近年來受到亞洲金融風暴的影響，許多東亞國家經濟活動受到十分嚴重的打擊，使得這些國家在近年紛紛解除金融管制，期望提高金融市場的競爭性，各國銀行在激烈的競爭中，必須做出適當的調整提高經營績效與競爭力，在這改革潮流中，綜合銀行的多樣化產品組合倍受矚目，而綜合銀行的收入來源中非利息收入占的比例較專業銀行高，所以本文除定義傳統的投資及放款為產出外，增加非利息放入為第三產出，利用成本效率分析了解銀行的競爭優勢。

    為瞭解東亞各國銀行業，在金融風暴發生以後，成本效率是否有所提昇，並比較各國銀行廠商效率差異，本研究採用共同成本函數(meta cost function)，針對香港、泰國、馬來西亞、南韓、台灣及日本等六國銀行業做深入分析。傳統上，在做跨國銀行效率的比較分析時，常因各國金融體制與經濟狀況不一，導致成本邊界也不同，忽略此點進行估計可能會使研究結果產生偏誤，而共同成本函數考慮到不同國家的差異，無需假設各國勞動素質、生產技術和經濟制度皆須相同，能正確衡量和比較各國銀行業的效率差異，其角色如同生產理論中的包絡曲線，先找到各國個別的成本函數後，再從中找出一條可以包含各國成本函數的包絡曲線，進而得以比較各國的技術效率。

    實證結果發現共同成本效率最高的是日本，表示日本的銀行廠商使用的生產技術，居五國之冠。平均而言，各國若能使用先進技術，在共同邊界上生產，可以節省28%的生產成本。技術缺口顯示各國技術的差異，各樣本國皆有銀行的生產邊界與共同邊界相切，表示這些銀行採用的生產技術水準最高。規模經濟的驗證顯示各國快接近長期成本的最低點，且具有多元經濟，為充份發揮資源共享優勢，各銀行應同時提供多種金融商品，降低生產成本。

During the Asian financial turmoil, many east and south Asian counties were heavily hit. The governments of these countries took steps to liberalize their financial industries in an attempt to improve their banks efficiency.

To investigate whether the production efficiency of the banks in this area is enhanced after the financial crisis, we use the stochastic frontier approach along with meta cost function model. The stochastic meta-cost frontier model enables the calculations of relative technical efficiencies for banks operating under different technologies and of the technology gaps, to be estimated for banks under different technologies relative to the potential technology available to the industry as a whole. We collect data from Hong Kong, Thailand, Malaysia, Japan, republic of Korea, and Taiwan to be used in the empirical study.

Evidence is found that Japan has the best level of production technology. On average, Sample banks can save about 28% of the current expenditure to produce the same amount of outputs, if they adopt the best technique to produce their outputs. The technology gap measures the difference of production technology among different groups. Each country has some banks producing on the metafrontier as there is some technology gap estimates being found to be equal to unity. Economies of scale and scope prevail in the sample, meaning that sample banks can benefit by enlarging their production scale and diversifying their outputs. This is because these actions are able to decrease the average cost.

目         錄
第一章	緒論
第一節	研究動機	                   1
第二節	研究背景與目的	          2
第三節	研究架構	                   2
第二章	文獻回顧
第一節	經濟效率簡介	          4
第二節	規模經濟與多元經濟	10
第三節	共同函數	                  11
第三章	研究方法
第一節	 隨機成本邊界模型	         14
第二節	規模經濟和多元經濟模	16
第三節	 隨機成本共同邊界模型 	17
第四章	資料蒐集與整理
第一節	資料來源與整理	         21
第二節	變數定義	                  22
第三節	樣本統計量	         23
第五章	實證分析
第一節	正規條件檢驗及各國效率分析	25
第二節	共同函數估計結果分析	32
第三節	規模經濟與多元經濟	38
第六章	結論與建議	         39
參考文獻	                           41
附錄	                           45

圖   表   目   錄
圖一  研究架構流程圖	3
圖二 共同成本邊界模型	17
圖三  線性規劃下各國TGR的分佈狀況	35
圖四  非線性規劃下各國TGR的分佈狀況	36
附圖一 線性規劃下第一階段各國TGR的分佈狀況	50
附圖二 線性規劃下第二階段各國TGR的分佈狀況	51
附圖三 非線性規劃下第一階段各國TGR的分佈狀況	52
附圖四 非線性規劃下第二階段各國TGR的分佈狀況	53
表3-1  效率相關文獻整理	9
表3-2  共同函數相關文獻整理	13
表4-1  各國銀行數	21
表4-2  變數定義	22
表4-3  各變數的總樣本統計量	23
表4-4  各國變數的樣本統計量	24
表5-1  各國迴歸係數估計值	26
表5-2  各國不符合正規條件的比例	30
表5-3  各國銀行每年的平均效率值	31
表5-4  隨機邊界法與共同函數參數估計結果	32
表5-5  線性規劃下各國技術缺口與共同成本效率	34
表5-6  非線性規劃下各國技術缺口與共同成本效率	35
表5-7  規模經濟值	38
表5-8  多元經濟與成本互補性	38
附表一 第一階段與第二階段LP與QP參數估計結果	45
附表二 線性規劃下第一階段各國技術缺口與共同成本效率	46
附表三 線性規劃下第二階段各國技術缺口與共同成本效率	47
附表四 非線性規劃下第一階段各國技術缺口與共同成本效率	48
附表五 非線性規劃下第二階段各國技術缺口與共同成本效率	49

