本文選題：保險(xiǎn)　切入點(diǎn)：效率　出處：《山東大學(xué)》2014年博士論文

【摘要】：二十世紀(jì)后二十年世界經(jīng)濟(jì)的一個(gè)顯著的變革就是諸多的發(fā)展中國(guó)家從政府主導(dǎo)的經(jīng)濟(jì)向市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)過(guò)渡的進(jìn)程。其中最為顯著而且又具備鮮明的不同特色的是中國(guó)和俄羅斯的改革。中俄兩國(guó)在20世紀(jì)前半期發(fā)生了共產(chǎn)主義革命并均在經(jīng)濟(jì)進(jìn)程中力圖推行社會(huì)主義公社制度的社會(huì)生產(chǎn)運(yùn)行保障體系。但是,隨著強(qiáng)有力的中央計(jì)劃經(jīng)濟(jì)時(shí)代的逐漸落幕,中俄兩國(guó)均開(kāi)始轉(zhuǎn)向市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)。1970年代末期的中國(guó)改革,作為典型的“漸進(jìn)式”改革的代表,在過(guò)去的35年間取得了舉世矚目的經(jīng)濟(jì)成就,在21世紀(jì)初甚至成為世界經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的最強(qiáng)的推動(dòng)力。另一方面,俄羅斯在社會(huì)劇變之后,從1990年代初期,實(shí)施了“休克”療法,強(qiáng)制性迅速過(guò)渡到市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)體制�！皾u進(jìn)式”改革與“休克”療法兩種截然不同的路徑自誕生開(kāi)始便存在著巨大的爭(zhēng)議。中國(guó)和俄羅斯的經(jīng)濟(jì)改革進(jìn)程也因此被廣泛的關(guān)注。事實(shí)上,盡管在1990年代初期,西方的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家就已經(jīng)普遍認(rèn)同經(jīng)濟(jì)從計(jì)劃到市場(chǎng)的過(guò)渡的兩種轉(zhuǎn)變：穩(wěn)定性(也就是穩(wěn)定的宏觀政策,有效的控制通貨膨脹和保持國(guó)際收支平衡)；自由化(由市場(chǎng)而不是政府官僚機(jī)構(gòu)來(lái)決定市場(chǎng)價(jià)格)；私有化(生產(chǎn)資料從政府向私人的轉(zhuǎn)移)。然而,經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家對(duì)于這些變革的進(jìn)程并不一致。中俄兩國(guó)提供的漸進(jìn)式和激進(jìn)式兩種范式,經(jīng)過(guò)20多年的實(shí)踐,均得到了較大的發(fā)展和成績(jī),目前經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家普遍認(rèn)為,在市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)進(jìn)程的兩種范式并沒(méi)有絕對(duì)的正確與否,政策制訂者必須結(jié)合兩國(guó)的實(shí)際經(jīng)濟(jì)狀況和改革過(guò)程中的具體問(wèn)題進(jìn)行實(shí)際分析,從而不斷提升市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)的效率 沿襲總體的經(jīng)濟(jì)改革的脈絡(luò),中國(guó)和俄羅斯兩國(guó)在金融領(lǐng)域也分別實(shí)施了漸進(jìn)與激進(jìn)的方式來(lái)啟動(dòng)改革。盡管兩國(guó)改革的路徑有較大差異,但是改革路徑上的較大差異并不能掩蓋中俄兩國(guó)金融改革的共性,即總體而言都是在政府參與和推動(dòng)下,自上而下地進(jìn)行改革。具體而言,差異性體現(xiàn)在,中國(guó)金融體制改革和新框架的形成并沒(méi)有根本性地觸動(dòng)原有的利益格局,而是經(jīng)過(guò)多年有步驟、分階段的試點(diǎn),而后采用相應(yīng)的改革才確立的。對(duì)比俄羅斯,在改革之初就對(duì)金融體制實(shí)施大規(guī)模且快速地整體轉(zhuǎn)變,直接地觸動(dòng)了原有的利益格局,并且為了加速該進(jìn)程,俄羅斯政府實(shí)施了金融自由化政策,包括銀行運(yùn)營(yíng)自由化、金融業(yè)務(wù)自由化、金融價(jià)格自由化和行業(yè)進(jìn)入自由化。這些政策使得俄羅斯在較短的時(shí)間內(nèi)就建立了同發(fā)達(dá)經(jīng)濟(jì)市場(chǎng)國(guó)家所具有的金融制度框架。顯然,不同轉(zhuǎn)軌路徑下的制度安排,對(duì)金融體制轉(zhuǎn)變的影響會(huì)有差異。 