淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


下載電子全文限經由淡江IP使用) 
系統識別號 U0002-2108200720240500
中文論文名稱 OECD與APEC諸國總體生產效率與總要素生產力之研究 ─ 共同邊界函數之應用
英文論文名稱 A Study of Production Efficiency and Rate of Total Factor Productivity Growth for the Member States of OECD and APEC: A Metafrontier Function Approach
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 產業經濟學系博士班
系所名稱(英) Department of Industrial Economics
學年度 95
學期 2
出版年 96
研究生中文姓名 陳盈秀
研究生英文姓名 Ying-Hsiu Chen
學號 892510057
學位類別 博士
語文別 中文
口試日期 2007-07-30
論文頁數 109頁
口試委員 指導教授-黃台心
指導教授-陳明園
委員-傅祖壇
委員-黃台心
委員-陳忠榮
委員-廖惠珠
委員-王泓仁
中文關鍵字 共同邊界函數  生產效率  總要素生產力  產量彈性  技術缺口比率 
英文關鍵字 Metafrontier function  Production Efficiency  Total Factor Productivity  Output Elasticity  Technology gap ratio 
學科別分類 學科別社會科學經濟學
中文摘要 本研究蒐集1985至2004年OECD與APEC諸國資料,考慮總體經濟變數可能具有非定態性質,建構產出成長率模型,進行生產效率與總要素生產力之研究。將樣本國家區分為四個不同技術群組國家,包括七大工業國 (G7)、非七大工業國 (Non-G7)、亞洲四小龍 (NICs)和非四小龍(Non-NICs),分別進行係數估計,期避免不同群組國家生產技術差異與要素品質異質性,對迴歸係數的影響。接著利用估計的生產邊界函數,分解總要素生產力變動率成為三種成分,探討各成分的重要性。最後,採用共同邊界函數分析法 (metafrontier function approach),估計樣本國家的技術缺口比率與生產效率。
實證結果發現樣本期間,四群組資本存量與勞動投入的產量彈性平均值均為正,而以NICs群組最高。NICs群組具有規模報酬遞增特性,其餘三群組處於規模報酬遞減階段,生產規模有過大傾向。四群組的生產技術均持續進步中,以Non-NICs群組進步最快,每年平均以3.77%的速度進步,G7群組進步速度最慢;四群組平均技術效率變動率均為負值,以NICs群組惡化情形最為嚴重,平均每年惡化0.95%,G7群組則較輕微。除NICs群組的規模效果為正外,其他三群組的規模效果皆對TFP成長率造成負向影響。四群組的總要素生產力 (TFP) 皆逐年成長,其中NICs群組的成長率名列前茅,平均每年成長3.4%,成長動力為正向規模效果與技術進步,其餘三群組的TFP成長主要泉源,來自生產技術的進步。
四群組的平均技術缺口比率約介於0.98 (G7群組) 至0.92 (NICs群組) 之間,以G7群組的生產技術水準最為先進,其次為Non-G7群組,NICs與Non-NICs兩群組則差異不大。群組技術效率與共同邊界技術效率的平均值皆以G7群組最高,分別為0.975與0.958,其成員國的實際產出水準約可達群組邊界產出的98%,但僅約達共同邊界產出的96%,其次為Non-G7群組。未來若欲快速提升共同邊界技術效率,G7與Non-G7群組應積極鼓勵企業從事研發活動,不斷提升生產技術,而NICs與Non-NICs群組則應以改善企業管理能力,提高技術效率為當務之急。
從TFP成長率的觀點,檢視所得收斂假說,NICs與Non-NICs群組的實際產出水準若假以時日,有可能追上先進國家,支持所得收斂假說;觀察共同邊界技術效率,推測Non-NICs群組的實際產出水準隨時間經過可能與Non-G7群組趨於一致,NICs群組的可能性較低。
英文摘要 This paper proposes a model of stochastic frontier macroeconomic production function, in which all variables are expressed in the form of rate of growth to eliminate the potential nonstationarity of the variables, to estimate the production efficiency and the rate of total factor productivity (TFP) for the members of OECD and APEC during the period 1985-2004. The sample countries are further classified into four groups, i.e., G7, Non-G7, NICs and Non-NICs, and a production frontier for each of the four groups is separately fitted. By doing so, we avoid the adverse impacts of technology differences among groups and input quality heterogeneity on the estimation of the technology parameters. Using the estimated parameters we compute measures of technical progress, changes in technical efficiency, and scale effects, which constitute the measure of the TFP growth rate. Furthermore, this paper applies a metafrontier production function proposed by Battese et al. (2004) to study the technical efficiency across groups of countries operating under different technologies.