參考文獻
王美惠（2002），「台灣銀行業經濟效率與規模經濟分析-參數法與無參數法之比較」，淡江大學管理科學學系博士論文。
吳姵萱（2002），「台灣銀行業的效率與風險研究」，銘傳大學金融所碩士班碩士論文。
李紀嫺 （1999），「綜合銀行體制國家之銀行業成本效率分析」，東吳大學國際貿易系碩士班國際金融組碩士論文。
李揚（2003），「技術效率對台灣中小企業海外投資影響之分析」，亞太社會科技學報，第2卷，第2期，117-130.
黃台心（1998），「以隨機成本邊界函數分析本國銀行的規模與多元經濟」，經濟論文叢刊，第26卷，第2期，209-241。
黃台心（1999），「由利潤函數衡量我國銀行廠商之經濟效率-參數計量法的應用」，經濟論文，第27卷，第2期，283-309。
謝孟芬（2003），「銀行脆弱性與銀行失敗-跨國性研究」，國立政治大學金融系碩士班碩士論文。
Aigner  D. J., C. A. K. Lovell and P. Schmidt (1977), Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models, Journal of Econometrics, 6, 21-37.
Alam I. M. and J. E. Leightner (2001), The impact of the financial crisis on the productivity of Thailand’s financial institutions, Singapore Economic Review, 46, 153-177.
Allen L. and A. Rai (1996), Operational efficiency in banking: An international comparison, Journal of Banking and Finance, 20, 655-672.
Atkinson S. E. and C. Cornwell (1994), Parametric estimation of technical and allocative inefficiency with panel data, International Economic Review, 35, 231-243.
Battese G. E. and D.S.P. Rao (2002), Technology gap, efficiency and a stochastic metafrontier function, International Journal of Business and Economics, 1, 87-93.
Battese G. E. and T. J. Coelli (1992), Frontier production functions, technical efficiency and panel data: With application to paddy farmers in India, Journal of productivity Analysis, 3, 153 -169.
Battese G. E. and T.J. Coelli (1995), A model for technical inefficiency effects in a stochastic frontier production function for panel data, Empirical Economics, 20, 325-332.
Battese G. E., D. S. P. Rao and C. J.O’Donnell (2004), A metefrontier production function for estimation of technical efficiencies and technology gaps for firms operating under different technologies, Journal of Productivity Analysis, 21, 91-103.
Bauer P.W., A. N. Berger and D. B. Humphrey (1993), Efficiency and productivity growth in U. S. banking, in the Measurement of Productive Efficiency: Techniques and Applications (H.O. Fried, C. A. K. Lovell and S. S. Schmidt, eds.), 386-413, Oxford University Press.
Bauer P.W., A.N. Berger,  G. D. Ferrier and D.B. Humphrey (1998), Consistency conditions for regulatory analysis of financial institutions: A comparison of frontier efficiency methods, Journal of Economics and Business, 50, 85-114.
Baumol W.J., J.C. Panzar and R.D. Willing (1982), Contestable markets and the theory of industry structure, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Benston G. J., G. A. Hanweck and D. B. Humphrey (1982), Scale economies in banking: A restructuring and reassessment, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 14, 435-456.
Berg S. A., F. R. Forsund, L. Hjalmarsson and M. Suominen (1993), Banking efficiency in the Nordic countries, Journal of Banking and Finance, 17, 371-388.
Berger A.  N. (1993), Distribution-Free Estimation of Efficiency in U.S. Banking Industry and Tests of the Standard Distribution Assumption, The Journal of Productivity Analysis, 4, 261-292.
Berger A.N. and D. B. Humphrey (1991), The dominance of inefficiencies over scale and product mix economies in banking, Journal of Monetary Economics, 28, 117-148. 
Berger A.N. and D. B. Humphrey (1997), Efficiency of financial institutions: international survey and directions for future research, European Journal of Operating Research, 98, 175-212.
Boskin M. J. and L. J. LAU (1992), International and intertemporal comparison of productive efficiency: An application of the meta-production function approach to the group-of-five (G-5) countries, The Economic Studies Quarterly, 43, 298-312.
Branstetter L. G., J. R. Chen and C. H. Yang (2001), Technology sourcing, spillover and productivity－Evidence from Taiwanese manufacturing firms, 28th annual conference of the European Association for Research in Industrial Economics（EARIE）, August 30－September 2, Dublin, Ireland.
Cummins J. D. and H. Zi (1998), Comparison of frontier efficiency methods: an application to the U.S. life insurance industry, Journal of Productivity Analysis, 10, 131-152.
DeYoung R. (1997), A diagnostic test for the distribution-free efficiency estimator: An example using U.S. commercial bank data, European Journal of Operational Research, 98, 243-249.
Drake L. and M.J.B. Hall (2003), Efficiency in Japanese banking: An empirical analysis, Journal of Banking and Finance, 27, 891-917.
Farrell M.J. (1957), The measurement of productive efficiency, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General), 120, 253-290.
