臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：中國大陸金融科技進步對金融業發展的影響分析
作者：洪柳益
作者(外文)：HUNG, LIU-YI
校院名稱：國立暨南國際大學
系所名稱：新興產業策略與發展博士學位學程
指導教授：林 霖
林欣美
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2019
主題關鍵詞：金融科技；金融創新；競爭策略；金融監管；交易成本；資訊不對稱；制度理論；監管理論；監管沙箱；金融發展；Fintech；Financial Innovation；Competitive Strategy；Financial Supervision；transation cost；asymmetric information；institutional theory；regulatory theory；regulatory sandbox；Financial development
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:1
科技進步越來越深刻地改變和影響著金融業，在金融領域更是出現了金融(Finance)和科技(Technology)兩者結合的金融科技(Fintech)。金融科技的應用將在未來金融業發展中逐步成為常態，從產品、工具、部門工作層面的管理，跨入到業務模式、組織形式、激勵機制、資源範圍等核心領域；並且由新的發起方用更多樣的組織形式來整合資源成為可能，因此對於金融服務、金融深度、金融效率、金融監管的影響非常深遠，甚至還會創造全新的生活方式。
本文以科技進步為大背景，重點從制度理論與交易成本理論兩個角度來解讀中國大陸金融科技進步對金融業發展的深遠影響，透過三個層次來闡述和分析，包括金融科技對產品、服務等商業模式層面的影響；金融科技對企業邊界、業務流程等組織形式層面的影響；金融科技對金融機構控制與監管的影響和建議。本研究與質性研究的深入訪談方式以文獻為基礎進行理論的應用與驗證為研究方法。訪談對象包括證卷、商業銀行以及保險產業類別中的各2家公司，訪談人次共18人。
由於金融科技進步使得資訊傳播有了新管道，可以實現資訊傳播成本更低、速度更快，便捷了資訊傳播；同時資訊獲取增加了新手段，擴大了資訊生成，可以實現資訊來源更廣、分析更准。因此金融科技進步對金融業發展最核心的影響在於降低交易成本和削弱資訊不對稱程度。科技進步通過和金融服務業的結合，帶來了金融廣度的擴大，整合了更多資源，會給客戶提供很多新的服務方式和產品，差異化程度更豐富。
同時金融科技會從輔助功能逐漸進入到核心功能，更多的資訊被生產和使用，從而實現交易更活躍，加強金融深度，市場有效性提高。科技進步會顛覆很多傳統金融業務模式，特別是對於具有更高交易成本和資訊不對稱等壁壘的金融領域來說，科技進步通過金融廣度和金融深度兩個層面提高了金融效率，促進了金融業競爭。
各類金融機構在科技進步帶來的變革中也需要不斷地改變自己、創新發展，從資訊角度分析科技進步對交易成本和資訊不對稱兩個核心問題的影響，以適應業務模式創新和對專業化程度更高的要求。科技進步對金融企業的邊界產生了深遠影響，各類專業化程度更高的細分領域競爭者可以展開更多的競合策略，包括湧現更多的跨界現象。科技進步對金融機構競爭策略和風險控制的推動作用也越來越顯著，要積極使用新的資訊來源，挖掘新的資訊價值，設計新的競爭角度和策略或者用更低成本和更高效率去實現，提高資產收益。金融監管也需要從更大的背景出發，做到深刻理解金融創新的內涵，深刻把握技術進步的影響，理解科技進步對金融微觀運行機制的影響，在促進其提升金融效率的同時控制好可能的金融風險。
Science and technology has changed and influenced the financial industry more and more profoundly. In recent years, a new force named Fintech combing finance and technology has emerged. The application of Fintech will gradually become the norm in the future development of the financial industry. Not only changing the management of products, channels, tools and other repetitive working contents, it will enter the core areas of business model, organization form, incentive mechanism, and resource scope. And it will help new initiators entering the financial industry and bring new forms of competition. It is possible to integrate resources in more varied forms of organization, and therefore have a profound impact on financial services, financial depth, financial efficiency, and financial supervision.
This paper takes technology development as the background and focuses on explaining the far-reaching impact of Fintech on the development of the financial industry from the two perspectives of transaction costs and information asymmetry. It specifically explains and analyzes the Fintech progress and its impact through four levels, including the impact of Fintech on the business models of financial products and services; the impact of Fintech on the organizational forms such as corporate borders and business processes; the impact of Fintech on the innovation of financial institutions and their competition strategies; and the impact of Fintech on financial risks control and its implications for financial supervision.
