Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/27469
標題: DEA方法應用在評估臺灣地區一審法院審理案件效率之研究
A Study on Evaluating the Judge Efficiency by Applying the DEA Approach in District Court in Taiwan Area
作者: 郭恆超
Kuo, Heng-Chao
關鍵字: Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA)
資料包絡分析法
District Court
Aggregate Efficiency
Slack Variable Analysis
Sensitivity Analysis
地方法院
整體效率
差額變數分析
敏感性分析
出版社: 應用經濟學系所
引用: 中文部分: 1.王美惠,2002,台灣銀行業經濟效率與規模經濟效率分析─參數法與無參數法之比較,私立淡江大學管理科學學系博士論文。 2.王媛慧,1999,台灣地區醫院效率與生產力變動之研究─非參數DEA方法之應用,國立政治大學經濟學系博士論文。 3.王碧如,2004,台灣鮑生產技術效率之分析-以宜蘭地區經營場為例,台灣農業與資源經濟學會2004年年會暨第三屆學術研討會C2-3論文。 4.吳毓佳,2000,台灣地區銀行業經營績效之評估─DEA方法之應用,私立銘傳大學管理科學研究所博士論文。 5.呂忠勳,2000,資料包絡分析法應用於警察派出所績效評估之研究-以嘉義縣警察局為例,中央警察大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。 6.邢台平,1998,警察機關刑事偵防績效評估之研究-資料包絡分析法之應用,中央警察大學行政警察研究所碩士論文。 7.林炎秋,2003,我國司法機關審理案件效率評估之研究-以全國各地方法院民刑事訴訟案件為例,國立中正大學會計與資訊科技研究所碩士論文。 8.孫遜,2003,臺北市立綜合醫院營運績效評估之研究,管理學報,第20卷,第5期,第993-1022頁。 9.孫遜、張江忠,2003,台灣地區地方法院檢察署辦案績效評估之研究,第二屆全國應用經濟學術研討會論文。 10.高強、黃旭男、Sueyoshi, T.合著,2003,管理績效評估─資料包絡分析法,華泰文化,台北市。 11.張石柱、廖哲聖,2000,國軍醫院經營效率之實證研究,國防管理學院學報,第21卷,第1期,第1-17頁。 12.張甫任,2003,私立技術學院高階主管才能與組織績效之研究,私立中華大學科技管理研究所博士論文。 13.張東生、曾國強,2000,利用融入價值判斷之資料包絡分析模式衡量台灣地區公共安全品質,管理與系統,第7卷,第3期,第283-304頁。 14.張保隆、陳澤義,1995,台灣各縣市文化中心相對績效之評估,中國行政,第31-46頁。 15.張保隆、黃旭男、沈佩蒂,1997,台灣地區社會福利慈善事業基金會之績效評估,管理與系統,第4卷,第1期,第145-160頁。 16.張瑞濱,2003,我國私立技術學院經營效率之研究,私立中華大學科技管理研究所博士論文。 17.張寶光、劉智仁,2001,警察機關辦案效率評估及其影響因素,2001年生產力與效率學術研討會,B2-3。 18.彭雅惠,2004,台灣金融機構之效率評估:銀行業之購併效率與生產力分析及農會信用部之績效評估與影響因素,國立交通大學管理科學系博士論文。 19.黃旭男,1999,二階段資料包絡分析法在績效評估上之應用:以臺灣地區環保機構組織績效之評估為例,管理與系統,第6卷,第1期,第111-130頁。 20.黃旭男,1993,資料包絡分析法使用程序之研究及其在非營利組織效率評估上之應用,國立交通大學管理科學研究所博士論文。 21.黃旭男、唐先楠,1996,台灣地區環境品質之衡量,管理與系統,第3卷,第1期,第117-134頁。 22.駱豐裕,2004,DEA方法應用在評估台電公司服務所經營效率之研究,國立清華大學工業工程與工程管理學系博士論文。 23.鍾智耀,2000,警政預算執行績效對治安改善之影響,中原大學會計學系研究所碩士論文。 24.司法院,1981,法院法官辦案成績考察實施要點,司法院主管法規。 25.司法院統計處,2005,司法統計年報2004年。 26.台灣高等法院,2005,93年台灣司法統計專輯,第43期。 英文部分: 1.Banker, R. D. and Maindiratta, A., (1986), “Piecewise Loglinear Estimation of Efficient Production Surfaces,” Management Science, Vol. 32, No.1, pp.126-135. 2.Banker, R. D., Charnes, A. and Cooper, W. W., (1984), “Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Efficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis,” Management Science, Vol. 30, No. 9, pp.1078-1092. 3.Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W. and Schinnar, A. P., (1981), “A Bi-external Principle for Frontier Estimation and Efficiency Evaluations,” Management Science, Vol. 27, No. 12, pp.1370-1382. 4.Bjurek, H., Hjalmarsson, L. and Forsund, F. R., (1990), “Deterministic Parametric and Nonparametric Estimation of Efficiency in Service Production,” Journal of Economics, Vol. 46, pp.213-227. 5.Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W. and Rhodes, E., (1978), “Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 2, No. 6, pp.429-444, 1978. 6.Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Lewin, A. Y. and Seiford, L. M., (1994), Data Envelopment Analysis: Theory, Methodology and Application, Kluwer Academic, Boston, 1994. 