Fecher F. and P. Pestieau (1993), Efficiency and competition in O.E.C.D. financial services, in The Measurement of Productive Efficiency: Techniques and Applications, edtied by H.O. Fried, C.A.K. Lovell, and S.S. Schmidt, 374-385, Oxford University Press.
Ferrier G.D. and C.A.K. Lovell (1990), Measuring cost efficiency in banking –econometric and linear programming evidence, Journal of Econometrics, 46, 229-245.
Gilligan T., M. Smirlock, and W. Marshall (1984), Scale and scope economics in the multiproduct banking firm, Journal of Monetary Economics, 13, 393-405.
Gunaratne L. H. P. and P. S. Leung (2001), Asian black tiger shrimp industry: A productivity analysis, Chapter 5 in Economics and Management of Shrimp and Carp Farming in Asia: A Collection of Research Papers Based on the ADB/NACA Farm Performance Survey, Leung P.S. and K. R. Sharma, editors. Bangkok: Network of Aquaculture Centers in Asia-Pacific (NACA), 240.
Hayami Y. (1969), Sources of agricultural productivity gap among selected countries, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 51, 564-575.
Hayami Y. and V.W. Ruttan (1970), Agricultural productivity differences among countries, The American Economic Review, 60, 895-911.
Hayami Y. and V.W. Ruttan (1971，1985), Agricultural development: An international perspective, Baltimore and London: John Hopkins University Press.
Huang T. H. (2000), Estimating X-efficiency in Taiwanese banking using a translog shadow profit function, Journal of Productivity Analysis, 14, 225-245.
Huang T.H. and M.H. Wang (2002), Comparison of economic efficiency estimation methods: Parametric and non-parametric techniques, The Manchester School, 70, 682-709.
Hunter W. C., S. C. Timme and W. K. Yang (1990), An examination of cost subadditivity and multiproduct production in large U. S. banks, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 22,504-525.
Karim M. Z. A. (2001), Comparative bank efficiency across select ASEAN countries, ASEAN Economic Bulletin, 18, 289-304. 
Kim H.Y. (1986), Economies of scale and economies of scope in multiproduct financial institutions: Further evidence from credit unions”, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 18, 220-226.
Kim J.L. and L. J. Lau (1994), The sources of economic growth of the east Asian newly industrialized countries, Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 8, 235-271.
Kim M. (1985), Scale economies in banking: A methodological note, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 17, 96-102.
Kumbhakar S.C. (1991), The measurement and decomposition of cost inefficiency: The translog cost system, Oxford Economic Papers, 43, 667-683.
Laeven L. (1999), Risk and efficiency in East Asian banks, The World Bank Working Paper, NO.2255.
Lang, G. and P. Welzel (1996), Efficiency and technical progress in banking: Empirical results for a panel of German cooperative banks, Journal of Banking and Finance, 20, 1003-1023.
Lau L. J. and P. A. Yotopoulos (1989), The meta-production function approach to technological change in world agriculture, Journal of Development Economics, 31, 241-269.
Meeusen W. and J. van D. Broeck (1977), Efficiency estimation from cobb-douglas production functions with composed error, International Economic Review, 18, 435-444.
Mendes V. and J. Rebelo (1999), Productive efficiency, technological change and productivity in Portuguese banking,  Applied Financial Economics, 9, 513-521.
Mester L. J. (1987), A multiproduct cost study of savings and loans, The Journal of Finance, 20, 1025-1045.
Mundlak Y. and R. Hellinghausen (1982), The intercountry agricultural production function: Another view, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 64, 664-672.
Sharma K.R. and P. S. Leung (2000), Technical efficiency of carp pond culture in South Asia: An application of stochastic Meta-Production frontier model, Aquaculture Economics and Management, 4, 169-189.
Van P. H. (2004), One industry at a time: evidence of induced localized technical gains in the east Asian countries, Department of Economics, University of Missouri, Working Papers.
Vennet R.V. (2002), Cost and profit efficiency of financial conglomerates and universal banks in Europe, Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 34, 254-282.
Weill L. (2002), Does restructuring improve banking efficiency in a transition economy, Applied Economics Letters, 9, 279-281.