在激進(jìn)模式下,俄羅斯在較短時(shí)間內(nèi)擺脫了舊的金融體制的束縛,迅速地建立起了新的適應(yīng)市場(chǎng)化需求的金融體制。目前俄羅斯在金融領(lǐng)域已經(jīng)初步建立了市場(chǎng)導(dǎo)向型、高度開(kāi)放的金融體系,為提高金融對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)的促進(jìn)作用打下了一定的基礎(chǔ)。 值得指出的是,目前中國(guó)金融領(lǐng)域的改革的進(jìn)程,相對(duì)于整體經(jīng)濟(jì)體制改革而言,還相當(dāng)滯后。一方面,中國(guó)相對(duì)壟斷和相對(duì)封閉的金融業(yè)在面對(duì)市場(chǎng)化經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展中顯得過(guò)于保守,在很大程度上限制了金融的運(yùn)行效率并降低了整體經(jīng)濟(jì)的運(yùn)行效率,另一方面,相對(duì)封閉的金融業(yè)也幫助中國(guó)避免了亞洲金融危機(jī)、美國(guó)次貸危機(jī)等多次國(guó)際金融風(fēng)暴的沖擊。同時(shí)由于中國(guó)貿(mào)易的增長(zhǎng),國(guó)際收支狀況良好,外匯儲(chǔ)備持續(xù)增加。因此,盡管進(jìn)一步的金融改革應(yīng)該開(kāi)放金融市場(chǎng),實(shí)現(xiàn)完全的金融自由化,但在中國(guó)的金融改革實(shí)踐中并非沒(méi)有阻力,特別是在是否應(yīng)該加快改革進(jìn)程的問(wèn)題上并未取得廣泛共識(shí)。從這個(gè)意義上說(shuō),探討俄羅斯金融業(yè)發(fā)展?fàn)顩r和效率,將對(duì)我國(guó)下一步金融改革具有非常強(qiáng)的借鑒意義。 進(jìn)入21世紀(jì)以來(lái),中國(guó)的保險(xiǎn)業(yè)得到了充分的發(fā)展,競(jìng)爭(zhēng)也日益加劇。但是總體而言,我國(guó)的保險(xiǎn)行業(yè)的發(fā)展相對(duì)于發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家還有很大差距。特別是作為金融業(yè)的“三駕馬車(chē)”之一的保險(xiǎn)業(yè),資產(chǎn)規(guī)模巨大,涉及客戶(hù)眾多,是社會(huì)發(fā)展的“穩(wěn)定器”和經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的“助推器”。在新興市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)國(guó)家的轉(zhuǎn)軌發(fā)展中,社會(huì)保障制度改革相對(duì)缺失或緩慢并引發(fā)了眾多的社會(huì)問(wèn)題,因此商業(yè)化保險(xiǎn)對(duì)轉(zhuǎn)軌國(guó)家的社會(huì)改革具有非常強(qiáng)的政策補(bǔ)償作用。目前保險(xiǎn)業(yè)也經(jīng)受著市場(chǎng)結(jié)構(gòu)以及業(yè)務(wù)渠道的劇烈變化考驗(yàn),保險(xiǎn)理論也在不斷更新,需要更適應(yīng)經(jīng)濟(jì)和自身的發(fā)展。而在現(xiàn)有的發(fā)展水平之下,我國(guó)保險(xiǎn)公司的自身效率還相對(duì)低下,隨著資本市場(chǎng)的逐步開(kāi)放,保險(xiǎn)業(yè)的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)將從渠道、規(guī)模轉(zhuǎn)向風(fēng)險(xiǎn)經(jīng)營(yíng)、精細(xì)管理,激烈的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)不會(huì)減弱只會(huì)加強(qiáng)。如果不能采取有效的措施來(lái)促使我國(guó)保險(xiǎn)公司加強(qiáng)發(fā)展和提高效率,那么在優(yōu)勝劣汰的市場(chǎng)機(jī)制下,國(guó)際資本的進(jìn)入,市場(chǎng)結(jié)構(gòu)的轉(zhuǎn)變將給我國(guó)保險(xiǎn)業(yè)帶來(lái)巨大的沖擊。本文從比較研究的角度,以俄羅斯為主要對(duì)照,探討分析我國(guó)保險(xiǎn)業(yè)的真實(shí)效率,并在此基礎(chǔ)上深入研究我國(guó)保險(xiǎn)業(yè)效率。 由于保險(xiǎn)的對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)的作用復(fù)雜,在發(fā)揮自身功能的同時(shí),對(duì)各種國(guó)民經(jīng)濟(jì)總量指標(biāo)如社會(huì)災(zāi)害事故損失總量、社會(huì)融資總量、社會(huì)就業(yè)總量和國(guó)內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值等均產(chǎn)生著顯著的影響。