English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 87250/116256 (75%)
Visitors : 23290441      Online Users : 100
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/118653


    Title: 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
    Authors: 傅明捷
    Fu, Sarah
    Contributors: 翁堃嵐
    傅明捷
    Fu, Sarah
    Keywords: 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
    Date: 2018
    Issue Date: 2018-07-13 15:18:32 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 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.
    Reference: 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.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    財政學系
    1052550252
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1052550252
    Data Type: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/THE.NCCU.PF.003.2018.F07
    Appears in Collections:[財政學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    025201.pdf1510KbAdobe PDF0View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback