台灣是一個小型開放的經濟體，整體經濟的發展，受國際貿易的影響相當大，其中美國又是台灣最主要的出口國，因此探討過去台灣產業在美國市場競爭力的變化，將有助於檢討台灣的經濟發展政策。
    本研究以實質匯率代表競爭力，依據經濟學家的定義，實質匯率其實就是國內外相對物價經名目匯率調整後的結果。依據經濟學原理，若總體需求不變，則物價取決於供給面。供給面愈強者，物價水準愈低；反之，供給面較弱國家的物價水準即愈高。因此，實質匯率是一種指標，可比較兩個國家競爭力的差異。當實質匯率上升時，表示本國的生產力相對外國的生產力提升，也就是說，本國的競爭力的提升相對優於外國的競爭力。
    本文以美國生產者物價指數代表國外物價，以台灣躉售物價指數代表國內物價，以政府消費性支出、貿易條件、開放程度及生產力代表控制變數，以國際收支帳中的外人來台直接投資、證券投資及其他投資代表國際資本移動變數，實證探索1990年至2009年間，國際資本流入對台灣產業競爭力的影響，利用實質匯率概念所計得的產業競爭力指標的迴歸方程式估計結果顯示，證券股權投資對提升產業競爭力有顯著的正面影響。利用標準化變數所估計的結果顯示，影響程度最大者為證券股權投資，其次為直接投資。

Taiwan is a small open economy, and the international trade has a great impact on the overall economic development. The United States is Taiwan’s main exporter, so exploring changes of the competitiveness of Taiwan's industry in the United States will help to review Taiwan’s economic development policies.
In this study, real exchange rate represents competitiveness. According to economists’ definition, real exchange rate is the outcome adjusted by the relative prices between domestics and foreign through nominal exchange rate. Based on principles of economics, if the aggregate demand is fixed, the price level depends on the aggregate supply. Therefore, the more the aggregate supply, the lower the price level. On the other hand, the less the aggregate supply, the higher the price level. Hence, real exchange rate is an indicator which compares competitiveness between two countries. Increasing real exchange rate represents that domestic productivity is higher than foreign productivity. That is to say, domestics are more competitive than foreign.  
This thesis uses the producer price index in the U.S. to represent the foreign price level, and the wholesale price index in Taiwan to represent the domestic price level. The control variables includes government consumption expenditure, terms of trade, trade openness and productivity. The variables of international capital inflows includes foreign direct investments, portfolio investments and other investments appear in the financial account of the balance of payments. This thesis empirically explores the effects of the various types of international capital inflows on the competitiveness of Taiwan’s industry during the period between 1990 and 2009. Adopting the concept of real exchange rate as proxy for the competitiveness index, regression analysis has shown that portfolio investments has brought about significant positive effects. Regression analysis using standardized variables reveals that the magnitudes of the effects of the four types capital inflows vary whereas the portfolio investments plays the most important role while the foreign direct investments the second.

目錄
頁次
表目錄 III
圖目錄 IV
第一章  緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機	 1
1.2 台灣產業的現況 7
1.3 本文研究架構 10
第二章  文獻回顧與本文研究方法 12
2.1 國家競爭力與國際資本移動 12
2.1.1 實質匯率與國家競爭力	12
2.1.2 國際資本移動的演變與型態 13
2.2 國際資本移動與實質匯率的實證研究	17
2.2.1 經濟理論中均衡實質匯率的決定 17
2.2.2 實質匯率的實證研究 21
2.2.3 本文研究方法	 24
2.3 實證模型與估計程序 24
2.3.1 實證模型 24
2.3.2 本文實證估計程序 26
第三章  實證研究	28
3.1 資料來源與特徵 28
3.1.1 產業競爭力變數 29
3.1.2 解釋變數 30
3.1.3 控制變數 37
3.2 國際資本移動影響的實證估計 41
3.2.1 國際資本移動對競爭力指標的實證結果 41
3.2.2 各種資本移動影響程度之比較 53
3.2.3 實證結果小結 55
第四章  結論 59
參考文獻	61

表目錄
頁次
表3-1 研究資料來源(台灣經濟新報TEJ)	28
表3-2 經濟變數敘述統計資料表 29
表3-3 控制變數相關係數矩陣表 41
表3-4 國際資本移動對競爭力影響之實證估計結果	43
表3-5國際資本移動對競爭力影響之實證估計結果(落後一期) 47
表3-6 標準化後國際資本移動對競爭力影響之實證估計結果 54
表3-7 實證估計結果彙整表 56

