資料載入中.....
|
請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/157868
|
| 題名: | 資源錯置與產業結構對企業拆分效益的影響：以PC產業為例
Effects of Resource Misallocation and Industry Structure of firm spin-off performance : The case of the PC industry |
| 作者: | 陳宏齊
Chen, Hung-Chi |
| 貢獻者: | 李文傑
王信實
Lee, Wen-Chieh
Wang, Shinn-Shyr
陳宏齊
Chen, Hung-Chi |
| 關鍵詞: | 資源錯置
PC產業
產業結構
反事實分析
Resource misallocation
PC industry
industrial structure
counterfactual analysis |
| 日期: | 2025 |
| 上傳時間: | 2025-07-01 15:36:21 (UTC+8) |
| 摘要: | 本文研究以 2002 年到 2012 年間的 PC 產業廠商業務拆分為研究背景，以 2008 年華碩(ASUS)拆分品牌與代工業務為一個時間分界點，分析拆分前與後廠商業務與政策變化。使用資源錯置模型討論三大問題 : (1) 觀察整體PC產業效率與總體經濟事件及廠商策略之間的關聯性，(2) 反事實假設華碩與和碩並未拆分下，所造成之資源錯置與實際拆分結果的差異，(3) 模擬關稅政策對PC產業效率與資源錯置的影響程度。而我們資料來源主要以 TEJ 、Bloomberg以及廠商財報，並以此資料作為本研究的主要數據。
在我們的假設中，PC產業的效率與總體事件的發生息息相關，廠商間的惡性競爭可能會使效率立即反應且大幅度降低；而總體事件發生後，PC產業的效率則會產生滯後性的反應下降。而我們假設若並無分家的情況下，會比現實分家的效率更好，扭曲程度更低。假設關稅反事實發生於當時，整體效率會更低，扭曲波動幅度更大且扭曲程度更高，而這源自於經濟在加關稅下所產生的生產面損失，使得廠商在決策下成本提高，生產者剩餘減少。且關稅將會扭曲價格信號，使資源配置不當。
This study examines the evolution of the PC industry from 2002 to 2012, highlighting the 2008 structural separation of ASUS’s brand and ODM businesses as a pivotal event. Employing a resource misallocation framework and firm-level data from TEJ, Bloomberg, and financial reports, we address three key questions: the impact of macroeconomic shocks and firm strategies on industry efficiency, a counterfactual scenario assuming no ASUS–Pegatron split, and the simulated effects of tariff shocks. Results reveal that macroeconomic shocks have delayed effects on efficiency, while intense competition causes immediate declines. The counterfactual without the corporate separation suggests lower distortion and higher efficiency. In contrast, simulated tariff shocks exacerbate resource misallocation, increase volatility, and reduce producer surplus due to production-side losses and distorted price signals. |
| 參考文獻: | 1.洪祥玲(2008)。台灣筆記型電腦產業競爭策略之研究，國立交通大學，管理學院碩士在職專班管理科學組，新竹市。
2.Banerjee, A. V., & Duflo, E. (2005). Growth theory through the lens of development economics. In P. Aghion & S. N. Durlauf (Eds.), Handbook of Economic Growth (Vol. 1, pp. 473–552). Elsevier.
3.Gopinath, G., Kalemli-Özcan, Ş., Karabarbounis, L., & Villegas-Sánchez, C. (2017). Capital allocation and productivity in South Europe. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 132(4), 1915–1967.
4.Hopenhayn, H. A. (1992). Entry, exit, and firm dynamics in long-run equilibrium. Econometrica, 60(5), 1127–1150.
5.Hall, R. E., & Jones, C. I. (1999). Why do some countries produce so much more output per worker than others? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(1), 83–116.
6.Hsieh, C.-T., & Klenow, P. J. (2009). Misallocation and manufacturing TFP in China and India. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(4), 1403–1448.
7.Klenow, P. J. and Andrés Rodríguez-Clare (1997).The Neoclassical Revival in Growth Economics: Has It Gone Too Far?” NBER Macroeconomics Annual 12: 73–103.
8.Lee Wen-Chieh,Wang Shinn-Shyr，(2017).Misallocations and policy constraints on mergers in the modern manufacturing sector.Journal of Macroeconomics Vol 52,pp.268-286
9.Midrigan, Virgiliu and Daniel Yi Xu. 2014. "Finance and Misallocation: Evidence from Plant-Level Data." American Economic Review, 104 (2): 422–58.
10.Restuccia, D., & Rogerson, R. (2008). Policy distortions and aggregate productivity with heterogeneous plants. Review of Economic Dynamics, 11(4), 707–720. |
| 描述: | 碩士
國立政治大學
經濟學系
112258041 |
| 資料來源: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0112258041 |
| 資料類型: | thesis |
| 顯示於類別: | [經濟學系] 學位論文
|
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 |
描述 |
大小 | 格式 | 瀏覽次數 |
|---|
| 804101.pdf | | 1166Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | 檢視/開啟 |
|
在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.
|
