(3.235.245.219) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/07 22:32
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

: 
twitterline
研究生:彭煥勛
研究生(外文):Huan-shun Peng
論文名稱:財政分權、地方經濟成長與政府效率
論文名稱(外文):Fiscal Decentralization, Local Economic Growth and Local Government Efficiemcy
指導教授:徐偉初徐偉初引用關係翁嘉禧翁嘉禧引用關係
指導教授(外文):Wai-cho TsuiJia-Hsi Weng
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立中山大學
系所名稱:中國與亞太區域研究所
學門:社會及行為科學學門
學類:區域研究學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2009
畢業學年度:97
語文別:中文
論文頁數:135
中文關鍵詞:財政分權縱橫資料Tobit隨機效果資料包絡分析
外文關鍵詞:fiscal decentralizationdata envelopment analysispanel dataTobit random effect
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:8
  • 點閱點閱:864
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:236
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
「財政分權」是指中央政府賦予地方政府在債務安排、稅收劃分和預算執行方面一定程度的自主權,涉及中央政府如何將支出責任與財源移轉給地方政府,以此激發地方政府提供公共財的效率。Oates (1972)在「財政聯邦主義」一書中,提出財政分權理論,將全部人口分為兩個子集,兩個子集間的民眾偏好不同,但子集內民眾的偏好相同,由地方政府提供的公共財較能滿足該地區民眾之偏好而達到柏瑞圖最適境界 (Pareto optimum),因此中央政府所提供公共財在資源配置的效率上不如地方政府,所以地方政府比中央政府更能有效地將產出提供給它們各自的選民。然而財政分權對地方經濟成長與政府效率的影響,也與各國經濟開發的程度有別,其效果有正有負並無定論,這個主題在學術界仍有許多爭議。實證模型的解釋變數多為學者主觀的思維與可獲得的資料為主,並無統一可行選取變數的規範可資依據。
本文探討財政分權對縣市的成長與地方政府效率的影響,以台灣23個縣市自1993到2006年,中央及省、市政府及縣市政府之統計資料為依據,首先採縱橫資料 (panel data)迴歸分析的方式,來探討財政分權與地方經濟成長的關係,接著以資料包絡分析法 (data envelopment analysis)來計算地方政府之效率值,並以Tobit隨機效果模型進行回歸分析,探索效率差異之可能因素。
就個別縣市而言,台北市、嘉義市、臺中市、新竹市及新竹縣等在1993到2006年14年間有超過一半以上的時間技術效率為1,表示這些縣市在經營上是比較有效率的,而多數的縣市還有改進的空間。我們同時就財政分權的角度來看,縣級單位因為資源有限因此會做較有效率的運用,而省轄市與院轄市,則因稅收資源較為豐沛,對資源運用比較不具效率。分權程度的高低與政府施政效率亦無明確的正負關係。收入分權與地方政府效率成正比,支出分權與地方政府之效率成反比。
The desire is infinite, but the resources are limited. The relationship between fiscal decentralization and long-run economic growth is ambiguous. Several economists have made the case for fiscal decentralization as a means of promoting
long-run economic growth based on the view that it leads to better resource allocation and a more productive, and possibly smaller, public sector.
Countries have pursued decentralization policies both for political and developmental reasons. Fiscal decentralization, the allocation of tax and spending powers to lower levels of government, currently in vogue is based on notions of economic efficiency criteria. Although it is theoretically expected that decentralization leads to efficient provision of local public services and stimulates economic development, the theoretical underpinnings for this relationship remain largely undeveloped. The absence of an adequate theoretical framework has undermined the validity of the empirical work on this subject. Advocates of fiscal decentralization argue that among other benefits, it can increase the efficiency of delivery of government services.
We use data from 23 counties (cities) of the Taiwan province. The empirical findings can be stated as follows. The primary finding is that the estimated coefficient on fiscal decentralization variable is positive and statistically significant . This finding provides evidence that fiscal decentralization contributes to economic growth. This paper is also one of the first to evaluate this claim empirically by looking at the association between expenditure decentralization and the efficiency of local government .We also provide evidence that expenditure (revenue) decentralization is a negative (positive) relation with the efficiency of local government.
Further Tobit panel regression of 23 counties (cities) provide robust evidence that more decentralization is not associated with higher efficiency of local governments. Therefore that fiscal decentralization contributes to the efficiency of local governments is ambiguous in the previous period.