Evidence is found that on average the output elasticity of capital and labor are both positive for each group, and that scale economies prevail in NICs nations, while the rest of the three groups exhibit decreasing returns to scale. The rates of TFP change of the four groups increase over time, in which a maximum average rate amounts to 3.4% per annum for the group of NICs. Tthe scale effect and technological progress are two important sources of TFP growth for NICs nations, whereas the technological progress constitutes the main source of the TFP gain for the rest of the three groups. In addition, the technical efficiency changes are all negative, implying that, on average, the actual levels of production for the countries involved deviate away from the individual production frontiers over time. According to the estimated rates of TFP growth, it is concluded that the outputs of the NICs and Non-NICs states tend to converge toward those of the G7 states.
Evidence is also found that the mean values of the technology gap ratio vary from about 0.98 (G7) to 0.92 (NICs), implying that G7 countries employ superior level of production technology to the remaining groups. The states of G7 achieve the highest mean technical efficiency score of 0.975 relative to their production frontier and the highest metafrontier technical efficiency score of 0.958, respectively. The results suggest that G7 countries produce, on average, about 98% of the optimal output given the technology available to the group, and around 96% of the potential outputs defined by the metafrontier function. Finally, the difference of the metafrontier technical efficiency between the Non-G7 and the Non-NICs shrinks over time.
論文目次 第一章 緒論………………………………………………………………….…………….1
第一節 研究背景………………………………………………………………………1
第二節 研究目的與架構………………………………………………………………4
第二章 文獻回顧………………………………………………………………………….6
第一節 國家總體生產力………………………………………………………………6
第二節 共同生產函數…………………………………………………………………9
第三節 所得收斂假說………………………………………………………………..13
第三章 理論模型………………………………………………………………………...17
第一節 總體生產函數與技術效率…………………………………………………..17
第二節 總要素生產力變動率………………………………………………………..20
第三節 共同邊界函數與技術缺口比率……………………………………………..21
第四章 迴歸模型………………………………………………………………………...25
第五章 資料蒐集與變數定義…………………………………………………………27
第六章 實證分析………………………………………………………………………...30
第一節 係數估計結果………………………………………………………………..30
第二節 各項指標值之計算與分析…………………………………………………..34
第三節 TFP成長決定因素與所得收斂趨勢…………………………….…………..44
第四節 共同邊界技術效率與技術缺口比率………………………………………..55
第七章 結論與建議……………………………………………………………………...64

附錄1 國家總體生產力之相關文獻…………………………………………………….66
附錄2 共同生產函數之相關文獻……………………………………………………….68
附錄3 所得收斂假說之相關文獻……………………………………………………….71
附錄4 機率密度函數與期望值得推導………………………………………………….73
附錄5 個別國家變數之樣本統計量…………………………………………………….75
附錄6 國家效果之係數估計值………………………………………………………….76
