巴塞爾資本協定是一個非強制性的國際銀行監管制度,若世界各國均遵照此協定,能夠提升各國金融體系的穩定性,進而降低國內與國際金融危機發生的可能性。然而,在其非強制性的本質下,有些國家的實行程度相當高,但有些國家實行程度相當低,本論文的核心問題在於理解世界各國實行巴塞爾資本協定的差異。本論文採用國際政治經濟理論中的理性選擇理論,以一個簡單的國際與國內政治壓力模型,描繪出各國政府試圖降低銀行監管規範所帶來的國際與國內政治成本總和,以求得最適化的金融監管規範。
根據此模型的內涵,本論文假設:若一個國家是個經濟強權、與全球經濟市場的互賴程度低,且擁有一個弱勢且較無法隔絕國內政治因素的行政體系時,該國的巴塞爾資本協定通常較低;若一個國家並非為經濟強權、與全球經濟市場的互賴程度高,且擁有一個強勢且較能隔絕國內政治因素的行政體系時,該國能實行較高程度的巴塞爾資本協定;若一個國家是個經濟強權、與全球經濟市場的互賴程度低,且擁有一個強勢且較能隔絕國內政治因素的行政體系時,該國較不受到政治壓力的影響,因此能夠自行決定巴塞爾資本協定的實行程度;若一個國家並非為經濟強權、與全球經濟市場的互賴程度高,且擁有一個弱勢且較無法隔絕國內政治因素的行政體系時,該國將部分實行巴塞爾資本協定,且將帶來相同程度的國際與國內政治壓力,以最小化政治壓力之總和。
在實證分析部分,我採用並分析了涵蓋91個國家,從1973至2005年的時間序列資料,以及一份涵蓋150個國家的問卷資料,以進行量化迴歸分析。此外,我針對台灣與中國大陸銀行監管制度的變遷,進行兩國的個案研究與比較,其資料包括第一手的訪談,以及第二手的統計、學術研究、媒體報導、與專家評論等資料。量化與兩個個案的實證結果支持了本論文的核心論點。 / This dissertation seeks to answer the question of why some countries comply with high level of Basel Accords while others ignore this global governance regime. It adopts a rational theory of international political economy that treats a government’s bank regulation preference as a result of the interaction between international and domestic political costs.
The theoretical model shows that if a country is more economically powerful (weak) or less (more) economically interdependent on global markets, and has a weaker (stronger) executive branch that is unable (able) to shield itself from domestic political factors, it is more likely to realize lower (higher) level of Basel Accords. If a country is powerful or not economically interdependent on global markets, and has a strong executive branch, it has more leeway to decide the level of bank regulation. If a country is weak or economically interdependent on global markets, and has a weak executive branch, an equilibrium level of bank regulation will cause equal international and domestic political costs that minimize the aggregate pressure.
For quantitative tests, I collect time-series data covering 91 countries from 1973 to 2005, as well as a cross-national survey dataset covering more than 150 countries. In addition, I conduct two in-depth case studies of China's and Taiwan's changes of bank regulations since 1980, which rely on first hand interviews and second hand data. Both quantitative and qualitative results support political pressure hypotheses.
Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:CHENGCHI/G0099265504 |
Creators | 陳宗巖 |
Publisher | 國立政治大學 |
Source Sets | National Chengchi University Libraries |
Language | 英文 |
Detected Language | English |
Type | text |
Rights | Copyright © nccu library on behalf of the copyright holders |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds