近年來中國在經濟上的成就是有目共賭的，並儼然成為帶動世界經濟成長的重要推動力。為因應社會主義市場經濟的建立和發展，並解決原稅制與市場經濟發展不相配合的問題，中國自1980年起進行多次的財政改革，將中央政府的財政權力下放給地方政府。也由於此一「財政分權」的設計，加強地方政府發展經濟的財政誘因，不但帶動了地方經濟的發展，也因地方財政收入增加而提高了地方公共財的投資，更進一步的促進經濟成長。然而，隨著地方經濟的發展和勢力的壯大，「先發地區」政府利用其經濟優勢，向中央或上級政府爭取更多的政策優惠和發展資源；但對於「後發地區」政府，由於經濟落後，因而與中央談判的籌碼不多，致使各地方政府分配到的財政資源殊異。 本篇文章之主要研究目的，即為探討改革開放後中國地方財政不均度對經濟成長的影響。本研究將利用1979年至2006年的時間序列資料來分析，中國地方財政分配不均度對於其經濟成長是否呈現正向的貢獻。於本研究中，將回顧現有文獻中，關於地方財政分配不均度對經濟成長影響之相關理論與實證文獻。其次，本文也將清楚地介紹與說明，改革開放以來中國地方財政分配不均度與其經濟成長間關係之現況。再者，本研究將建立九組實證模型，並透過共整合ARDL模型來試圖捕捉到更全面性的中國地方財政不均度與其經濟成長之關係。本文主要發現可分為長期與短期兩部分。先就長期而言，中國地方財政不均度對其經濟成長有著顯著且為正向的關係。再就短期而言，中國地方財政不均度對其經濟成長則呈現不顯著或顯著且為正向的關係。最後，為了降低實證模型發生錯誤的機會，並使研究過程更為嚴謹，本研究將對實證模型和估計結果使用更多方法檢定。 / The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of regional fiscal distribution inequality on the economic growth in post-reform China. By using of the time-series data during the period of 1979-2006, this study analyzes whether or not China’s regional fiscal distribution inequality provides a positive effect for economic growth. Both theoretical papers and empirical papers related to the relationship between regional fiscal distribution inequality and economic growth are reviewed. This study establishes nine empirical models and are estimated by ARDL with cointegration model which attempts to catch the relationship more comprehensively between regional fiscal distribution inequality and the economic growth in China. The main finding of this study is that China’s regional fiscal distribution inequality has the significantly positive effect on its economic growth in the long run. In the short run, China’s regional fiscal distribution inequality has the significantly positive effect or not has an effect on its economic growth. Finally, in order to reduce the mistakes occurred in positive models and enable the study more rigorous, this study uses more methods to test the models and the result.

1992年鄧小平「南巡」之後，上海房地產業頓時成為全世界投資者所矚目的焦點。伴隨著上海經濟的急速成長、房地產市場的豐厚利潤、以及對人民幣升值的強烈預期，境外資金不斷湧入上海市進行房地產投資。節節高升的房價最終造成中國政府的注意，限制外資進入房地產市場成為大陸宏觀調控的重點。然而外資是否為房價高漲的主因，至今為止依然是爭論不休。到底外資是大陸房地產價格居高不下的罪魁禍首，還是宏觀調控政策下的代罪羔羊，為了清楚了解FDI對大陸房地產價格到底造成何種影響，本文主要研究目的主要有以下兩點：一為探討FDI金額的變動對上海房地產價格波動是否造成影響，二為研究影響上海房價波動的總體經濟因素為何。 根據實證結果顯示，就長期關係而言，外商直接投資、物價、利率、匯率、收入，皆與房價呈現正向關係，股價則與房價呈現反向關係。就短期關係而言，影響房價的因素有外商直接投資、利率、收入、以及房價本身，以上皆與房價呈現正向關係；整體而言短期物價對房價沒有顯著影響，但就個別月份而言，落後兩期的物價指數與房價指數呈現反向關係；短期匯率波動對房價的影響相互抵銷，加總後的影響效果為零，而短期股價則對房價沒有顯著影響，宏觀調控脈絡下的「限外令」並沒能使房市降溫。總的來說，外商直接投資雖對房價有正向影響，但影響最劇的因素卻是匯率與利率，因此外商直接投資並非上海房價飆漲的罪魁禍首，亦不是宏觀調控政策下的代罪羔羊。大陸政府拿外資開刀，其目的不外乎是為了「殺雞儆猴」，借此達到抑制房價的目的。 / The real estate has become a burgeoning industry in Shanghai since the Mainland deceased leader Deng Xiao-ping made his remarkable inspection tour of the South in 1992. Due to the fast growing market and desirable profit, uncountable foreign capital has flowed into the real estate industry of Shanghai. Housing prices have soared and already drew the attention of the authorities, which causes the restraint on real estate investment. Does foreign capital matter to real estate prices? What economic factors cause the movement of real estate prices? The purposes of this paper are to investigate the relationship between foreign direct investment and real estate prices of Shanghai. The empirical result shows: FDI, CPI, interest rate, exchange rate and income have significant positive effects on real estate prices in the long run. Nevertheless, stock market has significant negative effect. In the short run, however, FDI, interest rate, income and housing price itself have significant positive effects on real estate prices. In addition, overall CPI has no effect on real estate prices while some individual months of CPI have negative effect; exchange rate and stock market also have no effect on real estate prices in general. Furthermore, the policy of restraining foreign capital on real estate investment does not induce declining housing prices. To sum up, exchange rate is the main reason that affects real estate prices of Shanghai. FDI is not the “chief criminal” nor a scapegoat, neither. Penalizing the foreign capital is simply a warning from the Mainland government to seize the “hot money” in the real estate market.