附錄7 各模型之係數估計值 ─ 10%資本折舊率……………………………………..77
附錄8 模型1之個別國家指標平均值…………………………………………………..79
附錄9 模型1之各年度指標平均值……………………………………………………..80
附錄10 模型2之個別國家指標平均值…………………………………………………..81
附錄11 模型1之個別群組指標平均值 ─ 10%資本折舊率…………………………...81
附錄12 模型1之個別國家指標平均值 ─ 10%資本折舊率…………………………...82
附錄13 模型1之四個年度區間指標估計值 ─ 10%資本折舊率……………………...83
附錄14 模型1之個別國家TFP成長率分解…………………………………………….84
附錄15 模型1之各年度TFP成長率分解……………………………………………….85
附錄16 模型2之個別國家TFP成長率分解…………………………………………….86
附錄17 模型3之個別國家TFP成長率分解…………………………………………….87
附錄18 模型4之個別國家TFP成長率分解…………………………………………….88
附錄19 模型1之個別群組指標平均值 ─ 10%資本折舊率…………………………...88
附錄20 模型1之個別國家TFP成長率分解 ─ 10%資本折舊率……………………..89
附錄21 模型1之四個年度區間TFP成長率分解 ─ 10%資本折舊率………………...90
附錄22 共同邊界函數之國家效果係數估計值………………………………………….91
附錄23 模型1之個別國家技術缺口與效率……………………………………………..92
附錄24 模型1之各年度技術缺口與效率………………………………………………..94
附錄25 模型1之QP法各年度技術趨口與效率…………………………………………95
附錄26 模型2之個別國家技術缺口與效率……………………………………………..96
附錄27 模型1之共同邊界函數係數估計值 ─ 10%資本折舊率……………………...98
附錄28 模型1之個別群組技術缺口與效率 ─ 10%資本折舊率……………………..99
附錄29 模型1之個別國家技術缺口與效率 ─ 10%資本折舊率…………………....100
參考文獻…………………………………………………………………101

表 圖 目 錄
表圖號 頁次
表1 各種成長率計算方式………………………………………………………………….4
表2 四個技術群組之樣本國家…………………………………………………………...27
表3 各變數之樣本統計量………………………………………………………………...29
表4 實證模型之分類……………………………………………………………………...30
表5 各模型之係數估計值………………………………………………………………...33
表6 模型1 之個別群組指標估計值………………………………………………………35
表7 模型1 之四個年度區間指標估計值…………………………………………………38
表8 三模型之個別群組指標估計值……………………………………………………...43
表9 模型1 之個別群組TFP 成長率分解…………………………………………………45
表10 模型1 之四個年度區間TFP 成長率分解………………………………………….47
表11 三模型之個別群組TFP 成長率分解……………………………………………….54
表12 共同邊界函數之係數估計值……………………………………………………….55
表13 模型1 之個別群組技術缺口與效率……………………………………………….57
表14 模型1 之四個年度區間技術缺口與效率………………………………………….58
表15 模型2 之個別群組技術缺口與效率……………………………………………….63
圖1 研究架構流程圖…………………………………………………………………….5
圖2 共同邊界曲線………………………………………………………………………22
圖3 模型1 之各年度要素產量彈性………………………………………………………41
圖4 模型1 之各年度TFP成長率分解…………………………………………………….50
圖5 模型1 之個別群組TFP 成長率………………………………………………………52
圖6 模型1 之各年度技術缺口與效率……………………………………………………60
參考文獻 王俊鈞 (2001),效率及生產力變動之評估 ─ OECD國家與亞洲四小龍的實證分析,逢甲大學經濟學系,研究所碩士論文。
林倩瑜 (2003),總體電子商務環境對製造業總要素生產力之影響 ─ OECD國家與台灣的實證分析,銘傳大學經濟學系,研究所碩士論文。
林秋琴 (2004),歐洲國家效率及生產力分析 ─ 資料包絡分析法之應用,政治大學會計學系,研究所碩士論文。
邱郁芳 (2006),應用共同成本函數探討東亞六國銀行業之生產效率,淡江大學經濟學系,研究所碩士論文。
邱柏豪 (2006),應用共同成本函數探討歐洲16國銀行業的生產效率,交通大學財務金融學系,研究所碩士論文。
許啟昭 (2006),宜蘭縣休閒農產經營效率分析 ─ Meta-Frontier之應用,宜蘭大學經營管理學系,研究所碩士論文。
彭惠萍 (2004),1990年代東亞經濟體之效率與生產力分析,交通大學經營管理學系,研究所碩士論文。
黃台心、陳盈秀與王美惠 (2007),我國與東亞諸國總體生產效率與生產力之研究,經濟論文叢刊「生產效率」特刊,即將刊登。
楊世華 (2007),台灣農田水利會經營效率之比較研究 ─ 三階段DEA及Metafrontier模型之應用,台灣大學農業經濟學系,研究所博士論文。
潘思翰 (2006),亞洲金融風暴對東亞國家效率及生產力分析 ─ 資料包絡分析法之應用,政治大學會計學系,研究所碩士論文。
羅時芳 (2005),納入環境因素之國家、地區及企業效率與生產力,交通大學經營管理學系,研究所博士論文。
Al-Yousif, Y.K. (1997), Exports and economic growth: Some empirical evidence from the Arab gulf countries, Applied Economics, 29, 693-697.