因此,對(duì)保險(xiǎn)業(yè)效率的研究不僅應(yīng)立足于保險(xiǎn)功能的角度,還應(yīng)該同時(shí)考慮到研究保險(xiǎn)業(yè)的微觀效率和宏觀效率。這樣的研究才更具有全面性和合理性�；谏鲜龇治�,本文從保險(xiǎn)業(yè)的效率出發(fā),使用數(shù)據(jù)包絡(luò)分析和全要素生產(chǎn)率分析的方法,分別測(cè)算并分析了中國(guó)和俄羅斯兩國(guó)保險(xiǎn)業(yè)的微觀效率和宏觀效率。并在此基礎(chǔ)上本文考察了宏觀環(huán)境因素與兩國(guó)保險(xiǎn)體系穩(wěn)定和效率的辯證統(tǒng)一關(guān)系。 本文選取了2008至2012年中國(guó)15家保險(xiǎn)公司及俄羅斯14家保險(xiǎn)公司,共29家大型保險(xiǎn)公司,采集了樣本機(jī)構(gòu)3項(xiàng)投入3項(xiàng)產(chǎn)出的數(shù)據(jù)。本研究并參考國(guó)內(nèi)外保險(xiǎn)業(yè)效率研究文獻(xiàn),使用數(shù)據(jù)包絡(luò)分析(DEA)方法,對(duì)兩國(guó)主要保險(xiǎn)公司進(jìn)行效率計(jì)算與變量比較分析,總結(jié)了各時(shí)間階段比較分析的數(shù)據(jù)結(jié)果。從兩國(guó)保險(xiǎn)業(yè)技術(shù)效率平均值看,中國(guó)2008年到2012年的保險(xiǎn)行業(yè)平均效率一直徘徊在0.7左右,該效率屬于中等水平。相比而言,俄羅斯一直維持在0.9以上的高效率域,這表明中國(guó)保險(xiǎn)公司總體的技術(shù)效率和俄羅斯差距較大。由于技術(shù)效率可進(jìn)一步分解為純技術(shù)效率和規(guī)模效率,進(jìn)一步的考察發(fā)現(xiàn)：兩國(guó)保險(xiǎn)公司差距較大的效率指標(biāo)是純技術(shù)效率,純技術(shù)效率反映的是公司的經(jīng)營(yíng)管理水平,因此從實(shí)證研究的結(jié)果可以說(shuō)俄羅斯的保險(xiǎn)公司經(jīng)營(yíng)管理水平比中國(guó)保險(xiǎn)公司高。 筆者認(rèn)為三方面的因素造成了這樣上述現(xiàn)象。第一,市場(chǎng)上經(jīng)營(yíng)主體數(shù)量少,國(guó)有保險(xiǎn)公司在市場(chǎng)上占主導(dǎo),其他公司規(guī)模不大,不利于市場(chǎng)形成充分有效競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。雖然中國(guó)保險(xiǎn)公司數(shù)量逐年增加,2012年已達(dá)150家,但是與俄羅斯的保險(xiǎn)市場(chǎng)逐年淘汰后的400多家主體比起來(lái)還較少,而且在中國(guó)幾家國(guó)有控股保險(xiǎn)公司的資產(chǎn)總額和市場(chǎng)份額都占有很高比例,形成了寡頭壟斷市場(chǎng)。因此加快開(kāi)放保險(xiǎn)市場(chǎng)營(yíng)造良好競(jìng)爭(zhēng)氛圍將會(huì)有利于提升市場(chǎng)效率和公司運(yùn)營(yíng)效率。 第二,保險(xiǎn)市場(chǎng)尚處于粗放經(jīng)營(yíng)規(guī)模競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的階段,保險(xiǎn)企業(yè)更傾向于擴(kuò)大保費(fèi)收入獲取資金,重視銷(xiāo)售業(yè)績(jī)和積累資金能力,對(duì)公司經(jīng)營(yíng)管理水平不夠?qū)Ｗ?行業(yè)內(nèi)出現(xiàn)總體專(zhuān)業(yè)人員質(zhì)量不高、高端人才嚴(yán)重缺乏、人才流失嚴(yán)重等現(xiàn)象。總的來(lái)說(shuō)專(zhuān)業(yè)人才更有利于公司提高經(jīng)營(yíng)管理純效率,開(kāi)展更加嚴(yán)密的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)控制。 第三,保險(xiǎn)投資渠道較窄,投資收益較低,風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理能力有待提高。中國(guó)的保險(xiǎn)業(yè)經(jīng)營(yíng)活動(dòng)已經(jīng)從以前單純經(jīng)營(yíng)保險(xiǎn)業(yè)務(wù)到了擴(kuò)展資產(chǎn)和負(fù)債業(yè)務(wù)的兩端,多渠道投資收益能夠彌補(bǔ)保險(xiǎn)業(yè)務(wù)的虧損,平滑保險(xiǎn)經(jīng)營(yíng)的業(yè)務(wù)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。 