微型金融機構的發展與雙基線關係的研究

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：71

、訪客IP：3.133.141.71

姓名

陳重嘉(Chung-chia Chen) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

財務金融學系

論文名稱

微型金融機構的發展與雙基線關係的研究
(A Study of Microfinance Institutions’ Development and Double Bottom Line)

相關論文

★ 以資料包絡線分析法評估國內金融機構之經營效率	★ 我國企業員工行為守則分析--以新光金控為例
★ 理財專員的專業倫理探討	★ 證券投資信託業倫理議題的探討
★ 台資企業赴海外籌資之探討─以富士康科技個案為例	★ 大陸台商融資管道與操作模式分析-以個案企業為例
★ 本土銀行從事財富管理業務之現況與前景探討	★ 我國銀行業經營致勝的關鍵因素：公司治理、風險管理及競爭優勢的觀點
★ 新版巴賽爾協定下信用風險對中小企業授信行為之探討	★ 臺灣公司治理之探討-以銀行業為例
★ 以投資型保險作退休理財規劃	★ 連動債投資風險探討--C銀行一年期高收益型連動債個案研究
★ 信用評等機制與次級房貸危機	★ 私募股權基金之研究
★ 世代金融危機的比較:一九三○年代經濟大蕭條與二○○八年金融危機	★ 另類投資及其在資產配置中的地位

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

本文利用 MIX Market 的資料，以多元迴歸分析來探討微型金融機構社會績效和財務績效間的正負向關係，並且使用 CERISE 評等機構的社會績效評估準則和模型進行研究。被解釋變數部分是關於微型金融機構的財務指標，使用每員工負責的借款人數衡量其生產力、超過三十天的逾期貸款比率加上沖銷比例衡量其資產品質，以及營運費用比例衡量其效率。解釋變數以每位借款人平均貸款額度除以國民人均所得、女性借款人數比率、貸款利率、顧客回流率、員工週轉率以及借款人數為社會指標。本研究結果顯示營運在越偏遠貧窮的地方帶給微型金融機構愈大的生產力，但也會帶來較低的效率；貸款利率的減少也能增加借款人數，提高生產力；對員工的社會責任越好，可以提升機構的生產力和效率。本文對財務績效和社會績效相關性的結果有呈現負相關，也有呈現正相關，展現財務績效和社會績效兼容並存的一面。

摘要(英)

Adopting the data source from MIX Market and social performance criteria and model of CERISE rating agency, this paper studies the relationship between social performance and financial performance of Microfinance institutions(MFI) by using regression analysis. Dependent variables are about MFIs’ financial indicator: we use borrowers per staff member to measure productivity, portfolio at risk > 30 days plus write-off ratio to measure portfolio quality and operating expense ratio to measure efficiency. As to independent variables, we use average loan balance, percentage of female borrowers, yield, borrower retention rate, staff turnover rate and number of active borrowers as social indicators. Three results come out that: the remoter MFIs operate, the more productivity they have, but it also causes less efficiency; when yield is lower, it can increase active borrower to raise productive ; it can raise productivity and efficiency when social responsibility to staff is improved. This paper reveals negative and positive relationship between social performance and financial performance, and most importantly social performance and financial performance are compatible.

關鍵字(中)

★ 社會績效
★ 財務績效
★ 微型金融機構

關鍵字(英)

★ social performance
★ financial performance
★ microfinance institution

論文目次

摘要...........................I
ABSTRACT.......................II
誌謝...........................III
目錄...........................IV
圖目錄.........................V
表目錄.........................V
第一章緒論...................1
1-1　　研究背景和動機..........1
1-2　　研究目的................1
1-3　　研究架構................2
第二章微型金融機構的發展.....3
2-1　　微型金融機構的商業化....4
2-2　　商業化帶來的負面後果....5
第三章微型金融評等機構.......9
第四章實證研究...............14
4-1　　樣本與實證模型..........14
4-2　　實證結果................19
4-3　　小結....................27
第五章結論...................28
參考文獻.......................30

參考文獻

1. 穆罕默德‧尤努斯，打造富足新世界，曾育慧譯，初版，博雅書屋，台北市，民國九十七年。
2. Bédécarrats, F., S. Baur, and C. Lapenu (2011), “Combining Social and Financial Performance:A Paradox? ,” CERISE working paper.
3. Center for the Study of Financial Innovation (2011), Microfinance Banana Skins 2011, Losing its Fairy Dust, Heron, Dawson & Sawyer, UK.
4. Christen, R. P. (2001), “Commercialization and Mission Drift,” Occasional paper, CGAP , Washington D.C.
5. Chen, G., S. Rasmussen, X. Reille, and D. Rozas (2010), “Indian Microfinance Goes Public: The SKS Initial Public Offering,” CGAP report no. 65, Washington, D.C.
6. Cull, R., A. Demirguc-Kunt, and J. Morduch (2009), “Microfinance Meets the Market,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23(1), 167–192.
7. Dewez, D., and S. Neisa (2009), “MFI’s Social Performance Mapping and the
Relationship between Financial and Social Performance,” Incofin Investment
Management.
8. Fernando, N. A. (2004), “Micro Success Story: Transformation of Nongovernmental Organizations into Regulated Financial Institutions,” Manila: Asian Development Bank.
9. Gonzalez, A. (2010), “Microfinance Synergies and Trade-offs: Social versus Financial Performance Outcomes in 2008,” MIX Data Brief, No. 7.
10. Kumar, K. A. (2010), “Sustainability and Mission Drift in Microfinance: Empirical Studies on Mutual Exclusion of Double Bottom Lines,” Hanken School of Economics.
11. Lieberman, I. W., A. Anderson, Z. Grafe, B. Campbell, and D. Kopf (2008), “Microfinance and Capital Markets: The Initial Listing/ Public Offering of Four Leading Institutions,” Council of Microfinance Equity Funds.
12. Mersland, R., and R. Ø. Strøm (2010), “Microfinance Mission Drift? ,” World Development, Vol. 38(1), 28-36.
13. Nair, T. S. (2010), “Commercial Microfinance and Social Responsibility: A Critique,” Economic and Political Weekly , Vol. XLV, No. 31, 32-37.
14. Rhyne, E. (1998), “The Yin and Yang of Microfinance: Reaching the Poor and Sustainability,” MicroBanking Bulletin.
15. Rosenberg, R. (2007), “CGAP Reflections on the Compartamos Initial Public Offering: A Case Study on Microfinance Interest Rates and Profits,” CGAP report no. 42, Washington, D.C.
16. Schmidt, R. H. (2008), ”Microfinance, Commercialisation and Ethics,” Working Paper Series: Finance and Accounting, No. 194, Goethe-University, Frankfurt.

指導教授

邱慈觀(Tzu-Kuan Chiu)

審核日期

2012-7-16

推文