Aigner, D. J., C. A. K. Lovell and P. J. Schmidt (1977), “Formulation and Estimation of Stochastic Frontier Production Function Models,” Journal of Econometrics, 6, 21-37.
Barro, R.J. (1990), Government spending in a simple model of endogenous growth, Journal of Political Economy, 98, 103-125.
Barro, R.J. (1991), Economic growth in a cross section of countries, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106, 407-443.
Barro, R.J. and J.W. Lee (1993), International comparesons of educational attainment, Journal Monetary Economics, 32, 363-394.
Barro, R.J. (1996), Determinants of economic growth: A cross-country empirical study, NBER working paper No.5698.
Barro, R.J. and X.X. Sala-i-Martin (1992), Covergence, Journal of Political Economy, 100, 223-251.
Battese, G.E. and T.J. Coelli (1992), Frontier productions, 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. 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., D.S.P. Rao and C.J. O’Donnell (2004), A metafrontier production function for estimation of technical efficiencies and technology gaps for firms operating under different technologies, Journal of Productivity Analysis, 21, 91-103.
Battese, G.E. and D.S.P. Rao and D. Walujadi (2001), Technical efficiency and productivity of garment firms in different regions in Indonesia: A stochastic frontier analysis using a time-varying inefficiency model and a metaproduction function, CEPA Working Paper, No. 7/2001, Centre for Efficiency and Productivity Analysis, School of Economics, University of New England, Armidale, pp.26.
Baumol, W.J. (1986), Productivity growth, convergence and welfare: What the long-run data show, American Economic Review, 76, 1072-1085.
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, Economic Studies Quarterly, 43, 298-312.
Caselli, F., G. Esquivel and F. Lefort (1996), Reopening the convergence debate: A new look at cross-country growth empirics, Journal of Economic Growth, 1, 363-390.
Caves, D.W., L.R. Christensen and W.E. Diewert (1982), The economic theory of index numbers and the measurement of input, output, and productivity, Econometrica, 50, 1393-1414.
Chang, C.C. and Y.H. Luh (2000), Efficiency change and growth in productivity: The Asian growth experience, Journal of Asian Economics, 10, 551-570.
Collins, S. and B. Bosworth (1997), Economic growth in East Asia: Accumulation versus assimilation, Brookings Papers in Economic, 2, 135-203.
Cook, P. and Y. Uchida (2002), Productivity growth in East Asia: A reappraisal, Applied Economics, 34, 1195-1207.
Cornwell, C., P. Schmidt and R.C. Sickles (1990), Production frontiers with cross-sectional and time-series variation in efficiency levels, Journal of Econometrics, 46, 185-200.
De Long, J.B. (1988), Productivity growth, convergence and welfare: comment, American Economic Review, 78, 1138-1154.
Duffy, J. and C. Papageorgiou (2000), A cross-country empirical investingation of the aggregate production function specification, Journal of Economic Growth, 5, 87-120.