進(jìn)一步的,本文從全要素生產(chǎn)率的視角,運(yùn)用多個(gè)指標(biāo)來(lái)衡量保險(xiǎn)業(yè)的發(fā)展與經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的關(guān)系,實(shí)證結(jié)果這表明在過(guò)去30年里,我國(guó)的保險(xiǎn)業(yè)無(wú)論從規(guī)模還是深度上,都發(fā)展迅速,并且遠(yuǎn)超同期的經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)。但是,我國(guó)的全要素生產(chǎn)率對(duì)保險(xiǎn)業(yè)發(fā)展具有決定作用而保險(xiǎn)業(yè)的發(fā)展對(duì)我國(guó)的生產(chǎn)率的提高則沒(méi)有明顯作用。這再次體現(xiàn)出我國(guó)保險(xiǎn)業(yè)總體運(yùn)行效率仍然不高。這些因素阻礙了我國(guó)保險(xiǎn)業(yè)的發(fā)展,從而不利于保險(xiǎn)功能的充分發(fā)揮。而俄羅斯的保險(xiǎn)業(yè)的發(fā)展與全要素生產(chǎn)率之間存在互相的溢出,與中國(guó)保險(xiǎn)業(yè)相比效率較高。但是,值得指出的是,盡管無(wú)論對(duì)于中國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)還是對(duì)于俄羅斯的經(jīng)濟(jì)而言,全要素生產(chǎn)率對(duì)保險(xiǎn)業(yè)增長(zhǎng)和發(fā)展有重要的拉升作用。但與發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家,甚至是其他的新興亞洲國(guó)家相比,兩國(guó)的保險(xiǎn)產(chǎn)業(yè),無(wú)論是在保險(xiǎn)密度還是深度上,仍有較大差距,也具有更大的未來(lái)發(fā)展的潛力。 基于效率比較分析,本文指出中國(guó)未來(lái)保險(xiǎn)業(yè)發(fā)展的政策建議為：明確保險(xiǎn)的本質(zhì)意義,發(fā)揮保險(xiǎn)的轉(zhuǎn)移風(fēng)險(xiǎn)提供保障職能；從制度上吸取俄羅斯的經(jīng)驗(yàn),加快保險(xiǎn)業(yè)的市場(chǎng)化進(jìn)程；提升保險(xiǎn)業(yè)經(jīng)營(yíng)效率；完善保險(xiǎn)監(jiān)管,提升監(jiān)管水平；加速保險(xiǎn)業(yè)創(chuàng)新步伐,以創(chuàng)新驅(qū)動(dòng)保險(xiǎn)業(yè)健康發(fā)展等。
[Abstract]:In the first half of the 20th century , China and Russia began to move towards a market economy . However , in the beginning of the 1990s , China and Russia began to shift to market economy . However , in the early 1990s , China and Russia have been widely concerned . In fact , although in the early 1990s , Western economists have generally accepted the two shifts in transition from plan to market : stability ( i.e . , stable macroeconomic policies , effective control of inflation and maintaining international balance ) ;
liberalization ( market prices are determined by markets rather than government bureaucracy ) ;
However , economists generally agree that the two paradigms in the process of market economy are not correct or not , and the policy makers must combine the actual economic situation of the two countries and the specific problems in the reform process to continuously improve the efficiency of the market economy .