1978年中國大陸改革開放，吹皺經濟市場一池春水。住房公有制、住房福利制觀念相繼被打破，揭開房產制度改革曙光。鄧小平在1992年南巡講話後，定調「有中國特色社會主義市場經濟」的基本路線，從根本上解決市場經濟意識形態問題，自此中國大陸房地產市場活水澈底被激發。近十餘年來，中國大陸全國商品房平均價格從2000年2,112元人民幣，攀升至2010年5,032元人民幣，部分重點城市如北京、上海、廣州..等更早已突破萬元人民幣大關。 房產市場不對稱發展加深中國大陸社會結構性矛盾與衝突對立，高房價顯然無益其國內經濟健全發展，這也讓大陸中央不得不正視此一嚴肅問題積極採取宏觀調控手段，企圖壓制漲勢不斷的房價期能消彌廣大民怨。而與之同時因為覬覦中國大陸經濟高速發展背後廣大利益而競相投入中國市場的外資也就格外引起大陸政府的關注，因為「外資炒房」的傳言與疑慮一直困擾著中共當局，在高房價、高民怨的氛圍壟罩下，產官學界檢討外資聲浪甚囂塵上；然而，高房價的背後是否一定有外資刻意炒作？值得探究與思考。 本研究嘗試以中國大陸天津做為觀察標的，運用共整合ARDL模型探討外商直接投資（FDI）對房地產價格波動的影響，釐清外資在房地產價格所扮演的角色。實證模型並納入物價指數（CPI）、人均收入（INC）、貸款利率（INT）、匯率（EXC）與股價（STOCK）為解釋變數，以做為觀察總體經濟因素對大陸房地產市場的影響。實證結果表明，在短期關係上外資的確有拉抬房價效果，不過長期關係影響並不顯著，顯示外資不是實際推升房地產價格的主因，角色定位應為「從犯」而非「主嫌」。研究結果並發現，匯率變動對房地產價格有著顯著實質影響，這意味如果大陸政府要運用匯率這項工具來抑制漲勢不斷的房價，就必須讓人民幣適時升值。不過目前中國大陸仍屬以出口導向為大宗的國家，長期而言，人民幣升值將對其出口造成某種程度衝擊，是以在匯率政策的操作上恐陷入兩難（升值或貶值)的困境。 / The reform and opening in mainland China in 1978 had fretted the surface of the water of the economic market. The concepts of public housing and housing welfare system had been broken, leading to a line of hope in the reform of the house property system. After Xiaoping Deng's speech during his south tour, he set up the basic route of the "socialism market economy with Chinese features", resolving the market economy ideology issue from the root. Since then, the house property market in Chine has been activated. In the recent decade, the average price of commercial residential buildings had increased from YMB$2,112 in 2000 to YMB$5,032 in 2010. In major cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou, the prices had already went over YMB$10,000. The asymmetric development of the house property market has further caused structural conflicts and confrontations in Mainland China. Apparently, high housing prices were not beneficial to the sound development of the domestic economy. And thus the central government in Mainland China had to face up to this serious problem and aggressively took the microscope controlling measure in the attempt to suppress the increasing housing prices to resolve people's complaints. In the mean time, under the desire for the great profits behind the rapid development of the economy in Mainland China, foreign funds had entered the Chinese market one by one, getting some extra attention of the Chinese government. Because the rumor of "foreign funds in real estate speculation" and some doubles had continuously bothered the Chinese government, under the atmosphere with high housing prices and high social grievance, requests for reviewing foreign funds in the industrial, governmental, academic, and research circles were very broad. However, whether there was real estate speculation with foreign funds behind high housing prices is worth thinking and studying. Using Tianjin City in Mainland China as a target for observation, this study attempted to apply the autoregressive ARDL model to explore the influences of foreign direct investment (FDI) on price changes in housing property, in order to clarify the role foreign funds play in real estate prices. The independent variables included in the model were consumer price index (CPI), per capita income (INC), loan interest (INT), exchange rate (EXC), and stock price (STOCK), in order to observe the influences of the macro economical factors on the Chinese real estate market. According to the empirical results, in the short run, foreign funds could indeed drive up housing prices. However, in the long