目 次
第一章 導論…………………………………………………………….1
第一節 研究動機與目的………………………………………………………1
第二節 研究方法與限制………………………………………………………4
第二章 文獻探討及實證資料…………………………...7
第一節 文獻探討………………………………………………………………7
第二節 研究資料之分配與趨勢……………………………………………21
第三章 財政分權與地方經濟成長…………………………………47
第一節 模型設定…………………………….......……….…………………..47
第二節 實證結果與分析……………………………………………………51
第三節 小結…………………………………………………………….....….63
第四章 財政分權與地方政府效率…………………………………...67
第一節 模型設定……………………………………………………………67
第二節 實證結果與分析……………………………………………….…….70
第三節 小結……………………………………………………………..…..107
第五章 結論與建議……………………………........................…….109
第一節 結論………………………………………………………………....109
第二節 對後續研究之建議…………………………………………………116
參考文獻………………………………………………………………118

表 次
表2-1 分權與經濟成長參考文獻統整表...............................…………………..19
表2-2 2006年各縣市自有財源比例、補助依存度及赤字比重………………..26
表2-3 地方支出自主指數…………………………………………………27
表2-4 財政自主指數……………………………………………………………29
表2-5 自有財源比例……………………………………………………………31
表2-6 人均支出指數……………………………………………………………33
表2-7 人均支出比值……………………………………………………………35
表2-8 1993~2006年各縣市分權變數變化表…………………………………..37
表2-9 國民黨執政時期 (1993-1999)各縣市分權變數變化表…………………39
表2-10 民進黨執政時 (2000-2006)期各縣市分權變數變化表…………………41
表2-11 各縣市家戶所得排名……………………………………………………..43
表2-12 各縣市家戶所成長率……………………………………………………..45
表3-1 各變數之操作定義及資料來源………………………..…………………50
表3-2 各分權變數與地方所得水準及其成長率相關係數表………….………52
表3-3 模型一:地方人均所得水準 (不考慮各級政府淨支出及進出口總額).. 54
表3-4 模型二:地方人均所得水準 (考慮各級政府淨支出及進出口總額)…..56
表3-5 模型三:地方人均所得成長率( 固定效果)
(不考慮各級政府淨支出及進出口總額)……………………………….58
表3-6 模型四:地方人均所得成長率 (考慮各級政府淨支出及進出口總額)………………………………….59
表3-7 國、民兩黨執政時期所得水準與成長率迴歸分析……………...…….62
附表 附錄 (一) 模型一:地方人均所得水準(固定效果)(不考慮各級政
府淨支出及貿易依存度……………………………….……………...…..65
表4-1 縣市經營績效投入與產出變數定義與說明……………………………69
表4-2 敘述統計…………………………………………………………………70
表4-3 各縣市投入與產出變數之Pearson相關係數…………………………..71
表4-4 各縣市各年度技術效率值………………………………………………73
表4-5 執政黨與縣市首長於執政期間之效率表………………………………74
表4-6 各縣市政府1993-2006各年度純粹效率值…………………………….76
表4-7 各縣市自有財源與純效率值表…………………………………………77
表4-8 地方支出自主指數………………………………………………………..79
表4-9 國、民兩黨執政期間平均地方支出指數及純效率值表……………….81
表4-10 財政分權指標與純效率平均值表………………………………………83
表4-11 1993到2006年各縣市政府純技術效率分區分析……………………..84
表4-12 各縣市各年度規模效率值………………………………………………86
表4-13 各縣市效率平均值………………………………………………………87
表4-14 各縣市政府各年度規模報酬分析………………………………………89
表4-15 國民黨執政時期各縣市長政黨屬性……………………………………91
表4-16 民進黨執政時期各縣市長政黨屬性……………………………………92
表4-17 國民黨執政期間國、民兩黨縣市效率之比較…………………………93
表4-18 民進黨執政期間國、民兩黨縣市效率之比較…………………………94
表4-19 精省前後各縣市政府之效率值…………………………………………95
表4-20 敏感度分析所重新組合的五種模式……………………………………96
表4-21 敏感度分析投入與產出項目組合差異分析表…………………………97
表4-22 敏感度分析各種組合之相關係數………………………………………99表4-23 各解釋變數之相關統計量………………………………………………103
表4-24 各縣市政府效率之迴歸結果……………………………………………104
表4-25 各縣市Malmquist 指數表……………………………………………..105
表4-26 各縣市Malmquist Index 分析 (按國、民兩黨執政期間區分)………106
表5-1 國內外學者以DEA研究地方政府效率之比較表……………………...110
一、中文部分
王炳文 (2002),台灣銀行商業銀行合併之效率分析:資料包絡分析法的應用。台灣管理學刊,1(2),341-356。
方凱宏 (2006),初探地方財政分權化及其在我國之政策意涵。政策研究學報,6,51-88。
王肇蘭、許義忠、徐偉初 (2008),台灣地區地方政府效率暨生產力之評估。應用經濟論叢,84,71-120。
古永嘉、吳世勛 (1995),以DEA模式評估我國商業銀行之經營績效。管理與系統,2(2),145-165。
史濟增 (1973),生產函數的理論發展。經濟論文,1,231-267。
