臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

　　臺灣地區金融體系歷經數次變革與衝擊，在金融體系採取開放政策下，於民國90年通過「金融控股公司法」，在該法引領下所設立之金融控股公司，結合銀行、保險、證券三大金融事業體，截至民國94年初，國內共有14家金融控股公司掛牌經營。本研究使用資料包絡分析法及Malmquist生產力指數衡量經營效率變化與各年度績效之成長，並依據超效率法獲知績效最佳之金控公司。最後，將信用評等之變數分別納入投入項、非投入項、產出項、非產出項，以達客觀衡量出信用評等對於金控產業影響程度。研究結果如下：

一、本研究發現影響金融控股產業之技術效率為規模效率與純技術效率未充分達至效率值，其中又以規模效率未達效率更為嚴重。
二、以整體生產力變動而言，14家金融控股公司變動效率值具有效率，此代表金控產業在生產力變動之績效逐年皆有成長。
三、於民國91年金融控股公司成立後，國泰金控之績效評估之效率為14家中最佳且最穩定。
四、將信用評等以投入項、非投入項、產出項、非產出項等四種模擬情況之平均純效率值與原始純效率值相比較之下，均呈現些微影響。其次，在Wilcoxon符號等級檢定下，其三年之原始效率等級與納入信用評等為投入變數之效率等級具有顯著性。最後，將信評視為可控制之投入項，於三年間在納入信用評等為投入項後，將具有經營績效之加分效果，而14家金控公司也在良好之信用評等之下，經營績效之評估呈現出更好之績效。

Taiwan’s financial system was experienced by several revolutions and impacts. The government adopts the policy of liberalization and internationalization, the enacted law of The Financial Holding Company Act in the year of 2001, followed by this new rules, the financial holding companies (FHC) were established by consisting of banking firm, insurance company and securities firm. The Financial Holding Company has already played the most important role in the financial industry and until the year of 2004, there have been 14 FHC listed in the Taiwan Stock Market. The study has used the method of Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to measure the efficiency of financial holding companies and the Malmquist productivity index is also employed to measure the total factor productivity changes from year 2002 to 2004. The best of performance of the company is also obtained by the super efficiency analysis. Finally, the score of credit rating is included as input and non-input, output and non-output, to measure objectively credit rating which influences the performance of financial holding companies. The results of this research are shown as follows:

1.The technological efficiency of the financial holding companies decreased due to the lower scale and pure technological efficiency, especially, caused by the problem of scale efficiency.

2.As for productivity change, the change efficiency value of financial holding company has increased. This shows that the performance of the finance holding industry in the productivity change has been grown up year by year.
3.The performance of Cathay Financial Holding is the best and most steady in 14 financial holding companies.
4.Averagely, the pure technological efficiency values have shown slightly changes when the credit rating is incorporated in the model as items of input, non-input, output, non-output. In general, if the credit rating takes as an item of input, the performance of these financial holding companies will improve much more and hence the operational efficiency of 14 financial holding companies also shows better performance.

第壹章　緒論 1
第一節　研究動機與背景 1
第二節　研究目的 3
第三節　研究方法與步驟 4
第四節　研究對象範圍與資料來源 6
第五節　論文架構 7
第貳節　台灣地區金控產業之經營概況分析 9
第一節　台灣地區金控產業之界定與範圍 9
第二節　台灣地區金控產業市場經營之現況分析 11
第三節　金控公司之信用評等概況分析 14
第四節　台灣地區金控公司投入與產出之分析 20
第五節　本章小結 23
第參章　理論基礎與文獻探討 26
第一節　理論基礎 26
第二節　文獻回顧 40
第三節　本章綜論 45
第肆章 實證結果與分析 47
第一節　實證模型之建立-效率與效率變動估計方法之建構 47
第二節　模型變數之選擇 51
第三節 效率及效率變動之估計結果分析 52
第四節　納入信用評等之模擬分析 69
第五節 本章小結 82
第伍章 結論與建議 87
第一節 結論 87
第二節 建議 90
參考文獻 93