run, the influence was not significant. This means foreign funds are not the main cause driving up real estate prices. The role they played was a "partner in crime" instead of a "main suspect". The study found that there was indeed a significant and substantial influence of exchange rate changes on real estate prices, meaning that if the Chinese government would like to surprise increasing housing prices using exchange rates as a tool, it is necessary to allow YMB appreciation. However, currently, Mainland China is still a country with mainly exports. In the long run, YMB appreciation may lead to certain impact on China's exportation. Therefore, operating exchange rate related policies may lead to a dilemma (to appreciate or depreciate).

2006年，中國大陸國務院將天津定位為北方經濟中心，天津的金融發展加速，金融機構家數及存貸款餘額不斷增加。當金融市場完善，有助降低交易成本使資金的融通管道暢通，居民可透過金融市場融通資金來從事更多消費，因此本研究目的為探討金融發展是否也是影響居民消費及恩格爾係數的因素。 本研究以金融深化程度及銀行效率指標兩項金融發展指標，來衡量天津的金融發展程度。實證結果顯示，短期下實質人均儲蓄、都市化程度對居民消費有負向影響；物價指數、實質人均GDP、實質人均可支配年收入與金融深化程度對居民消費有正向影響，銀行效率則對居民消費無影響；而長期下，實質人均儲蓄與都市化程度對消費有負向影響，物價指數、實質人均可支配年收入及銀行效率對消費有正向影響，金融深化程度及實質人均GDP則與居民消費無影響。 在恩格爾係數方面，短期下依賴比、實質人均可支配年收入對居民消費有負向影響；金融深化程度、都市化程度對居民消費有正向影響。長期下金融深化程度對恩格爾係數無影響，但銀行效率卻對恩格爾係數有正向影響。依賴比與實質人均可支配年收入呈負向關係，但金融發展程度與銀行效率對居民消費確實有促進作用。最後本研究建議天津政府除了積極促進消費的同時，也應致力於提高居民實質人均可支配年收入水準及提高銀行資金運用效率。 / In 2006, The State Council in China set Tianjin as the economic center in the northway of China., the financial development in Tianjin has speeded up. The numbers of the financial institutions and the balance of deposit and loan have risen up. When the financial market becomes mature that will reduce the transaction cost and consumers will have more financial accesses and opportunities to finance. Therefore, this paper is aimed to discuss whether the financial development is a factor that influence the consumption and Engel’s coefficient or not. This paper used two financial development indicators to measure the financial development in Tianjin- Financial irrelevant ratio (FIR) ,and bank efficiency. The empirical results shows that real personal savings, and urbanization have negative influence on consumption whereas the price index, real GDP per capita, real personal disposal income and financial irrelevant ratio have positive influence on consumption and banking efficiency has no influence on consumption in the short run. In the long run, however, real personal savings and urbanization have negative influence on consumption but price index, real personal disposal income and banking efficiency have the positive influence on consumption. But financial irrelevant ratio and real GDP per capita have no influence on consumption. In the Engel’s coefficient aspect, dependency ratio and real personal disposal income have negative influence. The Financial irrelevant ratio, urbanization and food price index have positive influence in the short run. In the long run, financial irrelevant ratio has no significant influence on Engel’s coefficient but banking efficiency has positive influence on consumption. Dependency ratio and real personal disposal income have negative influence on consumption. Therefore, this paper finds out that the FIR and the bank efficiency have pushed up the consumption in the short run and long run respectively. This paper recommends that the Tianjin’s government should not only to push up the consumption but also should be dedicated to raise up the personal disposal income and banking efficiency.