所有权结构与城市公交运营效率 —基于面板数据和SFA模型的实证研究 本期目录 >>
Title: Ownership Structure and Operational Efficienty of Urban Public Transport——Empirical Research Based on Panel Data and SFA Mode
作者 张春勤;隽志才;景鹏
Author(s): chunqin zhang; zhicai juan; peng jing
摘要: 本文探讨了所有权结构对我国公交企业运营效率的影响,为公交服务市场化改革提供了理论依据。根据契约理论提出了所有权结构是影响公交企业运营效率关键因素的核心假设,采用我国2008-2013年期间32家公交企业面板数据,建立基于超越对数生产函数时变形式标示的随机前沿生产函数模型对研究假设进行了实证检验。研究结果发现:公交企业运营效率受到所有权结构的显著影响;所有权结构为混合型公交企业的运营效率优于国有型企业和私有型企业的运营效率;公交企业规模与运营效率显著正相关,但“倒U型”关系不显著;市场竞争程度与运营效率显著正相关,且存在“倒U型”关系;人均GDP和政府投入都与运营效率显著负相关;人口密度对运营效率具有正向影响。
Abstract: Since the reform and opening up policy was introduced, some of Chinese municipal governments have reversed the privatization of market-oriented reform in the public transport field. These reforms usually involve ownership structure. These reforms aim at improving the efficiency and the service level of public transport services in a context of severe public budget constraints by changing the organizational and regulatory of public transport services. The privatization reform policy is implemented on the premise of a theoretical hypothesis, that is, that the ownership structure affects the performance of public transport operators. Therefore, our main objective in this paper is to test this hypothesis by investigating to what extent the ownership structure influence the performance of public transport operators. More precisely, the aim of this study is to assess the impact of the ownership structure on the performance of the Chinese public transport operators. To our knowledge, no other empirical studies of the Chinese public transport sector have already addressed this issue thus far. The panel data set of the operation cost covering 32 different Chinese public transport operators over the period 2008-2013 has been studied in order to test the hypotheses. The data that we use is one of our contributions. A stochastic frontier approach (SFA) based on a time-varying form of the trans-log production function has been used to obtain the operational efficiency of public transit operators and the influencing factors. This is an area of innovation in research methodology contributed by this paper. In addition, when SFA is used to assess the impact of the ownership structure on the operational efficiency, we need to choose other exogenous variables influencing the operational efficiency. The firm characteristics and the city characteristics are selected as the exogenous variables. The empirical analysis is used to discuss the effect of the ownership structure on the operational-technical efficiency. According to our estimates, the mixed operators outperform public ones and private ones, and exhibit the highest level of operational efficiency. The public operators exhibit the lowest level of operational efficiency. This suggests that, if we only improve the operational efficiency, the phenomenon of the resurgence of the current "nationalization" is debatable. The coefficient of scale and compete are negative and significant. However, they have the inverted U-shaped relationship with operational efficiency. These results show that scale and compete have positive effect on operational efficiency, but this kind of positive effect has a critical point. The per capita GDP has a negative impact on operational efficiency. The coefficient of Pop is negative but insignificant, indicating the positive effect of Pop on operational efficiency. Subsidy is negatively correlated with operational efficiency and is significant at the 5% level. This suggests that government subsidy has a stronger substitution effect than income effect on operational efficiency. Thus, it is not true that the more subsidies, the better. The first thing the government needs to do is to incentive operators to minimize operating cost and improve efficiency rather than to compensate them fully. These research findings have the following implications with regards to policy-making. For a service-oriented government, the mixed operators may be the best organisational choice for public transport services as it can expand the scale of operators and bring in due competition while mitigating the pressure on government subsidy. Thus, the equilibrium can be achieved among government regulation, market-based operation and the involvement of social communities. Optimal efficiency and social benefit can also be realized.
关键词: 城市公共交通;随机前沿生产函数;运营效率;所有权结构
Keywords: urban public transport; stochastic frontier production function; operational efficienty; ownership structure
基金项目: 国家社科基金重大项目
发表期数: 2018年 第2期
中图分类号: 文献标识码: 文章编号:
参考文献/References:

[1] De Borger, B, Kerstens K, Costa A. Public transit performance: What does one learn from frontier studies? [J]. Transport Reviews, 2002,22(1): 1-38.

