台灣銀行業生產力與效率分析

Abstract

自1970年代起，政府鬆綁了許多金融管制與政策限制，國內的銀行產業環境有所改變，再加上逐漸自由化與國際化的趨勢，導致國內的銀行業日益競爭，在如此競爭的環境中，銀行要生存的關鍵在於本身的經營績效是否禁得起市場考驗。\r\n 本文有鑑於銀行經營績效的重要性，採用Balk﹝2001﹞定義將總要素生產力變動分解為技術改變、純技術效率改變，規模效率改變及產出組合效果來進行分析。以本國53家一般銀行，選取1997-2005年共9年資料進行分析，並以不同面向進一步探討銀行生產力差異，最後以營運績效管理矩陣討論哪些銀行具有競爭優勢及發展的潛力。\r\n 本研究主要實證結果如下：\r\n1、從整體銀行產業各年度生產力來看，整體銀行的經營效率在觀察期間的前半段是呈現退步，但後半段則是呈現成長的反方向變動；至於規模效率與產出組合效果方面則幾乎呈現退步；而技術面則與效率變動恰巧呈現反方向狀態，可見對整體銀行產業來說，規模效率的提昇及產出組合的最適選擇仍有相當大的努力空間。\r\n2、以外資持股比例的面向來看，外資持股比例較高的銀行其生產力並未較外資持股比例較低的銀行生產力高。以公、民營銀行面向來探討，公營銀行的總要素生產力變動較民營銀行的生產力變動高。加入金控後對於技術變動有所提升，但就整體生產力來看加入前後並無顯著差異。\r\n3、以營運績效管理矩陣來分析銀行廠商的表現可知，最多銀行廠商落在象限Ⅵ(TFPC<1，0.75<TE<0.9)，佔所有廠商家數的比率為26.3%，而落於第Ⅰ象限(TFPC>1，TE>0.9)的銀行所佔的比率為14.3%。我們可以看到以縱軸為劃分基準來看，分佈於跨期生產力變動表現不佳的第ⅡⅣ及Ⅵ象限(TFPC<1)的銀行數目佔銀行總家數高達71.5%，顯示對大部分的銀行來說，都不具長期的發展潛力。

In accordance with the policy of economic liberalization and internationalization, the Taiwan government released the banking industry from lots of financial regulations since 1970. The deregulation has exerted significant structural changes of financial institutions and imposed competitive pressure on the operation of banking industry. It follows that promoting efficiency and productivity of banking are the key factors for the banks to survive in the keen competitive environment.\r\n\r\n This study investigated the productivity and efficiency issues and decomposed total factor productivity change (TFPC) into technical change (TC), pure technical efficiency change (PTE), scale efficiency change (SEC) and output mix effect (OME) following Balk (2001). Then we proceeded to apply DEA method to estimate and analyze the productivity growth of the 53 sample banks in 1997-2005. The study also constructed an operational performance management matrix to classify and discuss the banks’ competitive advantage and the strategy of future development.\r\n\r\n The major empirical results were as follows:\r\n\r\n1.Operational efficiency of whole banking industry showed a decline tendency in the anterior half of observation period, but the posterior half presented the reverse direction change. The SEC and the OME were declining. The TC presented an increase tendency in the anterior half of observation period, but the posterior half presented the reverse direction change. Therefore, it indicates there are a lot of spaces for the industry to improve its performance.\r\n\r\n2.The banks with a higher proportion of foreign shareholdings didn’t have higher TFPC compared to those with lower proportion of foreign shareholdings. The TFPC of the publicly-owned banks was higher than the private banks. We also found that there were no difference in the operation efficiency before and after banks become the subsidiary banks of financial holding corporations.\r\n\r\n3.Using operational performance management matrix to classify and discuss banks’ performance, we found that 26.3% of the total banks belong to quadrant Ⅵ (TFPC<1，0.75<TE<0.9). 14.3% of banks belong to quadrantⅠ(TFPC>1，TE>0.9). The banks which located on quadrants Ⅱ, Ⅳ and Ⅵ (TFPC<1) account for 71.5%, which indicates that most of banks lose their long-run competitiveness.