Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/118557
|
| Title: | 最適出口稅與民營化政策—考慮競爭模式內生化情況
Optimal export tax and privatization in endogenous competition modes |
| Authors: | 沈忠慈 |
| Contributors: | 翁堃嵐
沈忠慈 |
| Keywords: | 民營化程度
混合雙占
出口稅
數量競爭
價格競爭
Privatization
Export taxes
Price and quantity contracts
Mixed oligopoly |
| Date: | 2018 |
| Issue Date: | 2018-07-10 15:36:23 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 本文主要探討在雙占混合競爭市場下，民營化程度與最適出口稅及社會福祉之關聯性。研究結果顯示在不考慮內生化競爭模型情況下，兩家廠商選擇Cournot 數量競爭策略或Bertrand價格競爭時，民營化程度之變動與最適出口稅及社會福祉不具關聯性，但競爭程度與最適出口稅與社會福祉具關聯性。接著考慮內生化競爭模型情況下，當兩私營廠商做競爭時，採取Cournot 數量競爭策略會達到市場均衡；當一家公營廠商與一家私營廠商做競爭時，市場均衡可能為Cournot 數量競爭策略或Bertrand價格競爭策略亦或是一家廠商採取價格競爭另一家廠商採取數量競爭策略。比較四種競爭均衡下之社會福祉後，發現Cournot 數量競爭均衡下社會福祉最大。最後考慮部分民營化程度之情況，研究顯示無論民營化程度如何變動，政府皆可透過調整出口稅以達到最適出口稅下之社會福祉。
This paper investigates the effect of privatization on welfare or the optimal export taxes policy in differentiated mixed oligopoly. The main findings of our paper is as follows:(1) If the two firms take the same competition, i.e., Cournot or Bertrand competition, and the degree of privatization has no effect on welfare or the optimal export taxes. (2) We analyze the strategic variables are determined endogenously. If degree of privatization , two private firms will take Cournot competition strategy；If degree of privatization , two firms will take q-q competition strategy or p-p competition strategy or q-p competition strategy or p-q competition strategy. In this case, social welfare is higher if the state-own firm and private firm choose quantity contract. Finally, when the equilibrium under Cournot competition in a mixed duopoly with partial privatization, Government how adjust export tax to maximize social welfare. |
| Reference: | 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(2)，246-259。
林瑞益與孫嘉宏(2017)，〈整合型市場之下的混合雙占-價格與數量競爭〉，《經濟研究》，53(2)，261-294。
翁永和，羅鈺珊與劉碧珍(2006)，〈市場結構與最適民營化政策〉，《經濟論文》，31(2)，149-169。
Bárcena-Ruiz, J.C. and M.B. Garzón. (2003), “International Trade and Strategic Privatization,” Review of Development Economics, 9. 502-513.
Boyer,M and M.Moreaux. (1987) , “On Stackelberg Equilibria with Differentiated Products:the Critical Role of the Strategy Space,” Journal of Industrial Economics,36,217-230.
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.
Chang, R.Y., H Hwang ,and C.H Peng. (2017), “Endogenous Competition Modes, Privatization, and Welfare,” Working paper.
Dixit, A. K (1979), “A Model of Duopoly Suggesting a Theory of Entry Barriers,” Bell Journal of Economics, 10, 20–32
Defraja,G and F, Delbono. (1989), “Alternative Strategies of a Public Enterprise in Oligopoly,” Oxford Economic Papers, 41,302-311.
Defraja, G and F, Delbono. (1990), “Game-Theoretic Models of Mixed Oligopoly,” Journal of Economic Surveys, 4,1-17
Fujiwara, K. (2007), “Partial Privatization in a Differentiated Mixed Oligopoly,” Journal of Economics, 99,51-65.
Haraguchi, J. and T. Matsumura (2016), “Cournot-Bertrand Comparison in a Mixed Oligopoly,” Journal of Economics, 117, 117–136.
Kenneth. G and M. La Manna (1996), “Mixed Duopoly, Inefficiency, and Public Ownership,” Review of Industrial Organization, 11,853-860.
Klemperer, P. (1986), “Price Competition vs. Quantity Competition: The Role of Uncertainty,” Rand Journal of Economics, 17, 618-638.
Lambertini. (2000), “Extended Games Played by Managerial Firms,” The Journal of the Japanese Economic Association， 51，274-283.
Long, Ngo and S, Frank. (2008) , “How Does State Ownership Affect Optimal Export Taxes ? ,” Economics Bulletin, 37, 1-7.
Matsumura, Toshihiro. (1998), “Partial Privatization in Mixed Duopoly, ” Journal of Public Economics, 70,473-483.
Matsumura, T and A, Ogawa. (2012), “Price Versus Quantity in a Mixed Duopoly, ” Economics Letters, 116,174-177.
Marcella Scrimitore. (2013), “Price or Quantity？ The Strategic Choice of Subsidized Firms in a Mixed Duopoly” Economics Letters,118,337-341
Myles,G. (2002), “Mixed Oligopoly, Subsidization and the Order of Firms` Moves: An Irrelevance Result for the General Case,” Economics Bulletin ,12,1-6
Pal, D. (1998), “Endogenous Timing in a Mixed Oligopoly,” Economics Letters ,61,181-185.
Poyago-Theotoky, J. (2007), “Mixed Oligopoly, Subsidization, and the Order of Firm’s Moves an Irrelevance Result,” Economics Bulletin, 12, 1-5.
Scrimitore, M. (2012), “Private and Social Gains in Delegation and Sequential Games with Heterogeneous Firms,” Manchester School, 81, 493-517.
Singh, N. and X Vives. (1984), “Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly,” Rand Journal of Economics, 15(4), 1-10.
Reisinger, M. and L. Ressner (2009), “The Choice of Prices versus Quantities under Uncertainty,” Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 18:4, 1155-1177.
Tomaru, Y. (2006), “Mixed Oligopoly, Partial Privatization and Subsidization,” Economics Bulletin, 12, 1-6.
Tomaru, Y., and M. Saito. (2010), “Mixed Duopoly, Privatization and Subsidization in an Endgenous Timing Framework,” Manchester School, 78, 111-134.
White, M.D. (1996), “Mixed Duopoly, Privatization and Subsidization,” Economics Letters, 53, 189-195. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
財政學系
105255009 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105255009 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| DOI: | 10.6814/THE.NCCU.PF.001.2018.F07 |
| Appears in Collections: | [財政學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 500901.pdf | 1261Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 14 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