As the advancement of Fintech has made new channels for information dissemination possible, it can achieve lower information transmission costs, faster speeds, and more convenient information dissemination. At the same time, new means have emerged in information acquisition, which helps to expand information generation, and involve wider information sources and more accurate and timely analysis. Therefore, the most central influence of the progress of Fintech on the development of the financial industry lies in reducing transaction costs and weakening information asymmetry. The combination of technology development with the financial services industry has brought about an expansion of the financial breadth, integrated more resources, and will provide customers with many new service methods and products, with a greater degree of differentiation.
Also the influences brought by Fintech will gradually move from the auxiliary functions to the core functions. And as more information being produced and used, it will thereby realize more active transactions, strengthen financial depth and improve market effectiveness. Progress in Fintech will overturn many traditional financial business models, improve financial efficiency through financial breadth and financial depth, and promote the financial industry competition, especially for financial subsectors with higher transaction costs and information asymmetries.
Conclusively, financial institutions need to constantly change themselves and innovate in the changing landscape brought about by advances in science and technology. Financial institutions should analyze the impact of Fintech progress on the two core issues of transaction costs and information asymmetry, and embrace those business model innovations and fulfill higher requirements of professionalism. The progress of Finetch has had a profound effect on the boundaries of financial institutions. Competitors in various sub-fields with higher levels of specialization can launch more co-opetition strategies and more cross-border competition. Financial institutions must actively use new sources of information, tap new information values, design new competitive means and strategies or use lower costs and higher efficiency to realize returns and control risks. Financial supervision also needs to start from a larger background, so as to profoundly understand the connotation of financial innovation, grasp the impact of Fintech progress on financial micro-operational mechanisms, and promote more efficient and timely control of financial risks while improving the whole financial efficiency.
參考文獻
一、中文部分
1.彼得.蒂爾、布萊克.馬斯特斯 (2015)，從0到1：開啟商業與未來的秘密，中信出版社。
2.戴志敏、羅崢 (2009)，科技進步對金融創新活動促進研究，科技管理研究，V28(11)，48-51。
3.多納德.海、德里克.莫瑞斯 (2001)，產業經濟學與組織，經濟科學出版社。
4.佛蘭克林.艾倫、道格拉斯.蓋爾 (2002)，比較金融系統，中國大陸人民大學出版社。
5.傑倫.拉尼爾 (2014)，互聯網衝擊-互聯網思維與我們的未來，中信出版社。
6.哈威爾.弗雷克斯、讓.夏爾.羅歇 (2000)，微觀銀行學，西南財經大學出版社。
7.漢斯.烏裡希.德瑞克 (2002)，全能銀行-未來的銀行類型，中國大陸金融出版社。
8.邁克爾.波特 (2005)，競爭優勢，華夏出版社。
9.朱甯 (2014)，投資者的敵人，中信出版社。
10.徐木蘭, 沈介文, & 陳銘嘉. (2010). 戰後六十年台灣商管學術研究取向之分析與展望: 制度理論觀點. 明道學術論壇, 6(4), 45-65.
11.莊世杰, 賴志松, 孫衙聰, 龔昶元, 葉穎蓉, & 許秉瑜. (2005). 一個 ERP 系統之建構決定因素的理論探索: 整合制度理論, 資源依賴理論, 資源基礎理論及交易成本理論之理論模型. 資訊管理學報, 12(1), 149-170.

二、英文部分
1.Abercrombie, T. A. (1986). The politics of sacrifice: an Aymara cosmology in action (Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago).
2.Alt, R., Beck, R., & Smits, M. T. (2018). FinTech and the transformation of the financial industry.
3.Allen N. Berger (2003). The Economic Effects of Technological Progress: Evidence from the Banking Industry. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, Volume 35.
4.Ameriks, J., T. Wranik, and P. Salovey (2011). Emotional Intelligence and Investor Behavior, Charlottesville. VA: Research Foundation of CFA Institute.
5.AR Barros (2007). Information technology and long term trends of financial services supply. Global Business & Economics Review, 6(1),149-170.
6.Authority, F. C. (2015). Regulatory sandbox. online< https://www. fca. org. uk/publication/research/regulatory-sandbox. pdf>(last accessed 1 October 2016).
7.Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The qualitative report, 13(4), 544-559.
8.Christian Haddad, Lars Hornuf (2016). The Emergence of the Global Fintech Market: Economic and Technological Determinants. CESIFO WORKING PAPER NO. 6131.
9.Claessens, Stijn, Thomas Glaessner, Daniela Klingebiel (2002). Electronic Finance: Reshaping the Financial Landscape Around the World. Journal of Financial Services Research, 22, 29-61.
10.Cashore, B., & Vertinsky, I. (2000). Policy networks and firm behaviours: Governance systems and firm reponses to external demands for sustainable forest management. Policy sciences, 33(1), 1-30.
11.DeYoung Robert (2002). Learning-by-Doing, Scale Efficiencies, and Financial Performance at Internet-Only Banks. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Working Paper, 01-06.
12.David Tuckett, Richard J.Taffler (2012). Fund Management: An Emotional Finance Perspective. The Research Foundation of CFA Institute.
13.Deng, A., & Chen, Z. (2017). Managing Online Supply Chain finance Credit Risk of “Asymmetric Information”. World Journal of Research and Review, 4, 29-32.
14.DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Collective rationality and institutional isomorphism in organizational fields. American sociological review, 48(2), 147-160.
15.Douglas Arner, Janos Barberis, Ross Buckley (2015). The Evolution Of Fintech: A New Post-Crisis Paradigm. University of Hong Kong Faculty of Law Research Paper, 47.
16.Douglas W. Arner, Jànos Barberis, Ross P. Buckley (2017). FinTech, RegTech and the Reconceptualization of Financial Regulation. Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business, 37(3).
17.Edjabou, M. E., Jensen, M. B., Götze, R., Pivnenko, K., Petersen, C., Scheutz, C., & Astrup, T. F. (2015). Municipal solid waste composition: Sampling methodology, statistical analyses, and case study evaluation. Waste Management, 36, 12-23.
18.Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of management review, 14(4), 532-550.
19.Ferrell, O. C., & Fraedrich, J. (2015). Business ethics: Ethical decision making & cases. Nelson Education.
20.Flick, U. (2018). An introduction to qualitative research. Sage Publications Limited.
21.Gerring, J. (2006). Case study research: Principles and practices. Cambridge university press.
22.Guan, J., & Yam, R. C. (2015). Effects of government financial incentives on firms’ innovation performance in China: Evidences from Beijing in the 1990s. Research Policy, 44(1), 273-282.
23.Guo, Y., & Liang, C. (2016). Blockchain application and outlook in the banking industry. Financial Innovation, 2(1), 24.
24.John H. Gibbons (1984). Effects of Information Technology on Financial Services Systems. NTIS order #PB85-152619.
25.Lagarde, C. (2018). Central Banking and Fintech: A Brave New World. Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, 12(1-2), 4-8.
26.Lai, K. H., Wong, C. W., & Cheng, T. E. (2006). Institutional isomorphism and the adoption of information technology for supply chain management. Computers in Industry, 57(1), 93-98.
27.Lemmon, M. L., & Zender, J. F. (2016). Asymmetric Information, Debt Capacity, And Capital Structure.
28.Lu, H., Tan, Y., & Huang, H. (2013). Why do venture capital firms exist: An institution-based rent-seeking perspective and Chinese evidence. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(3), 921-936.
29.Lopatta, K., Buchholz, F., & Kaspereit, T. (2016). Asymmetric information and corporate social responsibility. Business & Society, 55(3), 458-488.
30.Hsin-Mei, L. (2006). Interorganizational collaboration, social embeddedness, and value creation: A theoretical analysis. International Journal of Management, 23(3), 548.
31.He, L., & Ho, S. J. K. (2011). Monitoring costs, managerial ethics and corporate governance: A modeling approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(4), 623-635.
32.Houghton, C., Murphy, K., Shaw, D., & Casey, D. (2015). Qualitative case study data analysis: An example from practice. Nurse Researcher (2014+), 22(5), 8.
33.Gary E. Porter, Jack W. Trifts (2014). The Career Paths of Mutual Fund Managers: The Role of Merit. Financial Analysts Journal, 70(4).
34.Graafland, J. J., & van de Ven, B. W. (2011). The credit crisis and the moral responsibility of professionals in finance. Journal of business ethics, 103(4), 605-619.
35.Gomber, P., Koch, J. A., & Siering, M. (2017). Digital Finance and FinTech: current research and future research directions. Journal of Business Economics, 87(5), 537-580.
