy intensity in China: A regional comparison perspective. Energy Policy, 61, 513-522.
40.Lui, F. T. (1985). An equilibrium queuing model of bribery. Journal of political economy, 93(4), 760-781.
41.Mauro, P. (1995). Corruption and growth. The quarterly journal of economics, 110(3), 681-712.
42.Mauro, P. (1997). Why worry about corruption? (Vol. 6): International Monetary Fund.
43.Menyah, K., & Wolde-Rufael, Y. (2010). Energy consumption, pollutant emissions and economic growth in South Africa. Energy economics, 32(6), 1374-1382.
44.Mo, P. H. (2001). Corruption and economic growth. Journal of comparative economics, 29(1), 66-79.
45.Mohamadi, A., Peltonen, J., & Wincent, J. (2017). Government efficiency and corruption: A country-level study with implications for entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 8, 50-55.
46.Paksha Paul, B. (2010). Does corruption foster growth in Bangladesh? International Journal of Development Issues, 9(3), 246-262.
47.Reddy, B. S., & Assenza, G. B. (2009). The great climate debate. Energy Policy, 37(8), 2997-3008.
48.Robaina-Alves, M., Moutinho, V., & Macedo, P. (2015). A new frontier approach to model the eco-efficiency in European countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 103, 562-573.
49.Rock, M. T., & Bonnett, H. (2004). The comparative politics of corruption: accounting for the East Asian paradox in empirical studies of corruption, growth and investment. World Development, 32(6), 999-1017.
50.Saha, S., & Ali, M. S. B. (2017). Corruption and economic Development: New evidence from the middle Eastern and North African countries. Economic Analysis and Policy, 54, 83-95.
51.Sen, K. (2013). The political dynamics of economic growth. World Development, 47, 71-86.
52.Shabbir, G., & Anwar, M. (2007). Determinants of corruption in developing countries. The Pakistan Development Review, 751-764.
53.Skeer, J., & Wang, Y. (2007). China on the move: Oil price explosion? Energy Policy, 35(1), 678-691.
54.Sueyoshi, T., & Goto, M. (2011). DEA approach for unified efficiency measurement: assessment of Japanese fossil fuel power generation. Energy economics, 33(2), 292-303.
55.Sueyoshi, T., & Yuan, Y. (2015). China's regional sustainability and diversified resource allocation: DEA environmental assessment on economic development and air pollution. Energy economics, 49, 239-256.
56.Tanzi, V. (1998). Corruption around the world: Causes, consequences, scope, and cures. Staff Papers, 45(4), 559-594.
57.Tebaldi, E., & Elmslie, B. (2008). Institutions, innovation and economic growth. Journal of economic development, 33(2), 27.
58.Tone, K., & Tsutsui, M. (2009). Network DEA: A slacks-based measure approach. European journal of operational research, 197(1), 243-252.
59.Tone, K., & Tsutsui, M. (2010). Dynamic DEA: A slacks-based measure approach. Omega, 38(3-4), 145-156.
60.Wang, Z., He, W., & Chen, K. (2016). The integrated efficiency of economic development and CO2 emissions among Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation members. Journal of Cleaner Production, 131, 765-772.
61.Yang, L., Ouyang, H., Fang, K., Ye, L., & Zhang, J. (2015). Evaluation of regional environmental efficiencies in China based on super-efficiency-DEA. Ecological Indicators, 51, 13-19.
62.Zaim, O. (2004). Measuring environmental performance of state manufacturing through changes in pollution intensities: a DEA framework. Ecological economics, 48(1), 37-47.
63.Zhang, X.-P., Cheng, X.-M., Yuan, J.-H., & Gao, X.-J. (2011). Total-factor energy efficiency in developing countries. Energy Policy, 39(2), 644-650.
64.Zhao, C.-b. (2012). Does Regulation on CO2 Emissions Influence Productivity Growth?–The Empirical Test Based on DEA Analysis. Energy Procedia, 16, 667-672.
65.Zhou, P., Ang, B., & Poh, K. (2006). Slacks-based efficiency measures for modeling environmental performance. Ecological economics, 60(1), 111-118.