Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 內生化市場結構與補貼政策
Endogenous Market Structure and Subsidy Policy作者 林鈺凱
Lin, Yu-Kai貢獻者 賴景昌<br>蕭明福
Lai, Ching-Chong<br>Shaw, Ming-Fu
林鈺凱
Lin, Yu-Kai關鍵詞 研發
內生化市場結構
補貼政策
R&D
Endogenous market structure
Subsidy policy日期 2018 上傳時間 10-Aug-2018 10:49:30 (UTC+8) 摘要 本文建構了在內生化市場結構下的第二代R&D內生成長模型，並在此架構下探討四種不同補貼—最終財生產補貼、中間財生產補貼、內部研發補貼和進入補貼對經濟增長和內生市場結構的影響。\n發現當短期廠商數目固定時，最終產品生產補貼、中間產品生產補貼及內部研發補貼與過去的文獻相同，都會增加經濟增長率；但短期廠商數目固定時，研發部門的進入之價格補貼不會影響經濟增長。而當市場結構內生調整，也就是長期下，最終財生產補貼和中間產品生產補貼將使得廠商進入市場，隨著每家廠商的市場規模降低的負向效果將抵消短期的正向效果，因此對長期經濟增長率沒有效果。另一方面，當市場結構內生調整時，內部研發補貼減少了廠商數目但增加了經濟增長率，而研發部門的進入價格補貼擴大了廠商數目卻降低了經濟增長率。因此，內部研發補貼可能是比其他補貼更好的政策工具，因為它可以刺激長期經濟增長率。
This thesis builds up a second-generation R&D-based growth model featuring endogenous market structure, and uses it to explore the growth effect of four distinct styles of subsidies. The four subsidies this thesis consider include final goods production subsidies, intermediate goods productions subsidies, in-house R&D subsides and entry subsidies. Several main findings emerge from the analysis. First, when the number of firms is fixed in the short run, final goods production subsidies, intermediate goods productions subsidies and in-house R&D subsides will stimulate the economic growth rate. However, entry subsidies are powerless to affect economic growth. Second, when market structure adjusts endogenously in the long run, final goods production subsidies and intermediate goods productions subsidies will increase the number of firms, and this tends to lower economic growth. The induced negative growth effect arisen from a rise in the number of firms just exactly offsets the positive growth effect in the short run, leaving the economic growth rate intact. Third, when market structure adjusts endogenously in the long run, in-house R&D subsidies increase economic growth but decrease the number of firms, whereas entry subsidies expand the number of firms but reduce economic growth. As the result, in-house R&D subsidies is a better policy instrument compared to other subsidies since it can stimulate economic growth in the long run.參考文獻 一、中文部分\n賴景昌(2017)。R&D內生成長理論：內生化市場結構，講義。\n二、英文部分\nAghion, P., & Howitt, P. (1992). A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction. Econometrica, 60(2), 323-351.\nAghion, P., & Durlauf, S. (Eds.) (2005). Handbook of Economic Growth. Volume 1A. Handbooks in Economics, vol. 22. Amsterdam: North-Holland.\nAghion, P., & P. Howitt. (2008). The Economics of Growth. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.\nBarro, R. J., & Sala-i-Martin, X. (2004). Economic Growth. Second edition. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.\nBarcenilla-Visus, S., Lopez-Pueyo, C., & Sanau-Villarroya, J. (2014). Semi-Endogenous versus Fully Endogenous Growth Theory: A Sectoral Approach. Journal of Applied Economics, 17(1), 1-30.\nChu, A. C., Furukawa, Y., & Ji, L. (2016). Patents, R&D Subsidies, and Endogenous Market Structure in a Schumpeterian Economy. Southern Economic Journal, 82(3), 809-825.\nDavidson, C., & Segerstrom, P. (1998). R&D Subsidies and Economic Growth. RAND Journal of Economics, 29(3), 548-577.\nDinopoulos, E., & Thompson, P. (1998). Schumpeterian Growth without Scale Effects. Journal of Economic Growth, 3(4), 313-335.\nGrossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1991a). Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth. Review of Economic Studies, 58(1), 43-61.\nGrossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1991b). Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.\nHa, J., & Howitt, P. (2007). Accounting for Trends in Productivity and R&D: A Schumpeterian Critique of Semi-endogenous Growth Theory. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 39(4), 733-774.\nMadsen, J. B. (2008). Semi-endogenous versus Schumpeterian Growth Models: Testing the Knowledge Production Function Using International Data. Journal of Economic Growth, 13(1), 1-26.\nJones, C. I. (1995a). Time Series Tests of Endogenous Growth Models. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(2), 495-525.\nJones, C. I. (1995b). R&D-Based Models of Economic Growth. Journal of Political Economy, 103(4), 759-784.