圖目錄
頁次
圖1-1 台灣地區產業競爭力指標走勢圖 6
圖3-1 直接投資與競爭力指標走勢比較圖	32
圖3-2 證券股權投資與競爭力指標走勢比較圖 32
圖3-3 證券債權投資與競爭力指標走勢比較圖 33
圖3-4 其他投資與競爭力指標走勢比較圖 34
圖3-5 證券投資與競爭力指標走勢比較圖 35
圖3-6 直接投資+證券股權投資與競爭力指標走勢比較圖 36
圖3-7 其他投資+證券債權投資與競爭力指標走勢比較圖 37
圖3-8 政府消費性支出佔GDP比率與競爭力指標走勢比較圖 38
圖3-9 開放程度與競爭力指標走勢比較圖 39
圖3-10 生產力與競爭力指標走勢比較圖 40
圖3-11 貿易條件與競爭力指標走勢比較圖 40


 

中文部份：

1 杜震華、薛琦，”直接外來投資與台灣的固定投資”，經濟論文，
  民國78年3月，中央研究院經濟研究所，頁63-92
2.吳昕育(2000)，「開發中國家的資本移動性之研究─以韓國、台灣
  為實證研究」，中山大學中山學術研究所未發表碩士論文。
3.邱魏頌正、黃秋閔(2004)，「外人直接投資、貿易與經濟成長─東
  亞與拉丁美洲實證之研究」。
  http://203.72.2.115/Ejournal/3042050103.pdf
4.邱正雄(2001)，”「臺灣處理亞洲金融危機之經驗與當代金融架構
  下短期資本移動對新興市場經濟的影響」”，國家政策研究基金
  會，2002年11月13日。
  http://old.npf.org.tw/PUBLICATION/FM/090/FM-R-090-057.htm
5.許振明、劉完淳(2002)，”金融發展在經濟成長中的角色-台灣與
  韓國的實證研究”，國家政策研究基金會，2002年11月13日。 
  http://www.npf.org.tw/particle-3627-2.html
6.許振明、陳沛柔(2007)，”低利率時代私募基金盛行與貨幣金融政
  策之因應”，國家政策研究基金會，2007年5月16日。 
  http://www.npf.org.tw/particle-2456-2.html
7.彭惠琴(2001)，「資本移動對匯率的影響—台灣的實證研究」 
  http://yaya.it.cycu.edu.tw/course/grad_proj/90/%E5%BD%AD%
  E6%83%A0%E7%90%B4.pdf
8.賈昭南(2009)，「國際金融市場與理論」，台中：滄海書局，初
  版。

