Our purpose is to examine: what should be the best subsidy mechanism which can reduce the lost from the asymmetric information problem whereas the administration performs a subsidy policy. We use the incentive contract theory to establish our models, and analyze different kinds of subsidy policy results. We prove that: compare with the partial equally subsidy, zero-subsidy and full-purchase subsidy, the partial discriminably subsidy is the best subsidy policy.

This dissertation examines in depth one of the potential causes of the low performance of foreign aid; in particular, the role incentive structures within international donor agencies could play in leading to “a push” to disburse money. This pressure to disburse money is termed as the “Money-Moving Syndrome”. In this dissertation, the “Money Moving Syndrome” exists when the quantity of foreign aid committed or disbursed becomes, in itself, an important objective side by side or above the effectiveness of aid. The theoretical analysis relies on the principal-agent theory to explore how donor agencies’ institutional incentive systems may affect the characteristics of an optimal and efficient incentive contract and thus give rise to the “Money-Moving Syndrome”. We adapted the basic framework developed in Baker (1992) to fit the organizational settings of international development agencies. The model concludes that the extent to which a performance measure based the amount of aid allocated within a specific period of time would lead to the “Money-Moving Syndrome” and affect aid effectiveness depends on the level of institutional imperatives for survival and growth, the degree of aid agency’s accountability for effectiveness, the level of corruption in recipient countries and the degree of difficulty to evaluate development activities. Due to data unavailability regarding other bilateral and multilateral aid agencies, the empirical framework tests several predictions of the theoretical model by examining whether money moving incentives affect World Bank’s decisions regarding project loan size in developing countries. Overall, the empirical results suggest that there seems to be some degree of “Money-Moving Syndrome” in effect within the World Bank.

This dissertation explores the issues of mixed oligopoly, restructuring, and M&A that occurs in turn on the stages of policy set-up, preparation, and performing when the government attempt to privatize the state-owned enterprises (SOEs). On the policy set-up stage, private firms in domestic market are not necessary confined to originate at home country. Foreign private firms may establish an oversea subsidiary and create a mixed oligopoly market structure at home country. In addition, those foreign private firms may not passively accept all the trade policies that came from the government decision of home country. Mixed oligopoly competition between one domestic public firm and one subsidiary of foreign private firm is been formulated to investigate the following questions: (1) how the agents compete under the cases that home country government adopts policies such as corporate tax rate, repatriation tax rate, and partial offering public stocks; and the foreign private firm implements strategies such as vertical integration and transfer pricing; (2) the impact on social welfare and the decision of optimal public stock-offering ratio while home country government¡¦s policies and foreign private firm¡¦s strategies have changed. New findings include (1) Home country government can not maximize social welfare by simply adopting strategic policies; (2) For home country government, the best strategy for privatizing SOEs maybe partial privatization; (3) For home country government, ¡§mass privatization¡¨ should be avoided as the means of manipulating domestic market shares. On the preparation stage, an incentive scheme model is designed to analyze the governance mechanism for improving SOEs¡¦ situation. First, different types of SOEs are classified according to their own ability and the employees¡¦ attitude for privatization. By offering a sound device of incentive scheme, the government is able to strengthen the SOEs¡¦ ability and employees¡¦ desirability. Within a one-stage symmetric information game framwork, it proves that SOEs with high ability and their employees with high privatization desirability can implement the highest amount of public stock offering ratio. Next, it utilizes a two-stage asymmetric game model for discussing how to improve the SOEs¡¦ ability and how to encourage the employees to support privatization. By providing an incentive contract, the government not only can coerce the SOEs but also can inspire their employees to reveal their true information. The due process of public stock offering is able to strengthen the abilities of SOEs via ¡§restructuring¡¨ on the one hand, and to facilitate the issue of ¡§training subsidies¡¨ for hatching the entrepreneurship of employees on the other hand. Finally, it investigates the impact on public stock offering ratio for the amount of specific grants, and found that the more generosity of incentive contract, the higher the public stock offering ratio. On the performing stage, it adopts the incentive theorem to analyze the outcome of SOEs¡¦ privatization by inviting a named firm. The named firm takes over the SOEs through M&A for the purpose of long-term operation. In order to encourage the employees of the privatized company working more aggressively, the named firm comes up incentive schemes including bonus-sharing and Employees Stock Ownership Plan, ESOP. It found that whether there exists information asymmetry or not between the named firm and the employees of the privatized company will affect the following decision-makings: the level of the employees¡¦ effort, the willingness of the employees¡¦ stock-holding, and the achievement of the named firm¡¦s profit maximizing objective. In particular, it shows that the change of the contents of the incentive schemes will affect the bargaining outcomes between the named firm and the trade union of the SOEs on the issue of working conditions after privatization.