In contrast to Russia , the reform of China ' s financial system and the formation of the new framework have not fundamentally triggered the original interest pattern , but it has been established by the corresponding reforms . In contrast , the Russian government has set up the financial system framework with the developed economic market countries in the short time . Obviously , the system arrangement under different transfer paths will have different effects on the financial system transition .

In the radical mode , Russia has been freed from the old financial system in a short time and has set up a new financial system adapted to the market demand rapidly . At present , Russia has set up a market - oriented and highly open financial system in the financial field , laying a foundation for improving the promotion of the financial contribution to the economy .

On the one hand , China ' s relatively monopoly and relatively closed financial industry are too conservative in the face of the development of the market economy . On the other hand , the relatively closed financial sector also helps China avoid the impact of the Asian financial crisis and the US subprime crisis .

Since entering the 21st century , China ' s insurance industry has been fully developed and the competition is increasing . In general , China ' s insurance industry has a great gap with the developed countries . In the transition development of emerging market economy countries , the reform of social security system is relatively missing or slow and has caused many social problems . At present , the insurance industry has been continuously updated . With the gradual opening of capital market , the transformation of insurance industry will bring great impact on China ' s insurance industry .

Based on the above analysis , this paper analyzes the micro - efficiency and macro - efficiency of the insurance industry in China and Russia . Based on the above analysis , this paper studies the micro - efficiency and macro - efficiency of the insurance industry in China and Russia .

The paper selects 15 insurance companies and 14 insurance companies in China from 2008 to 2012 , 29 large insurance companies and collects 3 output data from sample institutions .

The author thinks that three factors have caused the above - mentioned phenomenon . First , there are fewer operating subjects in the market , the state - owned insurance companies dominate in the market , and other companies are not large in scale , which is not conducive to the full and effective competition of the market . Although the number of Chinese insurance companies has increased year by year , the total assets and market share of several state - controlled insurance companies in China have a high proportion , and the oligopolistic market is formed . Therefore , it will be beneficial to improve the market efficiency and the company ' s operational efficiency .

Second , insurance market is still in the stage of rough management scale competition , insurance enterprise prefers to expand premium income to obtain funds , pay attention to sales performance and accumulation fund ability , have not focus on the management level of the company , the quality of high - end talents is not high , high - end talents are serious lack , the brain drain is serious , etc . In general , professional talents are more favorable for the company to improve the pure efficiency of management and management , and carry out more rigorous risk control .

Third , the insurance investment channel is narrow , the investment income is low , the risk management ability is to be improved . The insurance business activities of China have been from the previous simple operation insurance business to the two ends of the extended assets and liabilities business , and the multi - channel investment income can make up for the loss of the insurance business and smooth the business risk of insurance business .

In the past 30 years , China ' s insurance industry has a decisive role in the development of the insurance industry , and the development of the insurance industry has played an important role in the growth and development of the insurance industry . However , it is worth pointing out that , in contrast with the developed countries and even the other emerging Asian countries , the insurance industry of the two countries still has a larger gap in the insurance density or depth , and has the potential for greater future development .

Based on the comparative analysis of efficiency , this paper points out that the policy suggestion of China ' s future insurance industry is to make clear the essential significance of insurance , and to provide the guarantee function for the transfer risk of insurance .
Draw Russia ' s experience from the system and speed up the market - oriented process of insurance industry ;
improve that operational efficiency of the insurance industry ;
Improve the supervision of insurance and improve the level of supervision ;
Speed up the pace of innovation in insurance industry to drive the healthy development of insurance industry .

【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：F842;F845.12

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 施嵐;李秀芳;;基于DEA方法的我國(guó)財(cái)產(chǎn)保險(xiǎn)公司技術(shù)效率分析[J];保險(xiǎn)研究;2007年04期

2 魏華林;楊霞;;中國(guó)財(cái)產(chǎn)保險(xiǎn)公司效率及生產(chǎn)率實(shí)證分析[J];保險(xiǎn)研究;2007年05期

3 淦其偉;胡三明;;我國(guó)壽險(xiǎn)業(yè)經(jīng)營(yíng)效率與銀行保險(xiǎn)的貢獻(xiàn)分析[J];財(cái)經(jīng)科學(xué);2007年09期

4 張偉;郭金龍;張?jiān)S穎;;我國(guó)壽險(xiǎn)公司規(guī)模效率與內(nèi)含價(jià)值的實(shí)證分析[J];財(cái)貿(mào)經(jīng)濟(jì);2006年03期

5 劉兵;;中國(guó)壽險(xiǎn)業(yè)市場(chǎng)結(jié)構(gòu)、效率與績(jī)效實(shí)證研究[J];產(chǎn)業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì)研究;2007年04期

6 米軍;郭連成;;中俄金融體制轉(zhuǎn)軌:基本問(wèn)題與發(fā)展路徑[J];俄羅斯中亞?wèn)|歐研究;2006年01期

7 黃少安;;中國(guó)轉(zhuǎn)軌時(shí)期公司治理的特征分析[J];甘肅社會(huì)科學(xué);2007年01期

8 王鶯;趙s，

本文編號(hào)：1719693