1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. College of Social Science
  4. Theses
  5. Item

學術產出-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

Citation Infomation

題名 混合寡占市場下公營事業民營化效率提升效果之分析
An Analysis of Efficiency-Enhancing Effect of Privatization under a Mixed Oligopoly
作者 傅明捷
Fu, Sarah
貢獻者 翁堃嵐
傅明捷
Fu, Sarah
關鍵詞 混合寡占市場
民營化
效率提升效果
成本差異
Mixed oligopoly
Privatization
Efficiency-enhancing effect
Cost differentials
日期 2018
上傳時間 13-Jul-2018 15:18:32 (UTC+8)
摘要 傳統探討公營事業民營化的文獻中，大多忽略了因為民營化所導致廠商的效率提升，因此本文在基本的混合寡占市場模型中加入了民營化的效率提升效果後有幾點重要發現：(1) 考慮效率提升效果因素將使得民營化廠商的最適產量增加，原本外國民營廠商所生產的數量則會因為策略性替代效果而減少，進而提升整體產業的生產配置效率；(2) 當公營廠商可以透過民營化來改善生產效率時，釋股比例將不具有獨立性；(3) 當公營廠商沒有生產效率改善效果時，關稅政策和民營化政策之間是有等價性，反之若公營廠商民營化後的生產效率會改善時，則關稅政策和民營化政策之間將不具有等價性。
This paper investigates a quantity-setting oligopoly involving a domestic private firm, a foreign private firm and a privatized firm jointly owned by the public and private sectors. We consider a efficiency-enhancing effect in this model and find that the Cournot-Nash equilibrium outputs are higher than the situation without efficiency improvement. Moreover, if the tariff and the privatization policies are independent of each other, then the optimal trade liberalization and optimal privatization would not be equivalent in welfares. Besides, the degree of state ownership affects welfare if the government chooses optimal subsidy and privatization policy with economic efficiency.
參考文獻 翁堃嵐、林宛儀與郭虹瑩(2014)，《混合寡占市場下利潤稅的中立性與最適釋股比例》，應用經濟論叢，96，105-126。
邱俊榮與黃鴻(2006)，《公營廠商民營化的最適釋股比例分析》，經濟論文叢刊，34，246-259。
翁永和、羅鈺珊與劉碧珍(2003)，《市場結構與最適民營化政策》，經濟論文叢刊，31，149-169。

Abdelmutti, Nazek, and Laurie Hoffman-Goetz (2009), “Risk Messages about HPV, Cervical Cancer, and the HPV Vaccine Gardasil: A Content Analysis of Canadian and U.S. National Newspaper Articles,” Women & Health, 49, 422-440.
Anderson, S. P., A. Palma, and J. F. Thisse (1997), “Privatization and Efficiency in a Differentiated Industry,” European Economic Review, 41, 1635-1654.
Barros, F. (1995), “Incentive Schemes as Strategic Variables: An Application to a Mixed Duopoly,” International Journal of Industrial Organization, 13, 373-86.
Bárcena-Ruiz, J. C. (2007), “Endogenous Timing in a Mixed Duopoly: Price Competition,” Journal of Economics, 91, 263-272.
Brandão, A. and S. Castro (2007), “State-Owned Enterprises as Indirect Instruments of
Entry Regulation,” J Econ, 92, 263-274.
Bárcena-Ruiz, J. C. and M. B. Garzon (2010), “Endogenous Timing in a Mixed Duopoly with Capacity Choice,” The Manchester School, 78, 93-109.
Boardman, A. and A. R. Vining (1989), “Ownership and Performance in Competitive Environments: A Comparison of the Performance of Private, Mixed, and State-Owned Enterprises,” Journal of Law and Economics, 32, 1-33.
Chang, W.W.(2005), “Optimal Trade and Privatization Policies in an International Duopoly with Cost Asymmetry,” Journal of International Trade and Economic Development, 14, 19–42.
Chao, C. C. and E. S. H. Yu (2006), “Partial Privatization, Foreign Competition, and Optimum Tariff,” Review of International Economics, 14, 87-92.
Chen, T. L. (2017), “Privatization and Efficiency: A Mixed Oligopoly Approach ,” Journal of Economics,120(3), 251-268.
Cremer, H., M. Marchand, and J. F. Thisse (1989), “The Public Firm as an Instrument for Regulating an Oligopolistic Market,” Oxford Economic Papers, 41, 283-301.
Dadpay, A. and J. S. Heywood(2006), “Mixed Oligopoly in a Single International Market,” Australian Economic Papers, 45, 269-280.
Dewenter, K. and P. H. Malatesta (2000), “State-Owned and Privately-Owned Firms: An Empirical Analysis of Profitability, Leverage, and Labour Intensity,” American Economic Review, 91(1), 320-334.
De Fraja, G. and F. Delbono (1989), “Alternative Strategies of a Public Enterprise in Oligopoly,” Oxford Economic Papers, 41, 302-311.
De Fraja, G. and F. Delbono (1990), “Game-Theoretic Models of Mixed Oligopoly,” J Econ Surv, 4, 1–17.
Drucker, P. (1969), “The Age of Discontinuity,” Fuente: Butterworth-Heinemann, 380 pp.
Estrin, S. and V. Perotin (1991), “Does Ownership Always Matter?” InternationalJournal of Industrial Organization, 9, 55572.
Fjell, K. and D. Pal (1996), “A Mixed Oligopoly in the Presence of Foreign Private Firms,” Canadian Journal of Economics, 29, 737-743.
Fjell, K. and J. Heywood (2004), “Mixed Oligopoly, Subsidization and the Order of
Firm’s Moves: The Relevance of Privatization,” Econ Lett, 83, 411-416.
George, K. and M. La Manna (1996), “Mixed Duopoly, Inefficiency, and Public Ownership,” Review of Industrial Organization, 11, 853-860.
Gupta, N. (2005), “Partial Privatization and Firm Performance,” J Finance, 60, 987-1015.
Heywood, J. S. and G. Ye (2009), “Partial Privatization in a Mixed Duopoly with an R&D Rivalry,” Bulletin of Economic Research, 61, 165-178.
Ishida, J. and N. Matsushima (2009), “Should Civil Servants Be Restricted in Wage
Bargaining? A Mixed-Duopoly Approach,” J Public Econ, 93, 634-646.
Kay, J. A., C. Mayer, and D. J. Thompson (1986), “Privatization and Regulation: The U.K. Experience,” Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Kay, J. A. and D. J. Thompson (1986), “Privatization: A Policy in Search of a Rationale,” Economic Journal, 96, 18-32.
La Porta, R., F. Lopez‐de‐Silanes, and A. Shleifer (2002), “Government Ownership of Banks,” The Journal of Finance, 57(1), 265-301.
Long, N. V. and F. Stähler (2009), “Trade Policy and Mixed Enterprises,” Canadian Journal of Economics, 42, 590–614.
Matsumura, T. (1998), “Partial Privatization in Mixed Duopoly,” Journal of Public Economics, 70, 473-483.
Mujumdar, S. and D. Pal (1998), “Effects of Indirect Taxation in a Mixed Oligopoly,” Economic Letters, 58, 199-204.
Matsumura, T. and N. Matsushima (2004), “Endogenous Cost Differentials Between
Public and Private Enterprises: A Mixed Duopoly Approach,” Economica, 71, 671-688.
Matsumura, T. and O. Kanda (2005), “Mixed Oligopoly at Free Entry Markets,” Journal of Economics, 84, 27-48.
Pal, D. and M. D. White (1998), “Mixed Oligopoly, Privatization, and Strategic Trade Policy,” Southern Economics Journal, 65, 264-281.
Parker, D. (1997), “The Regulation of Privatised Utilities: Reflections of the UK Experiences,” Policy Studies, 3(3), 3-37.