Durlauf, S.N. and P.A.Johnston (1995), Multiple regimes and cross-country growth behavior, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 10, 365-384.
Durlauf, S.N., A. Kourtellos and A. Minkin (2001), The local Solow growth model, European Economic Review, 45, 928-940.
Efron, B. and R.J. Tibshirani (1993), An introduction to the bootstrap, monographs on statistics and applied probability, 57, Chapman and Hall, London.
Esfahani, H.S. (1991), Exports, imports, and economic growth in semi-industrialized countries, Journal of Development Economics, 35, 93-116.
Evans, A.D., C.J. Green, and V. Murinde (2002), Human capital and financial development in economic growth: New evidence using the translog production function, International Journal of Finance and Economics, 7, 123-140.
Färe, R., S. Grosskopf, M. Norris and Z. Zhang (1994), Productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change in industrialized countries, American Economic Review, 84, 66-83.
Fischer, S. (1993), The role of macroeconomic factors in growth, Journal of Monetary Economics, 32, 485-512.
Granger, C.W.J. and P. Newbold (1974), Spurious regressions in econometrics, Journal of Econometrics, 2, 111-120.
Greenaway, D. and D. Sapsford (1994), What does liberalization do for exports and growth?, Weltwirschaftliches Archives, 130, 152-174.
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.
Han, G., K.P. Kalirajan and N. Singh (2002), Productivity and economic growth in East Asia: Innovation, efficiency and accumulation, Japan and the World Economy, 14, 401-424.
Han, G., K.P. Kalirajan and N. Singh (2004), Productivity, efficiency and economic growth: East Asia and the rest of the world, Journal of Developing Areas, 37, 99-117.
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, American Economic Review, 60, 895-911.
Hayami, Y. and V.W. Ruttan (1971), Agricultural Development: An International Perspective, Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
Ho, T.W. (2006), Income Thresholds and growth convergence: A panel data approach, The Manchester School, 74, 170-189.
Huang, C.J. and J.T. Liu (1994), Estimation of a non-neutral stochastic frontier production function, Journal of Productivity Analysis, 5, 171-180.
Hsieh, C.T. (1999), Productivity growth and factor prices in East Asia, American Economic Review, 89, 133-138.
Hsieh, C.T. (2002), What explains the industrial revolution in East Asia? Evidence from the factor markets, American Economic Review, 92, 502-526.
Islam, N. (1995), Growth Empirics: a panel data approach, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110, 1127-1170.
Jeon, B.M. and R.C. Sickles (2004), The role of environmental factors in growth accounting, Journal of Applied Economics, 19, 567-591.
Kalirajan, K.P., M.B. Obwona and S, Zhao (1996), A decomposition of total factor productivity growth: The case of Chinese agricultural growth before and after reforms, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 78, 331-338.
Kawagoe, T. and Y. Hayami (1985), An intercountry comparison of agricultural production efficiency, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 67, 87-92.
Kawagoe, T., Y. Hayami and V.W. Ruttan (1985), The intercountry agricultural production function and productivity differences among countries, Journal of Development Economics, 19, 113-132.
Kim, J.I. and L. Lau (1994), The sources of economic growth in the East Asian newly industrialized countries, Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 8, 235-271.
Krüger, J.J. (2003), The global trends of total factor productivity: Evidence from the nonparametric Malmquist index approach, Oxford Economic Paper, 55, 265-286.
Kumbhakar, S.C. (1990), Production frontiers, panel data, and time-varying technical inefficiency, Journal of Econometrics, 46, 201-212.
Kumbhakar, S.C. and C.A.K. Lovell (2000), Stochastic Frontier Analysis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.
Kumbhakar, S.C. and H.J. Wang (2005), Estimation of growth convergence using a stochastic production frontier approach, Economics Letters, 88, 300-305.
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.
Lee, Y.H. and P. Schmidt (1993), A production frontier model with flexible temporal variation in technical inefficiency, in H.O. Fried, C.A.K. Lovell, and S.S. Schmidt, eds., The Measurement of Productive Efficiency: Techniques and Applications, New York: Oxford University Press.