汪明生、曾玉祥 (2007),台灣縣市政府自有財源運用效率之衡量:資料包絡分析 (DEA)之應用。中國行政評論,15(2),1-29。
李宜倫 (2001),解除管制之經營效率分析—台灣商業銀行案例。逢甲大學經濟學系碩士班碩士論文。
李春長 (1999),不動產仲介市場上仲介業經營型態對其經營績效之影響。國科會人文及社會科學研究彙刊,9(3),718-725。
李春長、尚瑞國、林書正 (2002),房屋仲介業效率之研究-DEA之應用。2002年中華民國住宅學會第十一屆年會論文集,195-208。
章定愃、劉小蘭、尚瑞國 (2002),我國各縣市財政支出與經營績效之研究。台灣土地研究,5,45-66。
許鈺珮\、張錫介 (2005),金融控股公司法實施對台灣銀行業經營效率影響之分析。金融風險管理季刊,1(2),33-56。
許嘉玲 (2003),銀行合併後效率分析之檢定。逢甲大學經濟學系碩士班碩士論文。
陳政任 (2002),以資料包絡法探討台灣資訊電子業之核心能力與經營績效。國立成功大學碩士論文。
陳振遠、吳炳松 (2002),銀行分支機構經營效率評估之研究。台灣銀行季刊,53(4),1-23。
黃旭男 (1993),資料包絡分析法使用程序之研究及在非營利組織效率評估上之應用。國立交通大學管理科學研究所博士論文。
黃崇興、黃貴蘭 (2000),應用數據包絡分析於航空公司航線經營績效之分析。管理學報,17(1),149-181。
黃貴蘭 (2001),會計師事務所合併之技術效率比較分析。國立台灣大學會計研究所博士論文。
馮國豪、彭煥勛 (2006),調降金融業營業稅對台灣銀行業經營績效之影響。中華財政學會財稅學術研討會論文集,121-135。
傅祖壇、詹滿色、劉錦添 (1992),生產邊界估計方法、函數型式與個別農場技術效率─台灣稻作與果樹農場之實證。經濟論文叢刊,20(2),129-153。
羅紀瓊、石淦生、陳國樑 (1996),醫院效率之衡量-DEA方法之應用,經濟論文,24(3),375-396。

二、英文部分
Abowd, J. M. & Kaplan. D. S. (1999). Executive Compensation: Six Questions That Need Answering. Journal of Economic Perspetives, 13(4), 145-168.
Afonso, A. & Fernandes, S. (2008). Assessing and Explaining the Relative Efficiency of Local Government: Evidence for Portuguese Municipalities. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 37(5), 1946-1979.
Akai, N. & Sakata, M. (2002). Fiscal Decentralization Contributes to Economic Growth: Evidence from State-level Cross-section Data for the United States. Journal of Urban Economics, 52, 93-108.
Alesina, A., Baqir, R., & Easterly, W. (1999). Public goods and Ethnic Divisions. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(4), 1243-1284.
Anthanassopoulos, A. D. & Shale, E. (1997). Assessing the Comparative Efficiency of Higher Education Institutions in the UK by means of Data Envelopment Analysis, Education Economics, 5(2), 117-134.
Banker, R. D., Chames, A., Cooper, W. W.,(1984),Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelope Analysis, Fall,541-600.
Banker, R. D., Chames, A., Cooper, W. W., Swarts, J., & Thomas ,D. A. (1989). An Introduction to Data Envelopment Analysis, with Some of Models and Their Uses. Research in Government and Nonprofit Accounting, 5, 125-163.
Barankay, I. & Lockwood, B. (2007). Decentralization and the Productive Efficiency of Government :Evidence from Swiss canton. Journal of public Economics, 91, 1197-1218.
Begg, I. (1999). Cities and Competitiveness. Urban studies, 36(5-6), 795-809.
Bird, R., Freund, C., & Wallich, C. (1994). Decentralization of Intergovernmental Finance in Transition Economies. Comparative Economic Studies, 36(4), 149-160.
Bird, R. M., Ebel, R. D., and Wallich, C. I. (1995). Fiscal Decentralization: From Command to Market. In Bird, R. M., Ebel, R. D., and Wallich, C. I. (eds.) Decentralization of the Socialist State: Intergovernmental Finance in Transition Economies. Avebury, Aldershot, Hants.