基金經理人與投資人間的代理問題起源於兩者目標的不一致，前者要求個人薪酬財富的極大化，後者要求投資組合價值的極大化。造成目標歧異的原因有兩個：其一是在資訊不對稱的環境下，投資人無法觀察到經理人投資組合是否真正從投資人利益角度出發，因此引發了經理人的道德危險；其二是在競爭激烈的基金產業□，年度定期績效評比結果與經理人薪酬紅利多寡相連結等制度的設計，加重經理人選擇持有一個高風險投資組合的逆誘因，特別是期中累積績效較差的輸家，隨著年終總績效結算日期的接近，在自利動機的驅使下可能會透過較高的操作風險調整幅度，企圖扭轉頹勢以求反敗為勝。 本研究首先利用卡方檢定、t檢定與Logistic迴歸模式，實證國內基金經理人是否具有自利性風險調整的行為傾向，接著從契約設計的觀點，以理論模式推導命題的方式，探討三種不同型態的誘因費契約對於抑制經理人自利性風險調整行為的作用，並間接利用問卷調查的方式來驗證其效果。研究的結果發現： 1.國內基金經理人不管是贏家或輸家，在越接近年終總績效的結算時，都會偏向選擇一個高風險的操作水準，同時，上述特性在非外資型投信公司所發行的基金、新基金、小規模基金、資淺經理人所操盤的基金特別明顯。 2.基金投資人對於季等短期績效的過分重視，是導致國內經理人操作風險調整幅度偏高的主要原因之一。 3.純粹誘因費契約以及只加上「上限條款」設計的契約，這兩種契約都無法抑制經理人冒高風險的傾向；而純粹誘因費契約加上「懲罰條款」的設計，有抑制經理人自利性調高操作風險行為的效果。 本研究成果的貢獻主要有兩點： 1.在政策應用上，本研究提出契約條款設計的理念，對於我國擬開放勞退等大型基金委託代客操作，雙方契約該如何設計以確保投資人的權益，有相當參考的價值，本研究同時也對投信公司、基金經理人等提出相關的制度性建議。 2.在理論推導上，本研究融合一般化均衡分析法與選擇權理論的應用，將不同型態的誘因費契約化成經理人向投資人所購買的歐式買權，標的資產為經理人所持投資組合的價值，履約價格為比較基準指數的價值，執行日期為一年期的績效評比，模型導証的重點是經理人所選擇投資組合的風險程度與該類比選擇權價值的關係。 / An important question for the contracting literature is the extent to which real behavior is driven by the financial incentives contained in compensation schemes. To address this issue, (1) we use the tournament concept as the framework, and focus on the competitive nature of mutual fund environments how to affect the managers' portfolio decision-making processes. (2) we also use the Black-Scholes option pricing model as the framework, and analyze the impact on the mutual fund managers' risk-manipulation behavior of a performance-based incentive plan. Given the asymmetric information financial markets, most investors of mutual funds can not measure the funds' risk without error, thus, agent-divergent behavior may potentially arise. In a tournament reward structure, the managers' rational attempting to maximize their expected compensation may revise the risk level or alter the composition of their portfolio during the assessment period. While there will be times when such changes don't serve the best interest of funds' investors. Our research demonstrates the following results: 1. An empirical investigation of 86 open-type mutual funds during 1995 to 1998 with the methods of test, t test and the Logistic regression shows fund managers with poor performance would become aggressive and tend to increase fund volatility in the latter part of an annual assessment period. The effect is obviously clear toward the end of the year and it is involved with the investors' myopic of the assessment to the managers' performances. 2. In our model, the bonus is similar to a call option on the funds' portfolio. Three types of incentive contracts are compared. The results show that the incentive contract with penalty can reduce managers to adversely alter the risk of the portfolio they manage. It dominates the pure incentive contract and only with a ceiling incentive contract. Questionnaires investigated by fund managers will support some hypothesis.