7.Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Lewin, A. Y., Morey, R. C. and Rousseau, J., (1985), “Sensitivity and Stability Analysis in DEA,” Annuals of Operations Research, Vol. 2, pp.139-156, 1985. 8.Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M. and Stutz, J., (1983), “Invariant Multiplicative Efficiency and Piecewise Cobb-Douglas Envelopment.” Operations Research Letters, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp.101-103, 1983. 9.Coelli, T., (1996), “A Guide to DEAP Version 2.1: A Data Envelopment Analysis Program”. (http://www.une.edu.au/econometrics/cepa.htm) 10.Farrell, M. J. and Fieldhouse, M., (1962), “Estimating Efficient Production Functions under Increasing Returns to Scale,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, General, 125, Part 2, pp.252-267, 1962. 11.Farrell, M. J., (1957), “The Measurement of Productive Efficiency,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A, Vol. 120, No. 3, pp.253-290, 1957. 12.Francisco Pedraja-Chaparro and Javier Salinas-Jimenez (1996), “An assessment of the efficiency of Spanish Courts using DEA”, Applied Economics, 1996, 28, p1391-1403 13.Golany, B. and Roll, Y., (1989), “An Application Procedure for DEA,” OMEGA, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp.237-250, 1989. 14.Kao, C. and Yang, Y. C., (1992), “Reorganization of Forest Districts via Efficiency Measurement, ” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 58, pp.356-362, 1992. 15.Keeney, R. and Raiffa, H., Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs, New York, NY: Cambrige University Press, 1993. 16.Kittelsen, S.A.C and Forsund, (1992), “Efficiency Analysis of Norwegian District Courts”, The Journal of Productivity Analysis ,3,277-306. 17.Lewin, A. Y. and Minton, J. W., (1986), “Determining Organizational Effectiveness: Another Look, and an Agenda for Research,” Management Science, Vol. 32, No. 5, pp.514-538, 1986. 18.Lewin, A. Y., Morey, R. C. and Cook, T. C. (1982), “Evaluating the administrative efficiency of Courts”, Omega, The International Journal of Management Science, 10 (4), 401-11. 19.Seiford, L. M., (1997), “A Bibliography for Data Envelopment Analysis (1978-1996),” Annals of Operations Research, Vol. 73, pp.393-438, 1997. 20.Sueyoshi, T., (1990), “A Special Algorithm for An Additive Model in Data Envelopment Analysis,” Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 41, No. 3, pp.249-257, 1990. 21.Tavares, G., (2002), A Bibliography of Data Envelopment Analysis (1978-2001), Technical Report RRR01-02, RUTCOR, Rutgers University, Piscataway, N. J., 2002.
摘要: 本文主要目的是應用資料包絡分析法(Data Envelopment Analysis, DEA)評估台灣地區一審法院審理案件之相對效率,以提供法院有效運用司法資源提高生產力,進而提昇整體的案件審理效率為目的。針對民國93年度司法院所屬台灣地區19家地方法院,就其所審理之五大主要案件類別,選取之辦案資料及投入產出資源,作為分析基礎。投入項目有三,分別為:法官與其他支援人數與經常支出決算數三項,至於產出部分,則以刑事、民事、強制執行、簡易案件以及非訟事件的終結件數等五項指標表示之。 茲將重要實證分析成果列述如下: 一、實證分析結果,整體審理效率方面,臺灣地區19個地方法院總效率平均值為0.928,其中有8家法院是屬於相對有效率的法院,顯示整體上地方法院在審理案件效率方面仍有加強的空間。 二、透過差額變數分析,可以提供各院須改善的方向。相對缺乏效率法院,可透過調整「其他支援人數」、「經常支出」等投入產出項目提高生產力,以改善其整體效率值,惟在應用上,需在考量公義、制度等實務限制下,謹慎處理。 三、以BCC可變生產規模模式評估觀之,本研究結果發現臺北、臺中、臺南、高雄、屏東、基隆、彰化及桃園等8個法院之最佳生產規模,係處於固定規模報酬的狀態。而相對缺乏效率的地方法院,大部分則處於規模報酬遞增的狀態,僅有板橋法院為規模報酬遞減的狀態。 四、「相對缺乏效率法院」可透過參考群體分析結果,確定參考法院對象,以達到提升效率之目的。以板橋法院而言,根據本研究之實證結果,可以參考學習的對象,依序為桃園、基隆、高雄及台北等四家法院。 五、各法院可透過敏感性分析,診斷其較具優勢的投入及產出項,得以瞭解「自己的優勢基礎」。以臺南法院為例,本研究實證結果指出,其「強制執行終結件數」係為最重要的優勢項目,換言之,該法院所有的審判業務單位中,民事執行處之表現,最為優異。
This main purpose of this study is to evaluate the relative efficiency of the District Court of Taiwan by applying the Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) approach. Five main cases classifications data from 19 District Courts in 2004 were selected. Three factors, which included Judge numbers, staffs numbers, and the number of often paying final accounts, and five factors, which included the terminated case numbers of the Criminal, the Civil, the Civil Compulsory Execution, the Simple and Non-contentious by District Courts in Taiwan. Main conclusions are listed as follows: 1.Empirical results implied that the average value of total efficiency of total 19 district courts in Taiwan was 0.928. 8 District Courts were relative efficient based on this study. 2.Through the Slack Variable Analysis, this study provided a direction for those relative inefficient courts to improve by adjusting the input and output items, such as “staffs numbers” and “often paying final accounts”. With the limitations on regulations and fairness, real practices of the results should be cautious. 3.With BCC - the variable production scale specification approach, the best production scale for 8 counties, which were Taipei, Taichung, Tainan, Kaohsiung, Pingtung, Keelung, Chungwha, and Taoyuanns, were the constant return to scale. District court with less efficient all were categorized in the state of increasing returns to scale but the Panchiao District Court, which was the only exemption with decreasing attribute. 4.The Consult Colony''s Analysis could offer those less efficient courts to target the paradigm courts to improve their efficiency. For example, Taoyuan, Keelung, Kaohsiung, and Taipei were the four ordered colonies that the Panchiao District Court could seek for consulting assistance. 5.Through the Sensitivity Analysis, the inputs and outputs with competitiveness in every district could be diagnosed to improve their fundamental advantages. Taking the court of Tainan as an example, “Civil Compulsory Execution Cases Terminated Number” in its output was the most important competitive item. In other words, the “Civil Execution Department” was the most outstanding sector in all judicial service departments at this District Court.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/27469
其他識別: U0005-1108200614361300
文章連結: http://www.airitilibrary.com/Publication/alDetailedMesh1?DocID=U0005-1108200614361300
Appears in Collections:應用經濟學系

文件中的檔案:

取得全文請前往華藝線上圖書館

Show full item record
 
TAIR Related Article
 
Citations:


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.