Bird, R. M. and Vaillancourt, F. (1997). An Overview, Fiscal Decentralization in Developing Countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Blanchard, O. & Shleifer, A. (2001). Federalism with and without Political Centralization China versus Russia. International Monetary Fund, 48(4), 8-18.
Bose, N., Haque, M. E., & Osborn, D. (2007). Public Expenditure and Economic Growth: a Disaggregate Analysis For Developing Countries. The Manchester School, 75(5), 533-556.
Brennan, G. & Buchanan, J. M. (2008). The Power to Tax: Analytic Foundations of a Fiscal Constitution. Cambridge University Press.
Bryce, J. (1924). Modern Democracies. New York: The Macmillan Company Press.
Brueckner, J. K. (2000). Fiscal Decentralization in Developing Countries: The Effects of Local Corruption and Tax Evasion. Annals of Economics and Finance, 1, 1-18.
Bushman, R., Indjejikian, R., & Smith, A. (1996). CEO Compensation: The Role of Individual Performance Evaluation. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 21, 203-306.
Cameron, D. (1978). The Expansion of the Public Economy: a Comparative Analysis. American Political Science Review, 72(4), 1243-1261.
Canova,F.(2007). Methods for Applied Macroeconomic Research, published by Princeton University Press
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Li, S. (1989). Using Data Envelopment Analysis to Evaluate Efficiency in the Economic Performance of Chinese Cities. Socio-Economic Planning, 23(6), 325-344.
Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Tone, K. (2000). Data Envelopment Analysis.A Comprehensive Text with Model, Applications, References and DEA-Solver Software. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Davoodi, H. & Zou, H. (1998). Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth: A Cross-country Study. Journal of Urban Economics, 43, 244-257.
De Borger, B., Kerstens, K., Moesen, W., & Vanneste, J. (1994). Explaining Difference in Productive Efficiency: An Application to Belgian Municipalities, Public Choice, 80, 339-358.
De Borger, B. & Kerstens, K. (1996). Cost Efficiency of Belgian Local Government: A Comparative Analysis of FDH, DEA and Econometric Approaches. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 26(2), 145-170.
Demski, J. & Sappington, D. (1999). Summarization with Error: A Perspective on Emperical Investigation of Agency Relationships. Management Accounting Research, 10, 21-37.
Easterly, W. & Levine, R. (1997). Africa’s Growth Tragedy: Policies and Ethnic Divisions. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 111(4), 1203-1250.
Ebel, R. D. & Yilmaz, S. (2002). On the Measurement and Impact of Fiscal Decentralization. Policy Research Working Paper: 2809.
Feld, L. P., Baskaran, T., & Dede, T. (2004). Fiscal Federalism and Economic Growth: Cross-country Evidence for OECD Countries. Unpublished Manuscript,
Feltham, G. A. & Xie, J. (1994). Performance Measure Congruity and Diversity in Multi-Task Principal/Agent Relations. The Accounting Review, 69(3), 429-453.
Fiaschi, D. & Lavezzi, A. M. (2007). Nonlinear Economic Growth: Some Theory and Cross-country Evidence. Journal of Development Economics, 84, 271-290.
Gould ,F and Zarkish , F (1986) Local Government Expenditure and Revenues in Western Democracies. Local Government Studies, volume 12, issue1,33-42.
Greene, W. (2003). Fixed Effects and Bias due to the Incidental Parameters Parameters Problem in the Tobit Model. manuscript of Economics, Stern School of Business, New York University.
Gupta, S., Verhoeven, M., & Tiongson, E. R. (2002). The Effeciveness of Government Spending on Education and Health Care in Developing and Transition Economies. European Journal of Political Economy, 18, 717-737.
Hindriks, J. & Lockwood, B. (2005). Decentralization and Electoral Accountability: Incentives, Separation and Vote Welfare. Department des Sciences Economiques Discussion Papers: 2005038.
Hollingsworth, B., Anthony, A., & Gospodarevskaya, E. (2002). The Efficiency of Immunization of Infants by Local Government. Applied Economics, 34, 2341-2345.
Hughes, A. N. & Edwards, E. (2000). Leviathan vs Lilliputian: A Data Envelopment Analysis of Government Efficiency. Journal of Regional Science, 40(4), 649-699.
Huther, J. & Shah, A. (1996). Applying A Simple Measure of Good Governance to the Debate on Fiscal Decentralization. Policy Research Working Paper Series: 1894.