\nO`Donoghue, T., & Zweimuller, J. (2004). Patents in a Model of Endogenous Growth. Journal of Economic Growth, 9(1), 81-123.\nPeretto, P. F. (1998). Technological Change and Population Growth. Journal of Economic Growth, 3(4), 283-311.\nPeretto, P. F. (2007). Corporate Taxes, Growth and Welfare in a Schumpeterian Economy. Journal of Economic Theory, 137(1), 353-382.\nPeretto, P. F. (2011). The Growth and Welfare Effects of Deficit-Financed Dividend Tax Cuts. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 43(5), 835-869.\nRomer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous Technological Change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), S71-102.\nSegerstrom, P. S. (1998). Endogenous Growth without Scale Effects. American Economic Review, 88(5), 1290-1310.\nSegerstrom, P. S. (2000). The Long-Run Growth Effects of R&D Subsidies. Journal of Economic Growth, 5(3), 277-305.\nSegerstrom, P. S., Anant, T. A., & Dinopoulos, E. (1990). A Schumpeterian Model of the Product Life Cycle. American Economic Review, 80(5), 1077-1091.\nYoung, A. (1998). Growth without Scale Effects. Journal of Political Economy, 106(1), 41-63.\nZeng, J., & Zhang, J. (2007). Subsidies in an R&D Growth Model with Elastic Labor. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 31(3), 861-886. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
經濟學系
105258007資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105258007 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 賴景昌<br>蕭明福 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Lai, Ching-Chong<br>Shaw, Ming-Fu en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 林鈺凱 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Lin, Yu-Kai en_US dc.creator (作者) 林鈺凱 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Lin, Yu-Kai en_US dc.date (日期) 2018 en_US dc.date.accessioned 10-Aug-2018 10:49:30 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 10-Aug-2018 10:49:30 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 10-Aug-2018 10:49:30 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0105258007 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/item?item_id=137223 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 經濟學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 105258007 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本文建構了在內生化市場結構下的第二代R&D內生成長模型，並在此架構下探討四種不同補貼—最終財生產補貼、中間財生產補貼、內部研發補貼和進入補貼對經濟增長和內生市場結構的影響。\n發現當短期廠商數目固定時，最終產品生產補貼、中間產品生產補貼及內部研發補貼與過去的文獻相同，都會增加經濟增長率；但短期廠商數目固定時，研發部門的進入之價格補貼不會影響經濟增長。而當市場結構內生調整，也就是長期下，最終財生產補貼和中間產品生產補貼將使得廠商進入市場，隨著每家廠商的市場規模降低的負向效果將抵消短期的正向效果，因此對長期經濟增長率沒有效果。另一方面，當市場結構內生調整時，內部研發補貼減少了廠商數目但增加了經濟增長率，而研發部門的進入價格補貼擴大了廠商數目卻降低了經濟增長率。因此，內部研發補貼可能是比其他補貼更好的政策工具，因為它可以刺激長期經濟增長率。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) This thesis builds up a second-generation R&D-based growth model featuring endogenous market structure, and uses it to explore the growth effect of four distinct styles of subsidies. The four subsidies this thesis consider include final goods production subsidies, intermediate goods productions subsidies, in-house R&D subsides and entry subsidies. Several main findings emerge from the analysis. First, when the number of firms is fixed in the short run, final goods production subsidies, intermediate goods productions subsidies and in-house R&D subsides will stimulate the economic growth rate. However, entry subsidies are powerless to affect economic growth. Second, when market structure adjusts endogenously in the long run, final goods production subsidies and intermediate goods productions subsidies will increase the number of firms, and this tends to lower economic growth. The induced negative growth effect arisen from a rise in the number of firms just exactly offsets the positive growth effect in the short run, leaving the economic growth rate intact. Third, when market structure adjusts endogenously in the long run, in-house R&D subsidies increase economic growth but decrease the number of firms, whereas entry subsidies expand the number of firms but reduce economic growth. As the result, in-house R&D subsidies is a better policy instrument compared to other subsidies since it can stimulate economic growth in the long run. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1\n第一節 研究動機與文獻回顧 1\n第二節 本文架構 3\n第二章 理論模型 4\n第一節 各部門之決策行為 4\n第二節 一般均衡及動態分析 11\n第三節 長期均衡及經濟成長 13\n第三章 補貼政策之效果 15\n第一節 補貼政策之長期均衡影響 15\n第二節 圖形分析 17\n第四章 結論 32\n本文附錄 34\n附錄A 34\n附錄B 35\n附錄C 37\n附錄D 39\n附錄E 41\n參考文獻 43 zh_TW dc.format.extent 1438502 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105258007 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 研發 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 內生化市場結構 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 補貼政策 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) R&D en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Endogenous market structure en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Subsidy policy en_US dc.title (題名) 內生化市場結構與補貼政策 zh_TW dc.title (題名) Endogenous Market Structure and Subsidy Policy en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 一、中文部分\n賴景昌(2017)。R&D內生成長理論：內生化市場結構，講義。\n二、英文部分\nAghion, P., & Howitt, P. (1992). A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction. Econometrica, 60(2), 323-351.\nAghion, P., & Durlauf, S. (Eds.) (2005). Handbook of Economic Growth. Volume 1A. Handbooks in Economics, vol. 22. Amsterdam: North-Holland.\nAghion, P., & P. Howitt. (2008). The Economics of Growth. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.\nBarro, R. J., & Sala-i-Martin, X. (2004). Economic Growth. Second edition. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.\nBarcenilla-Visus, S., Lopez-Pueyo, C., & Sanau-Villarroya, J. (2014). Semi-Endogenous versus Fully Endogenous Growth Theory: A Sectoral Approach. Journal of Applied Economics, 17(1), 1-30.\nChu, A. C., Furukawa, Y., & Ji, L. (2016). Patents, R&D Subsidies, and Endogenous Market Structure in a Schumpeterian Economy. Southern Economic Journal, 82(3), 809-825.\nDavidson, C., & Segerstrom, P. (1998). R&D Subsidies and Economic Growth. RAND Journal of Economics, 29(3), 548-577.\nDinopoulos, E., & Thompson, P. (1998). Schumpeterian Growth without Scale Effects. Journal of Economic Growth, 3(4), 313-335.\nGrossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1991a). Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth. Review of Economic Studies, 58(1), 43-61.\nGrossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1991b). Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.\nHa, J., & Howitt, P. (2007). Accounting for Trends in Productivity and R&D: A Schumpeterian Critique of Semi-endogenous Growth Theory. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 39(4), 733-774.\nMadsen, J. B. (2008). Semi-endogenous versus Schumpeterian Growth Models: Testing the Knowledge Production Function Using International Data. Journal of Economic Growth, 13(1), 1-26.\nJones, C. I. (1995a). Time Series Tests of Endogenous Growth Models. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(2), 495-525.\nJones, C. I. (1995b). R&D-Based Models of Economic Growth. Journal of Political Economy, 103(4), 759-784.\nO`Donoghue, T., & Zweimuller, J. (2004). Patents in a Model of Endogenous Growth. Journal of Economic Growth, 9(1), 81-123.\nPeretto, P. F. (1998). Technological Change and Population Growth. Journal of Economic Growth, 3(4), 283-311.\nPeretto, P. F. (2007). Corporate Taxes, Growth and Welfare in a Schumpeterian Economy. Journal of Economic Theory, 137(1), 353-382.\nPeretto, P. F. (2011). The Growth and Welfare Effects of Deficit-Financed Dividend Tax Cuts. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 43(5), 835-869.\nRomer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous Technological Change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), S71-102.\nSegerstrom, P. S. (1998). Endogenous Growth without Scale Effects. American Economic Review, 88(5), 1290-1310.\nSegerstrom, P. S. (2000). The Long-Run Growth Effects of R&D Subsidies. Journal of Economic Growth, 5(3), 277-305.\nSegerstrom, P. S., Anant, T. A., & Dinopoulos, E. (1990). A Schumpeterian Model of the Product Life Cycle. American Economic Review, 80(5), 1077-1091.\nYoung, A. (1998). Growth without Scale Effects. Journal of Political Economy, 106(1), 41-63.\nZeng, J., & Zhang, J. (2007). Subsidies in an R&D Growth Model with Elastic Labor. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 31(3), 861-886. zh_TW dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/THE.NCCU.ECONO.016.2018.F06 -