36.Guo, Y., & Liang, C. (2016). Blockchain application and outlook in the banking industry. Financial Innovation, 2(1), 24.
37.Hancock, D. R., & Algozzine, B. (2016). Doing case study research: A practical guide for beginning researchers. Teachers College Press.
38.Hailiang Chen, Prabuddha De, Yu (Jeffrey) Hu, Byoung-Hyoun Hwang (2014). Wisdom of Crowds: The Value of Stock Opinions Transmitted Through Social Media. The Review of Financial Studies, V27(5), 1367-1403.
39.Hauswald Robert, Robert Marquez (2003). Information Technology and Financial Services Competition. Review of Financial Studies, V16(3), 921-948.
40.Hunter William C., Stephen G. Timme (1986). Technical Change, Organizational form, and the Structure of Bank Productivity. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, V18, 152-166.
41.Hirsch, P. M. (1975). Organizational effectiveness and the institutional environment. Administrative science quarterly, 327-344.
42.Jenik, I., & Lauer, K. (2017). Regulatory sandboxes and financial inclusion. Washington, DC: CGAP.
43.Jing, H. A. N. (2010). An empirical analysis on China's high-technology industry innovation efficiency based on SFA [J]. Studies in Science of Science, 3, 021.
44.Jalil, A., & Feridun, M. (2011). The impact of growth, energy and financial development on the environment in China: a cointegration analysis. Energy Economics, 33(2), 284-291.
45.Ladislav Kristoufek (2013). Can Google Trends search queries contribute to risk diversification. Scientific Reports, V3, 2713.
46.Levav, J., J.J. Argo (2010). Physical Contact and Financial Risk Taking. Psychological Science, 21(6), 804–810.
47.Liu, F. C., Simon, D. F., Sun, Y. T., & Cao, C. (2011). China's innovation policies: Evolution, institutional structure, and trajectory. Research Policy, 40(7), 917-931.
48.Li Xi, Rodney N. Sullivan (2011), A Dynamic Future for Active Quant Investing. Journal of Portfolio Management, 37(3), 29–36.
49.Lin, H. M., Chen, H., Sher, P. J., & Mei, H. C. (2010). Inter-network co-evolution: reversing the fortunes of declining industrial networks. Long Range Planning, 43(5-6), 611-638.
50.Lin, H. M., Huang, H. C., Lin, C. P., & Hsu, W. C. (2012). How to manage strategic alliances in OEM-based industrial clusters: Network embeddedness and formal governance mechanisms. Industrial Marketing Management, 41(3), 449-459.
51.Luo, Y., Xue, Q., & Han, B. (2010). How emerging market governments promote outward FDI: Experience from China. Journal of world business, 45(1), 68-79.
52.LW Boone, AN Andreou (2002). The impact of information technology and cultural differences on organizational behavior in the financial service industry. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 3(14), 248-261.
53.Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American journal of sociology, 83(2), 340-363.
54.Misangyi, V. F., Weaver, G. R., & Elms, H. (2008). Ending corruption: The interplay among institutional logics, resources, and institutional entrepreneurs. Academy of Management Review, 33(3), 750-770.
55.Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. Jossey-Bass.
56.Meyer, B. (2015). Case studies. In Researching Translation and Interpreting (pp. 195-202). Routledge.
57.Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. Revised and Expanded from" Case Study Research in Education.". Jossey-Bass Publishers, 350 Sansome St, San Francisco, CA 94104.
58.Nicoletti, B. (2017). The future of FinTech: Integrating finance and technology in financial services. Springer.
59.North, D. C. (1990). A transaction cost theory of politics. Journal of theoretical politics, 2(4), 355-367.
60.Orru, M., Biggart, N. W., & Hamilton, G. G. (1991). Organizational isomorphism in East Asia: Broadening the new insititutionalism. Institute of Governmental Affairs, University of California, Davis.
61.Oyserman, D. (2009). Identity-based motivation: Implications for action-readiness, procedural-readiness, and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(3), 250-260.
62.Vives, X. (2017). The impact of FinTech on banking. European Economy, (2), 97-105.
63.Puddephatt, A. J. (2008). Incorporating ritual into greedy institution theory: The case of devotion in amateur chess. The Sociological Quarterly, 49(1), 155-180.
64.Peng, M. W. (2002). Towards an institution-based view of business strategy. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19(2-3), 251-267.