Iimi, A. (2005). Decentralization and Economic Growth Revisited: an Empirical Note. Journal of Urban Economics, 57, 449-461.
Jin, J. & Zou, H. (2005). Fiscal Decentralization, Revenue and Expenditure Assignments, and Growth in China. Journal of Asian Economics, 16, 1047-1064.
Kao, C. & Yang, Y. C. (1992). Measuring the Efficiency of Forest Management. Forest science, 37, 1239-1252.
Lang, J. R. & Golden, P. A. (1989). Evaluating the Efficiency of SBDCS with Data Envelopment Analysis: A Longitudinal Approach. Journal of Small Business Management, 27(4), 415-427.
Lambert, R. A. (2001). Contracting Theory & Accounting. Journalof Accounting and Economics, 32, 3-87.
Lindaman, K. & Thurmaier, K. (2002). Beyond Efficiency and Economy: An Examination of Basic Needs and Fiscal Decentralization. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 50(4), 915-934.
Litvack,J., Ahmad,J & Bird, R (1998). Rethinking Decentralization in Developing Countries. Washington D C. World Bank.
Loikkanen, H. A. & Susiluoto, L. (2006). Cost Efficiency of Finnish Municipalities in Basic Service Provision 1994-2002. Helsinki Center of Economic Research Discusing paper: 96.
Musgrave, R. A. (1969). Theories of Fiscal Federalism. Public Finances, Musgrave, R.A.
Nath, S. & Schroeder, L. (2007). A Counterfactual Analysis of Fiscal Decentralization in Small Country: the Case of Maurtius. Public Finance and Management, 7(2), 116-148.
Oates, W. E. (1972). Fiscal Federalism. New York: Harcourt Brace Press.
Oates, W. E. (1995). Comment on Conflicts and Dilemmas of Decentralization by Rudolf Homes. In Bruno, M. & Pleskovic, B. (eds.) Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics, 351-53.
Oates, W. E. (1999). An Essay on Fiscal Federalism. Journal of Economic Literature, 37(3), 1120-1149.
Panizza, U. (1999). On the Determination of Fiscal Decentralization: Theory and Evidence, Journal of Public Economics, 74, 97-139.
Qian, Y. & Weingast, B. R. (1997). Fereralism as a Commitment to Preserve Market Incentives, Journal of Economics Perspectives, 11, 83-92.
Sato, M. & Yamashige, S. (2005). Decentralization and Economic Development: An Evolutionary Approach. Journal of Public Economic Theory, 7(3), 497-520.
Seabright, P. (1996). Accountability and Decentralization in Government: An Incomplete Contracts Model. European Economic Review, 40, 61-91.
Shelton, C. A. (2007). The Size and Composition of Government Expenditure. Journal of Public Economics, 91, 2230-2260.
Sinn, H.-W. (1997). The Selection Principle and Market Failure in Systems Competition. Journal of Public Economics, 66, 247-274.
Solow, R. M. (1956). A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 70, 65-94.
Stein, E. H. (1998). Fiscal Decentralization and Government Size in Latin America, Inter-American Development Bank RES Working Papers: 4112.
Thornton, J. (2007). Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth Reconsidered. Journal of Urban Economics, 61, 64–70.
Tiebout, C. M. (1956). A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures. Journal of Political Economy, 64, 416-424.
Tulken, H. & Eeckaut, P. V. (1995). Non-Parametric Efficiency, Progress and Regress Measure for Panel Data: Methodological Aspects. European Journal of Operational Research, 80, 474-499.
Turnovsky, S. J. (1996). Method of Macroeconomic Dynamics. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Vanden Eeckaut, P., Tulkens, H., & Jamar, M. A. (1993). Cost Efficiency in Belgian Municipalities. In. Fried, H., Lovell, C. & Schmidt, S. (eds.) The Measurement of Productive Efficiency: Techniques and Application. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wasylenko, M. (1987). Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Development. Public Budgeting and Finance, 7, 57-71.
Wilson, J. D. & Wildasin., D. E. (2004). Capital Tax Competition: Bane or Boon. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 1065-1091.
Worthing, A. C. & Dollery, B. E. (2000). Measuring Efficiency in Local Governments Planning and Regulatory Function. Public Productive and Management Review, 23(4), 469-485.
Zhang, T. & Zou, H-F. (1998). Fiscal Decentralization, Public Spending, and Economic Growth in China. Journal of Public Economics, 67, 221-240.
Zhang, T & Zou, H-F. (2001). The Growth Impact of Intersectoral and Intergovernmental Allocation of Public Expenditure: With Applications to China and India. China Economic Review, 12, 58-81.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