海外華人人口，截至2004年底止，約為3,808萬人（不含香港、澳門），政府為照顧為眾多之海外僑胞，先於1926年於國民政府下設僑務委員會以推進僑務，復為擴大服務僑社並增進僑民福址，於1985年針對海外僑社需求，選擇華僑眾多之地區，設置華僑文教服務中心，自1985年起迄2004年底止，僑委會在海外各地前後共設置了十七個文教服務中心。為維持該等中心之運作，政府每年均編有巨額預算挹注，為瞭解相對於投入之資源，中心之產出是否符合經濟學上『投入』與『產出』之生產效率概念，本文之研究爰以產出導向之資料包絡分析法建立實證模型進行探討，同時以各文教服務中心為一決策單位，將2001年至2004年間各文教中心之投入及產出項目投入實證模型中，以計算各文教中心的經營績效。
實證結果顯示，海外文教中心整體的技術效率平均值介於2.4662與3.1605之間，同時規模效率平均值大於1，顯示造成各文教中心技術無效率的來源，大部份來自於純技術效率，另一部分則來自於規模無效率。
同時依實證結果資料可以發現，（一）僑委會截至2004年止之十七個文教中心，在各種不同的組合下，僅有4至9個中心之效率值為1，占全部文教中心的二成至五成，顯示整體經營績效有待加強與提升；（二）以僑委會關閉倫敦及墨爾本文教中心雖與實證分析結果相符，然績效較墨爾本中心為低之雪黎文教中心卻未關閉之情況而言，益顯數據性資料於決策過程中之重要性；（三）以全球華人人口分配來看，北美洲地區文教中心之技術效率值，無論在固定或變動規模下，就各種組合而言，均較其他地區文教中心之效率值為佳，顯示除應提高北美地區以外中心之效率外，似乎也反映了服務海外僑胞之資源分配是否過度集中，及與僑胞互動應予加強之問題。
最後，由於本研究係首次將DEA運用於駐外機構經營效率之評估，因此本文之相關實證模型將可作為評估我國其他部會所屬駐外機構效率衡量之基礎及參考。 / The overseas Chinese population, up till 2004, approximates 3.8 millions (not counting Hong Kong, Macao). To attend to their needs, the government has first established the Commission of Overseas Chinese Affairs under the Nationalist Government in 1926. To better and further serve this overseas Chinese community, the government has chosen among several populous areas to set up Chinese Culture and education service center later in 1985. Between 1985 and the end of 2004, 17 service centers have been set up. To keep these centers running requires a big budget support from the government each year. To examine if these centers provide values that conform to the economic concept of "the input" and "the output" production efficiency, this article has used the data envelopment analysis method to establish the real diagnosis model. This model has used various culture and education service centers as policy-making units from 2001 to 2004 to evaluate the efficacy of these service centers.
Test results have shown that the mean value of central whole technical efficiency is between 2.4662 and 3.1605. Also, the mean value of scale efficiency is bigger than 1. This demonstrates the inefficient central technology rate of the service centers results mainly from pure technical inefficiency, and partly from diseconomy of scale.
On the other hand, test results also show that, (1) up till 2004, among 17 culture and education centers, just only remain 4 to 9 with central efficiency value of 1 under different kinds of combinations. The fact that they account for two tenths to five tenths of the total number of service centers demonstrates the need for improvement in their operating performance (2) the closing of both London and Melbourne culture and education centers does not conform to the findings of the real diagnosis analysis, but Sydney center is not closed, which reveals the importance of data material in the decision-making process; (3) looking at the distribution of global overseas Chinese population, the technology efficiency values for culture and education centers in North America area are far higher than other areas, measured by all sorts of combinations regardless of fixed or variable scale. This has revealed issues of not only efficiency enhancements for local centers excepting this area, but also excessive concentration of service resources allocated within the region and augment the co-activity with compatriots.
Finally, since this is the first time DEA has been utilized in a research to evaluate the management efficiencies for government agencies abroad, the real diagnosis model presented in this article might be used as a reference for similar studies in the future.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:CHENGCHI/G0929210312 |
| Creators | 歐陽富 |
| Publisher | 國立政治大學 |
| Source Sets | National Chengchi University Libraries |
| Language | 中文 |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Rights | Copyright © nccu library on behalf of the copyright holders |
Page generated in 0.0026 seconds