Pestieau, P. and H. Tulkens (1993), “Assessing and Explaining the Performance of Public Enterprises,” Finanz Archiv, 50, 293-323.
Poyago-Theotoky, J. (1998), “R&D Competition in a Mixed Duopoly under Uncertainty and Easy Imitation,” Journal of Comparative Economics, 26, 415-428.
Sappington, D. E. and J. E. Stiglitz (1987), “Privatization, Information and Incentives,”
Journal of Policy Analysis and Management,6(4), 567-585.
Savas, E. S. (1987), “Privatization: The key to better government,” Chatham House.
Tian, G. L. (2000), “State Shareholding and Corporate Performance: A Study of a Unique
Chinese Data Set,” working paper, London Business School.
Wang, L. F. S. and T. L. Chen (2011), “Mixed Oligopoly, Optimal Privatization, and
Foreign Penetration,” Econ Model, 28, 1465-1470.
Wang, C. C. and J. R. Chiou (2015), “An Analysis of Policy Harmonization on
Privatization and Trade Liberalization,” International Review of Economics & Finance, 38, 279–290.
White, M. D. (1996), “Mixed Oligopoly, Privatization and Subsidization,” Econ Lett, 53,
189-195.
White, M. D. (2001), “Managerial Incentives and the Decision to Hire Managers in
Markets with Public and Private Firms,” European Journal of Political Economy, 17, 877-896.
Willner, J. (2001), “Ownership, Efficiency, and Political Interference,” Eur J Polit Econ,
17, 723-748.
Yarrow, G. (1985), “Privatisation in Theory and Practice,” Economic Policy, 5, 324-377.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
財政學系
1052550252
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1052550252
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 翁堃嵐zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 傅明捷zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Fu, Sarahen_US
dc.creator (作者) 傅明捷zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Fu, Sarahen_US
dc.date (日期) 2018en_US
dc.date.accessioned 13-Jul-2018 15:18:32 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 13-Jul-2018 15:18:32 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 13-Jul-2018 15:18:32 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G1052550252en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/118653-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 財政學系zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 1052550252zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 傳統探討公營事業民營化的文獻中，大多忽略了因為民營化所導致廠商的效率提升，因此本文在基本的混合寡占市場模型中加入了民營化的效率提升效果後有幾點重要發現：(1) 考慮效率提升效果因素將使得民營化廠商的最適產量增加，原本外國民營廠商所生產的數量則會因為策略性替代效果而減少，進而提升整體產業的生產配置效率；(2) 當公營廠商可以透過民營化來改善生產效率時，釋股比例將不具有獨立性；(3) 當公營廠商沒有生產效率改善效果時，關稅政策和民營化政策之間是有等價性，反之若公營廠商民營化後的生產效率會改善時，則關稅政策和民營化政策之間將不具有等價性。zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) This paper investigates a quantity-setting oligopoly involving a domestic private firm, a foreign private firm and a privatized firm jointly owned by the public and private sectors. We consider a efficiency-enhancing effect in this model and find that the Cournot-Nash equilibrium outputs are higher than the situation without efficiency improvement. Moreover, if the tariff and the privatization policies are independent of each other, then the optimal trade liberalization and optimal privatization would not be equivalent in welfares. Besides, the degree of state ownership affects welfare if the government chooses optimal subsidy and privatization policy with economic efficiency.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents Chapter 1 緒論 4
Chapter 2 文獻回顧 6
Chapter 3 基本模型 10
Chapter 4 公民營廠商產出決策 12
4.1 市場均衡 12
4.2 最適關稅 14
4.3 最適釋股比例 15

Chapter 5 關稅與民營化政策之等價性 17
Chapter 6 釋股比例獨立性 19
Chapter 7 結論 23

附錄A：數值模擬分析 25
參考文獻 30		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 1546964 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1052550252en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 混合寡占市場zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 民營化zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 效率提升效果zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 成本差異zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Mixed oligopolyen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Privatizationen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Efficiency-enhancing effecten_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Cost differentialsen_US
dc.title (題名) 混合寡占市場下公營事業民營化效率提升效果之分析zh_TW
dc.title (題名) An Analysis of Efficiency-Enhancing Effect of Privatization under a Mixed Oligopolyen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 翁堃嵐、林宛儀與郭虹瑩(2014)，《混合寡占市場下利潤稅的中立性與最適釋股比例》，應用經濟論叢，96，105-126。
邱俊榮與黃鴻(2006)，《公營廠商民營化的最適釋股比例分析》，經濟論文叢刊，34，246-259。
翁永和、羅鈺珊與劉碧珍(2003)，《市場結構與最適民營化政策》，經濟論文叢刊，31，149-169。

Abdelmutti, Nazek, and Laurie Hoffman-Goetz (2009), “Risk Messages about HPV, Cervical Cancer, and the HPV Vaccine Gardasil: A Content Analysis of Canadian and U.S. National Newspaper Articles,” Women & Health, 49, 422-440.