一、中文部份
1.朱明玉（2005），考慮多角化之金融控股公司績效與信用評等相關性之探討，東吳大學經濟學系碩士論文。
2.吳若詩（2004），台灣金融控股公司下之銀行經營效率，銘傳大學國際企業學系碩士論文。
3.林君瀌（2001），金融控股法探討，金華信銀證券專題評析。
4.洪志洋、江怡慧、李宗耀（2004），金融控股公司之營運績效評量–資料包絡分析法之應用，第一屆財務金融及財金未來學術暨實務研討會。
5.孫敏瑗（2005），加入信用評等下的銀行績效評估，東吳大學經濟學系碩士論文。
6.陳益華（1997），我國電信事業經營績效分析-資料包絡分析法之應用，中山大學企業管理研究所碩士論文，1997年。
7.許紋瑛（2000），金融控股公司之法制建構－以美日比較法觀點評析我國相關立法，中原大學財經法研所碩士論文。
8.粘坤成（2004），加入信用評等台灣地區票券金融公司之效率因素分析，東吳大學經濟學系碩士論文。
9.彭金隆、司徒達賢（2002），金融控股公司法、金融集團總體策略與金融機構網絡定位策略─保險業觀點，保險實務與制度季刊。
10.傅清萍（2000），金融控股公司之研究，台灣經濟研究月刊，第24卷第19期，頁73-79。
11.葉彩蓮（1998），台灣地區銀行經營效率之比較－資料包絡分析之應用，臺灣企銀季刊，第廿二卷，第一期，pp.37-52。
12.謝榮富（2004），銀行信用評等與經營績效研究，暨南國際大學國際企業學系碩士論文。
二、網站資料
1.中華信用評等：http://www.taiwanratings.com/tw/
2.台灣經濟新報資料庫：http://www.tej.com.tw/
3.公開資訊觀測站：http://www.tej.com.tw/
4.行政院金融監督管理委員會銀行局: http://www.fscey.gov.tw/
三、英文部份
1.Aigner, D. J., C. A. Lovell, and P. Schmidt (1977), “Formulation and Estimation of Stochastic Frontier Production Models,” Journal of Econometrics, Vol. 6, pp. 21-37.
2.Allen, L. and J. Jatoani (2000), “The Risk Effects of Combining Banking, Securities, and Insurance Activities,” Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. 52, pp. 485-497.
3.Andersen, P. and N. C. Petersen (1993), “A Procedure for Ranking Efficiency Units in Data Envelopment Analysis,” Management Science, Vol. 39, pp. 1261-1264.
4.Banker, R.D., A. Charnes and W.W. Cooper (1984), “Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis,” Management Science, 30, pp. 1078-1092.
5.Banker, R. D., and R. C. Morey (1986), “The Use of Categorical Variables in Data Envelopment Analysis,” Management Science, Vol.12, pp. 1613-1627.
6.Caves, D.W., L.R. Christensen and W.E. Diewert (1982a), “Multilateral Comparisons of Output, Input, and Productivity Using Superlative Index Number,” Economic Journal, Vol. 92, pp. 73-86.
7.Caves, D.W., L.R. Christensen and W.E. Diewert (1982b), “The Economic Theory of Index Numbers of Input, Output, and Productivity,” Econometrica, Vol. 50, pp. 1393-1414.
8.Charnes, A., W. W. Cooper and E. Rhodes, (1978), “Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Marking Units,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 2, pp. 429-444.
9.Chen, T. Y. and T. L. Yeh (2000), “An Estimation of X-inefficiency in Taiwan’s Banks,” Applied Financial Economics, Vol. 11, pp. 237-242.
10.Fare, R., (1994), “Biased Technical Change and the Malmquist Productivity Index,” Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Vol. 99, pp. 119-127.
11.Fare, R., S. Grosskopf and C. A. K. Lovell (1985), “The Measurement of Efficiency of Production,” Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
12.Farell, M.J. (1957), “The Measurement of Productive Efficiency,” Journal of Royal Statistical Society, Vol. 120, pp. 253-581.
13.Fried, H. O., C. A. K. Lovell, S. S. Schmidt and S Yaisawarng (2002), “Accounting for Environmental Effect and Statistical Noise in Data Envolopment Analysis,” Journal of producitivity Analysis, Vol. 17, pp. 157-174.
14.Garner, B. A. (1999), “Black’s Law Dictionary,” West Publishing Co., pp.275.
15.Hines (1982), “The measurement of productive efficiency,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A,General,” Vol. 120, pp. 253-281.
16.Kliger, D. and O. Sarig (2000), “The Information Value of bond Ratings,” The Journal of Finance, Vol. 6, pp. 2879-2902.
17.Meeusen, W. and J. van den Broeck (1977), “Efficiency Estimation from Cobb-Douglas Production Functions with Composed Error,” International Economic Review, pp. 271-287.
18.Muniz, M. A. (2002), “Separating managerial inefficiency and external conditions in data envelopment analysis,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol.143, pp. 625-643.
19.Ruggiero, J. (1998), “Non-discretionary Inputs in Data Envelopment Analysis,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 1, pp. 461-469.
20.Sherman, H. D. and F. Gold (1985), “Bank branch operating efficiency: evaluation with data envelopment analysis,” Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol. 9, pp. 297-315.
21.Syrjänen, M. J. (2004), “Non-discretionary and discretionary factors and scale in data envelopment analysis,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 158, pp. 20-33.
22.Yue, P. (1992), “Data Envelopment Analysis and Commercial Bank Performance: A Primer with Application to Missouri Banks,” Federal Reserve Bank of ST. Louis, Vol. 74, pp. 31-45.