英文部份：

1.Baffes, John, Ibrahim A. Elbadawi, and Stephen A. O’
  Connell, (1999). “Single Equation Estimation of the 
  Equilibrium Real Exchange Rate, in L. E. Hinkle and P. J. 
  Montiel, eds. Exchange Rate Misalignment: Concept and 
  Measurement for Developing Countries (New York, N.Y.: 
  Oxford University Press), ch.10, 405-464.
2.Bekaert, Geert, Campbell R. Harvey and Christian 
  Lundblad, (2005). “Does Financial Liberalization Spur 
  Growth?,” Journal of Financial Economics vol.77(1), pp. 
  3-55.
3.Bhagwati, Jagdish, (1998). “The Capital Myth: The 
  Difference Between Trades in Widgets and Dollars,” 
  Foreign Affairs, vol. 7, no. 3, pp.7-12.
4.Damyana Bakardzhieva,Sami Ben Naceur,and Bassem Kamar
 (2010).”The Impact of Capital and Foreign Exchange Flows 
 on the Competitiveness of Developing Countries,” IMF 
 working paper, WP/10/154.
5.Dickey, David A. and Wayne A. Fuller, (1981).
 “Likelihood Ratio Statistics for Autoregressive Time 
  Series with a Unit Root,” Econometrica, vol.49, no.4, 
  1057-1072.
6.Doroodian K., Chulho Jung, and Ahmet Yucel, (2002).
 “Estimating the Equilibrium Real Exchange Rate: The Case 
  of Turkey,” Applied Economics, vol.14, 1807-1812.
7.Edwards, Sebastian, (2007). “Capital Controls, Capital 
  Flow Contractions, and Macroeconomic Vulnerability,” 
  NBER Working Papers No.12852.
8.Edwards, Sebastian, (2007). “Crises and Growth: A Latin 
  American Perspective,” NBER Working Paper No. 13019.
9.Engle, Robert F. and C. W. J. Granger, (1987). “Co-
  integration and Error Correction: Representation, 
  Estimation, and Testing,” Econometrica, vol.55, No.2, 
  251-276.
10.Fabin Nsengiyumva, (1999). “External Real Exchange 
  Rates: Purchasing Power Parity, the Mundell-Fleming 
  Model, and Competitiveness in Traded Goods,” in L. E. 
  Hinkle and P. J. Montiel, eds. Exchange Rate 
  Misalignment: Concept and Measurement for Developing 
  Countries (New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press), ch. 
  2,41-111.
11.Feyzioglu, Tarhan, (1997). “Estimating the Equilibrium 
   Real Exchange Rate: An Application to Finland,” IMF 
   working paper, WP/97/109.
12.Fischer, Stanley, (1998). “Capital Account 
   Liberalization and the Role of the IMF,” in “Should 
   the IMF Pursue Capital-Account Convertability?” Essay 
   in International Finance, Department of Economics, 
   Princeton University, vol. 207, pp.1-10.
13.Fischer, Stanley, (1993). “The Role of Macroeconomic 
   Factors in Growth,” NBER Working Paper No. W4565
14.Fuller, Wayne A., (1976). Introduction to Statistical 
   Time Series (New York, N.Y.: John Wiley & Sons)
15.Harberger, Arnold C. (1950). “Currency Depreciation, 
   Income, and The Balance of Trade,” Journal of Political 
   Economy, vol. 58, pp. 47-60.
16.Hinkle, Lawrence E. and Peter J. Montiel, (eds.) 
   (1999).Exchange Rate Misalignment: Concept and 
   Measurement for Developing Countries (New York, N.Y.: 
   Oxford University Press).
17.Holden, Darryl and Roger Perman, (1994). “Unit Roots 
   and Cointegration for Economist,” in B. Rao, (ed.) 
   Cointegration for the Applied Economist (New York, N.Y.: 
   St. Martin’s Press) ch.2, 47-112.
18.Johnson, R. Barry and Yan Sun, (1997). “Some Evidence 
   on Exchange Rate Determination in Major Industrial  
   Countries,: IMF working paper, WP/97/98.
19.Klein, Michael and Giovanni Olivei, (2005). “Capital   
   Account Liberalization, Financial Depth, and Economic 
   Growth,” NBER Working Papers No. 7384.
20.Kose, M. Ayhan, Eswar Prassad, Kenneth Rogoff, and Shang-   Jin Wei, (2006). “Financial Globalization: A 
   Reappraisal,” NBER Working Paper No.12484
21.Laursen, Svend. and Lloyd A. Metzler (1950). “Flexible 
   Exchange Rates and The Theory of Employment,” Review of 
   Economics and Statistics, vol. 32, pp.281-299.
22.Lee, Minsoo, Mudziviri Nziramasanga, and Sung K. Ahn, 
   (2002). “The Real Exchange Rate: An Alternative 
   Approach to the PPP Puzzle,” Journal of Policy 
   Modeling, vol.24, 533-538.
23.Levine, Ross (1992). “Financial Intermediary Service 
   and Growth,” Journal of The Japanese and International 
   Economics, vol. 6, pp. 383-405.
24.MacDonald, Ronald and Luca Ricci, (2003). “Estimation   
   of the Equilibrium Real Exchange Rate for South 
   Africa,” IMF working paper, WP/03/44.
25.Michaely，M.(1977). “Exports And Growth：An Empirical 
   Investigation,” Journal of Development Economics, 
   vol.4, p49-53.
26.Obstfeld, Maurice and Kenneth Rogoff, (1995). “Exchange 
   Rate Dynamic Redux,” Journal of Political 
  Economy, vol.103, 624-660.
27.Prasad Eswar S., Raghuram Fajan (2008). “A Pragmatic 
   Approach to Capital Account Liberalization,” NBER 
   Working Papers No. 14051.
28.Quinn, Dennis P. (2003). “Capital Account 
   Liberalization and Financial Globalization, 1890-1999: A 
   Synopic View,” International Journal of Finance and 
   Economies vol.8(3), pp.189-204.
29.Rao, Bahaskara, (ed.)(1994). Cointegration for the 
   Applied Economist (New York, N.Y.: St. Martin’s Press)
30.Rodrik, Dani, (1998). “Who Needs Capital-Account 
   Convertability?” Essay in International Finance No. 207 
   (Princton, New Jersey: Princeton University).
31.Rogoff, Kenneth, (1996). “The Purchasing Power Parity 
   Puzzle,” Journal of Economic Literature, vol.34, no.2, 
   647-68.
32.Sarno, Lucio and Mary P. Taylor, (2002). “Purchasing 
   Power Parity and the Real Exchange Rate,” IMF Staff 
   Paper, vol.49, no.1, 65-105.
33.Stigliz, Joseph, (2000). “Capital Market 
   Liberalization, Economic Growth, and Instability,” 
   World Development, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 1075-86.
34.Summers, Lawrence H. (2000). “International Financial 
   Crises: Causes, Prevention, and Cures,” American 
   Economic Review vol. 90(2), pp. 1-16.