新北市基層農會信用部財務比率分析

Abstract

本研究根據民國86年至民國100年之農會年報資料，計算出此一期間新北市地區24家基層農會信用部之13項經營指標。研究期間以民國85年至99年共十五年進行研究。依據各基層農會信用部所在區域之都市化程度將其分為「都市型」、「綜合型」以及「鄉村型」等3種類型。藉以分析比較農業金融改革對不同類型農會信用部之影響程度。 根據本研究之分析結果，就都市型農會來看，有6項經營指標在農業金融改革過後並未獲得改善，反而每況愈下。績效指標在改革前後持平的有1項。改革後獲得改善的項目有6項。就綜合型農會來看，有8項經營指標在農業金融改革過後並未獲得改善，反而每況愈下。績效指標在改革前後持平的有1項。改革後獲得改善的項目有4項。就鄉村型農會來看，有8項經營指標在農業金融改革過後並未獲得改善，反而每況愈下。而改革後獲得改善的項目則有4項。 綜上所述，以都市型農會信用部的績效表現最佳，鄉村型農會信用部的表現最差。同時，本研究發現農業金融改革對於提升資產品質與強化管理能力方面有較大的助益，反而對於其他經營績效的提升幫助有限，尤其一些與營收相關的指標更呈現衰退的現象，應與近年來景氣不佳且金融市場競爭激烈有關，這隱含著農業金融改革對於除弊有極大的效果，但相對而言，對於興利的作用確實有限，但是就目前的研究方法跟資料我們尚不能很清楚的區分是景氣的影響還是農業金融改革確實無法發揮其功效，有待未來相關研究將新北市地區其他商銀等金融機構加入探討之後，方能做出較為確實的結果。

The study calculates 13 management indice of 24 Farmers’ Association credit departments in New Taipei City pursuant to Farmers’ Association annual report data from 1997 to 2011. The research period is between 1996 and 2010. All the Farmers’ Associations are divided into 3 types pursuant to urbanization extent of every elementary Farmers’ Association credit department area (urban-type, synthetic-type, and rural-type) to analyze and compare influence of agriculture financial reform on different types of Farmers’ Association credit departments. The research results reveal that on point of view of urban-type Farmers’ Association, 6 indice are not improved but go from bad to worse after agriculture financial reform. 1 performance indice remain almost equal before and after reform. 6 indice are improved after reform. On point of view of synthetic-type Farmers’ Association, 8 management indice are not improved after agriculture financial reform but go from bad to worse. 1 performance indice remain equal before and after reform. 4 indice are improved after reform. On point of view of rural-type Farmers’ Association, 8 management indice are not improved after agriculture financial reform but go from bad to worse. 4 indice are improved after reform. To sum up the foresaid, credit department of the urban-type Farmers’ Association has the best performance, but that of the rural-type has the worst, while the study finds that agriculture financial reform has more benefit to enhancement of asset quality and intensification of management, but has limited help to enhancement of other management performance. Especially, some revenues relevant indice present the recession phenomenon, inferred to be related to bad prosperity and fierce financial market competition in recent years, implying that agriculture financial reform has tremendously excellent effect on promoting what is beneficial but by contrast, has limited effect on abolishing what is harmful. On the current research method and data, we can not still clearly distinguish that it is prosperity influence or agriculture financial reform that indeed can not give the rein to its efficacy, a more actual result of which needs prospective relevant researches to incorporate financial institutes (e.g. other commercial banks in New Taipei City) into exploration.