Anderson, S. P., A. Palma, and J. F. Thisse (1997), “Privatization and Efficiency in a Differentiated Industry,” European Economic Review, 41, 1635-1654.
Barros, F. (1995), “Incentive Schemes as Strategic Variables: An Application to a Mixed Duopoly,” International Journal of Industrial Organization, 13, 373-86.
Bárcena-Ruiz, J. C. (2007), “Endogenous Timing in a Mixed Duopoly: Price Competition,” Journal of Economics, 91, 263-272.
Brandão, A. and S. Castro (2007), “State-Owned Enterprises as Indirect Instruments of
Entry Regulation,” J Econ, 92, 263-274.
Bárcena-Ruiz, J. C. and M. B. Garzon (2010), “Endogenous Timing in a Mixed Duopoly with Capacity Choice,” The Manchester School, 78, 93-109.
Boardman, A. and A. R. Vining (1989), “Ownership and Performance in Competitive Environments: A Comparison of the Performance of Private, Mixed, and State-Owned Enterprises,” Journal of Law and Economics, 32, 1-33.
Chang, W.W.(2005), “Optimal Trade and Privatization Policies in an International Duopoly with Cost Asymmetry,” Journal of International Trade and Economic Development, 14, 19–42.
Chao, C. C. and E. S. H. Yu (2006), “Partial Privatization, Foreign Competition, and Optimum Tariff,” Review of International Economics, 14, 87-92.
Chen, T. L. (2017), “Privatization and Efficiency: A Mixed Oligopoly Approach ,” Journal of Economics,120(3), 251-268.
Cremer, H., M. Marchand, and J. F. Thisse (1989), “The Public Firm as an Instrument for Regulating an Oligopolistic Market,” Oxford Economic Papers, 41, 283-301.
Dadpay, A. and J. S. Heywood(2006), “Mixed Oligopoly in a Single International Market,” Australian Economic Papers, 45, 269-280.
Dewenter, K. and P. H. Malatesta (2000), “State-Owned and Privately-Owned Firms: An Empirical Analysis of Profitability, Leverage, and Labour Intensity,” American Economic Review, 91(1), 320-334.
De Fraja, G. and F. Delbono (1989), “Alternative Strategies of a Public Enterprise in Oligopoly,” Oxford Economic Papers, 41, 302-311.
De Fraja, G. and F. Delbono (1990), “Game-Theoretic Models of Mixed Oligopoly,” J Econ Surv, 4, 1–17.
Drucker, P. (1969), “The Age of Discontinuity,” Fuente: Butterworth-Heinemann, 380 pp.
Estrin, S. and V. Perotin (1991), “Does Ownership Always Matter?” InternationalJournal of Industrial Organization, 9, 55572.
Fjell, K. and D. Pal (1996), “A Mixed Oligopoly in the Presence of Foreign Private Firms,” Canadian Journal of Economics, 29, 737-743.