65.Pozen, Robert, Theresa Hamacher (2011). The Fund Industry: How Your Money Is Managed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
66.Postlewaite, A. (2016). Asymmetric information. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 1-3.
67.Vasant Dhar, Roger M. Stein (2017). FinTech Platforms and Strategy. MIT Sloan School of Management Working Paper, 5183-16.
68.Pollari, I. (2016). The rise of Fintech opportunities and challenges. Jassa, (3), 15.
69.RBVK Vemuri (2004). Information technology and e-Business in the financial services: a global anthology of case studies and analytical research. Journal of Information Technology Case & Application research, 3, 66-68.
70.Roberts, P. W., & Greenwood, R. (1997). Integrating transaction cost and institutional theories: Toward a constrained-efficiency framework for understanding organizational design adoption. Academy of management review, 22(2), 346-373.
71.Roberts, M. R. (2015). The role of dynamic renegotiation and asymmetric information in financial contracting. Journal of Financial Economics, 116(1), 61-81.
72.Robert Pozen, Theresa Hamacher (2011), Most Likely to Succeed: Leadership in the Fund Industry. Financial Analysts Journal, 67(6).
73.Saloner Garth, Andrea Shepard (1995). Adoption of Technologies with Network Effects: An Empirical Examination of the Adoption of Automated Teller Machines. Rand Journal of Economics, 26, 479-501.
74.Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative science quarterly, 224-253.
75.Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations.
76.Sánchez, M. (2010). Financial innovation and the global crisis. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(11), 26.
77.Stake, R. E., Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. SAGE, Londres.
78.Stake, R. E. (2013). Multiple case study analysis. Guilford Press.
79.Stroebel, J. (2016). Asymmetric information about collateral values. The Journal of Finance, 71(3), 1071-1112.
80.Siu-Lun, Wong. "Chinese entrepreneurs and business trust." Asian business networks 64 (1996): 13-24.
81.Song, M., Ai, H., & Li, X. (2015). Political connections, financing constraints, and the optimization of innovation efficiency among China's private enterprises. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 92, 290-299.
82.Thiel, C. E., Bagdasarov, Z., Harkrider, L., Johnson, J. F., & Mumford, M. D. (2012). Leader ethical decision-making in organizations: Strategies for sensemaking. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(1), 49-64.
83.Tolbert, P. S., & Zucker, L. G. (1983). Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organizations: The diffusion of civil service reform, 1880-1935. Administrative science quarterly, 22-39.
84.Xiang, P., Huo, X., & Shen, L. (2015). Research on the phenomenon of asymmetric information in construction projects—The case of China. International journal of project management, 33(3), 589-598.
85.Xiaoqiu, W. U. (2015). Internet finance: the logic of growth. Finance Trade Econ, 2, 5-15.
86.Yang, X., & Gao, J. (2017). Bayesian equilibria for uncertain bimatrix game with asymmetric information. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 28(3), 515-525.
87.Yeoh, P. (2016). Innovations in Financial Services: Regulatory Implications. Business Law Review, 37(5), 190-196.
88.Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (applied social research methods). London and Singapore: Sage.
89.Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage publications.
90.Yin, R. K. (2011). Applications of case study research. Sage.
91.Zhang, Y. J. (2011). The impact of financial development on carbon emissions: An empirical analysis in China. Energy Policy, 39(4), 2197-2203.
92.Zhi Da, Umit G. Gurun, Mitch Warachka (2014). Frog in the Pan: Continuous Information and Momentum. Review of Financial Studies, 27(7), 2171-2218.
93.Zhu, H. (2012). An institution theory of formal meta-modelling in graphically extended BNF. Frontiers of Computer Science, 6(1), 40-56.
94.Zhu, Y., Wittmann, X., & Peng, M. W. (2012). Institution-based barriers to innovation in SMEs in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29(4), 1131-1142.

三、網路文獻
1.Fabio Braggion, Alberto Manconi, Haikun Zhu (2017). Can Technology Undermine Macroprudential Regulation? Evidence from Peer-to-Peer Credit in China. SSRN, from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2957411.
2.Hee Soo Lee (2013). Risk and Return in Hedge Funds and Funds of Hedge Funds: A Cross-Sectional Approach. Ssrn Electronic Journal, from: http://papers.ssrn.com.

 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：652（臺灣：643，外國：9） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2446764 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：68244773
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上