Liu, Z. and T. Stengos (1999), Nonlinearity in cross-country growth regressions: A semiparametric approach, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 14, 527-538.
Lucas, R.E. (1988), On the mechanics of economic development, Journal of Monetary Economics, 22, 3-42.
Mankiw, N.G., D. Romer and D.N. Weil (1992), A contribution to the empirics of economic growth, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107, 407-437.
Marti, C. (1996), Is there an East Asian miracle?, Union Bank of Switzerland Economic Research Working Paper, (October).
Meeusen, W. and J. van den Broeck (1977), “Efficiency Estimation form Cobb-Douglas Production Functions with Composed Error,” International Economic Review, 18, 435-444.
Moschos, D. (1989), Export expansion, growth, and the level of economic development, Journal of Development Economics, 30, 93-102.
Mundlak, Y. and R. Hellinghausen (1982), The intercountry agricultural production function: Another view, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 64, 664-672.
Neyman, J. and E.L. Scott (1948), Consistent estimateon from partially consistent observations, Econometrica, 16, 1-32.
Park, J.H. and P.B. Prime (1997), Export performance and growth in China: A cross-provincial analysis, Applied Economics, 29, 1353-1363.
Porter, M. (1990), The Competitive Advantage of Nations, New York: Free Press.
Quah, D. (1993), Galton’s fallacy and test of the convergence hypothesis, Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 95, 427-443.
Rao, D.S.P., C.J. O’Donnell and G.E. Battese (2003), Metafrontier functions for the study of inter-regional productivity differences, CEPA Working Paper, No. 01/2003, Centre for Efficiency and Productivity Analysis, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Rao, D.S.P. (2006), Metafrontier frameworks for the study of firm-level efficiencyes and technology gaps, presented at Conference on Productivity and Efficiency, March, Taipei, Taiwan, 21- 49.
Romer, P.M. (1986), Increasing returns and long-run growth, Journal of Political Economy, 94, 1002-1037.
Romer, P.M. (1990), Endogenous technological change, Journal of Political Economy, 98, 71-102.
Ruttan, V.W., H.P. Binswanger, Y. Hayami, W.W. Wade and A. Weber (1978), Factor productivity and growth: A historical interpretation, in Induced Innovation: Technology, Institution, and Developments, Binswanger, H.P. and V.W. Ruttan, eds., Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
Sala-i-Martin, X.X. (1996), Regional cohesion: Evidence and rheories of regional growth and convergence, European Economic Review, 40, 1325-1352.
Sharma, K.R. and P.S. Leung (2002), Technical efficiency of carp pond culture in South Asia: An application of stochastic meta-production frontier model, Aquaculture Economics and Management, 4, 169-189.
Simar, L. and P.W. Wilson (1998), Sensitivity analysis of efficiency scores: How to bootstrap in nonparametric frontier models, Management Science, 44, 49-61.
Solow, R.M. (1957), Technical change and the aggregate production function, Review of Economics and Statistics, 39, 312-320.
Sun, C.H. (2004), Market imperfection and productivity growth─Alternative estimates for Taiwan, Journal of Productivity Analysis, 22, 5-27.
Temple, J.R.W. (1998), Robustness test of augment Solow model, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 13, 361-375.
Wu, Y. (2004), Openness, productivity and growth in the APEC economies, Empirical Economics, 29, 593-604.
Young, A. (1992), A tale of two cities: Factor accumulation and technical change in Hong Kong and Singapore, NBER Macroeconomic Annual, NIT Press, Cambridge, 13-54.
Young, A. (1994), Lessons from the East Asian NICs: A contrarian view, European Economic Review, 38, 964-973.
Young, A. (1995), The tyranny of numbers: Confronting the statistical realities of the East Asian growth experience, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110, 641-680.
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2007-08-29公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2007-08-29起公開。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2281 或 來信