Fjell, K. and J. Heywood (2004), “Mixed Oligopoly, Subsidization and the Order of
Firm’s Moves: The Relevance of Privatization,” Econ Lett, 83, 411-416.
George, K. and M. La Manna (1996), “Mixed Duopoly, Inefficiency, and Public Ownership,” Review of Industrial Organization, 11, 853-860.
Gupta, N. (2005), “Partial Privatization and Firm Performance,” J Finance, 60, 987-1015.
Heywood, J. S. and G. Ye (2009), “Partial Privatization in a Mixed Duopoly with an R&D Rivalry,” Bulletin of Economic Research, 61, 165-178.
Ishida, J. and N. Matsushima (2009), “Should Civil Servants Be Restricted in Wage
Bargaining? A Mixed-Duopoly Approach,” J Public Econ, 93, 634-646.
Kay, J. A., C. Mayer, and D. J. Thompson (1986), “Privatization and Regulation: The U.K. Experience,” Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Kay, J. A. and D. J. Thompson (1986), “Privatization: A Policy in Search of a Rationale,” Economic Journal, 96, 18-32.
La Porta, R., F. Lopez‐de‐Silanes, and A. Shleifer (2002), “Government Ownership of Banks,” The Journal of Finance, 57(1), 265-301.
Long, N. V. and F. Stähler (2009), “Trade Policy and Mixed Enterprises,” Canadian Journal of Economics, 42, 590–614.
Matsumura, T. (1998), “Partial Privatization in Mixed Duopoly,” Journal of Public Economics, 70, 473-483.
Mujumdar, S. and D. Pal (1998), “Effects of Indirect Taxation in a Mixed Oligopoly,” Economic Letters, 58, 199-204.
Matsumura, T. and N. Matsushima (2004), “Endogenous Cost Differentials Between
Public and Private Enterprises: A Mixed Duopoly Approach,” Economica, 71, 671-688.
Matsumura, T. and O. Kanda (2005), “Mixed Oligopoly at Free Entry Markets,” Journal of Economics, 84, 27-48.
Pal, D. and M. D. White (1998), “Mixed Oligopoly, Privatization, and Strategic Trade Policy,” Southern Economics Journal, 65, 264-281.
Parker, D. (1997), “The Regulation of Privatised Utilities: Reflections of the UK Experiences,” Policy Studies, 3(3), 3-37.
Pestieau, P. and H. Tulkens (1993), “Assessing and Explaining the Performance of Public Enterprises,” Finanz Archiv, 50, 293-323.
Poyago-Theotoky, J. (1998), “R&D Competition in a Mixed Duopoly under Uncertainty and Easy Imitation,” Journal of Comparative Economics, 26, 415-428.
Sappington, D. E. and J. E. Stiglitz (1987), “Privatization, Information and Incentives,”
Journal of Policy Analysis and Management,6(4), 567-585.
Savas, E. S. (1987), “Privatization: The key to better government,” Chatham House.
Tian, G. L. (2000), “State Shareholding and Corporate Performance: A Study of a Unique
Chinese Data Set,” working paper, London Business School.
Wang, L. F. S. and T. L. Chen (2011), “Mixed Oligopoly, Optimal Privatization, and
Foreign Penetration,” Econ Model, 28, 1465-1470.
Wang, C. C. and J. R. Chiou (2015), “An Analysis of Policy Harmonization on
Privatization and Trade Liberalization,” International Review of Economics & Finance, 38, 279–290.
White, M. D. (1996), “Mixed Oligopoly, Privatization and Subsidization,” Econ Lett, 53,
189-195.
White, M. D. (2001), “Managerial Incentives and the Decision to Hire Managers in
Markets with Public and Private Firms,” European Journal of Political Economy, 17, 877-896.
Willner, J. (2001), “Ownership, Efficiency, and Political Interference,” Eur J Polit Econ,
17, 723-748.
Yarrow, G. (1985), “Privatisation in Theory and Practice,” Economic Policy, 5, 324-377.		zh_TW
dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/THE.NCCU.PF.003.2018.F07-