[2] Cowie J, Asenova D. Organization form, scale effects and efficiency in the British bus industry [J]. Transportation, 1999, 26(3): 231-248.

[3] Karlaftis, MG, 2010. Ownership and competition in European transit: assessing efficiency [J]. Transportmetrica, 6(2):143-160.

[4] Boitani, A, Nicolini M, Scarpa C. Do competition and ownership matter? Evidence from local public transport in Europe [J]. Applied Economics, 2013, 45(11): 1419-1434.

[5] Dalen, DM, Gómez-Lobo A. Yardsticks on the road: regulatory contracts and cost efficiency in the Norwegian bus industry [J]. Transportation, 2003, 30(4): 371-386.

[6] Megginson, WL, Netter JM. From state to market: A survey of empirical studies on privatization [J]. Journal of economic literature, 2001, 39(2): 321-389.

[7] Hart, O. The Proper Scope of Government: Theory and Application to Prisons [J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1997, 9(2): 1127-1162.

[8] Boycko M, Vishny SA. A theory of privatization [J]. Economic Journal, 1996, (106): 309-319.

[9] Roy, W, Yvrande-Billon A. Ownership, contractual practices and technical efficiency: The case of urban public transport in France [J]. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 2007, 41(2): 257-282.

[10] Ottoz, E, Fornengo G, Giacomo MD. The impact of ownership on the cost of bus service provision: an example from Italy [J]. Applied Economics, 2009, 41(3): 337-349.

[11] Eckel CVA. Elements of a theory of mixed enterprise [J]. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 1985, 32: 82-94.

[12] Filippini, M, Prioni P. The influence of ownership on the cost of bus service provision in Switzerland-an empirical illustration [J]. Applied Economics, 2003, 35(6): 683-690.

[13] Albalate, D, Bel G, Calzada J. Governance and regulation of urban bus transportation: Using partial privatization to achieve the better of two worlds [J]. Regulation & Governance, 2012, 6(1): 83-100.

[14] Odeck, J. The effect of mergers on efficiency and productivity of public transport services [J]. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 2008, 42(4): 696-708.

[15] Barnum, DT, Tandon S, McNeil S. Comparing the performance of bus routes after adjusting for the environment using data envelopment analysis [J]. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 2008, 134(2): 77-85.

[16] Nisha K. Improving the efficiency of urban bus services in India [D]. Rutgers University-Graduate School-New Brunswick, 2010.

[17] 王欢明, 诸大建. 我国城市公交服务治理模式与运营效率研究——以长三角城市群公交服务为例 [J]. 公共管理学报, 2011, 8(2): 52-62.

[18] Karlaftis, M., McCarthy P. The effect of privatization on public transit costs [J]. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 1999, 16(1): 27-44.

[19] 顾乃华, 朱卫平. 府际关系, 关系产权与经济效率 [J]. 中国工业经济, 2011, 2: 46-57.

[20] Battese, GE, Coelli TJ. A model for technical inefficiency effects in a stochastic frontier production function for panel data [J]. Empirical economics, 1995, 20(2): 325-332.

[21] Final, V., ed. Efficiency and Competition in Public Transport [D]. Sydney: University of Technology, 2010.

[22] Niskanen, W. Bureaucracy and Representative Government [M]. Aldine-AthertonChicago, 1974.

[23] 聂辉华, 谭松涛, 王宇锋. 创新, 企业规模和市场竞争 [J]. 世界经济, 2008, 8: 57-66.

[24] 国家统计局. 统计上大中小微型企业划分办法[EB/OL]. 2011, http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/tjbz/201109/t20110909 _8669.html