基于风险与绩效相关性的地方政府性债务管理研究

发布时间：2018-07-01 15:35

本文选题：地方政府性债务 + 债务管理　；参考：《财政研究》2017年03期

【摘要】：本文利用综合指标体系评估2013年地方政府性债务风险,同时利用DEA方法评估2011-2013年地方政府性债务绩效。与按规模评价不同,本文认为地方政府性债务风险的区域差异性明显,大部分中部地区大而东部地区较小;从绩效看,债务的整体绩效在下降,且不存在明显的区域性。基于债务风险与绩效的相关性,将30个省份划分为四类,即:综合风险较高、使用绩效较高的地区;综合风险较高、使用绩效较低的地区;综合风险较低、使用绩效较高的地区;综合风险较低、使用绩效较低的地区。不同地区的债务管理重点与思路由于其风险与绩效特征不同而不同;财政部应根据地方政府在债务风险与债务绩效方面的表现,对地方政府的债务规模与新增债务限额进行动态管理,将新增限额在不同地区进行重新配置。鉴于绩效评估的滞后效应,可使用近2-3年的绩效评估平均值作为对债务动态管理的依据。
[Abstract]:This paper uses the comprehensive index system to evaluate the local government debt risk in 2013 and the DEA method to evaluate the performance of local government debt in 2011-2013. Different from the scale evaluation, this paper thinks that the regional difference of the local government debt risk is obvious, most of the central region is large while the eastern region is smaller; from the performance point of view, the overall performance of the debt is declining, and there is no obvious regional. Based on the correlation between debt risk and performance, 30 provinces are divided into four categories, namely: areas with higher comprehensive risk and higher performance in use; areas with higher comprehensive risk and low performance in use; and low comprehensive risk. Use areas with higher performance; areas with low overall risk and low use performance. The emphasis and thinking of debt management in different regions are different because of their different risk and performance characteristics, and the Ministry of Finance should be based on the performance of local governments in debt risk and debt performance. The scale of local government debt and new debt limits are dynamically managed, and the new limits are redistributed in different regions. In view of the lag effect of performance evaluation, the average value of performance evaluation for nearly 2-3 years can be used as the basis for dynamic debt management.
【作者单位】：湖南大学金融与统计学院;
【分类号】：F812.5

【相似文献】