基于DEA模型的我国新能源产业上市公司经营绩效评价研究

发布时间：2018-01-24 10:49

本文关键词： 新能源上市公司 BCC模型 Malmquist指数绩效评价　出处：《南京工业大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：近几年全球新能源发展迅速，技术上逐步成熟，经济上也逐步为人们所接受，据预测，到2050年太阳能、风能、生物质能在世界能源结构中占比将达到50%。可见，21世纪是大规模开发利用新能源的世纪。同时，大力开发和利用新型能源也是我国优化能源结构，改善生态环境，促进经济社会可持续发展的重要战略措施之一。然而我国新能源产业发展过程中面临的技术、市场、管理和环境等众多风险被普遍忽视，使得产业潜在的危机凸显，加上国外市场需求的缩减，多数企业亏损、停产，全产业提前进入洗牌期。这无疑对新能源企业的经营绩效提出了更高的要求，新能源企业如何优化内部资源配置、调整业务结构，提高运营和产出效率，成为急待思考和解决的问题。本文首先根据现有文献成果对所要研究的绩效、绩效评价相关概念进行了界定，阐述了国外绩效评价研究的发展历程，梳理了国内绩效影响因素、绩效评价方法运用、新能源企业绩效等研究的现状。其次，，研究了新能源产业发展的影响因素，发展阶段、产业链和规模增长状况，分析了新能源上市公司的总资产、股本规模状况、财务状况和经营业绩状况，比较了几种常用绩效评价方法的优势和劣势，在与参数法SFA的比较中给出选取DEA评价的依据。再次，分别从静态和动态两方面评价了新能源产业上市公司的经营绩效，以非参数法的DEA模型度量了新能源上市公司的静态绩效；用Malmquist指数衡量了新能源上市公司动态经营绩效，并从横向公司之间和纵向不同年度之间两个角度分析了全要素生产率以及其变化趋势。得出如下结论：（一）我国新能源上市公司投入产出效率整体不是太高，在2009到2012年间，65家新能源上市公司分别有20、23、16、21家公司是纯技术效率和规模效率同时有效的，分别占所选企业的30.77%、35.38%、24.62%、32.31%；处于规模有效的企业占总样本比例分别为58.46%、46.15%、36.92%、36.92%；规模报酬递减的公司所占样本比例在分别为24.62%、36.92%、49.23%、50.77%；（二）样本新能源公司绩效投影分析中，投入冗余在5个投入变量上都存在，但主要集中在资本投入、劳动力投入和创新投入三方面。产出不足集中在净利润和每股收益上；（三）在样本研究期间，新能源产业上市公司经营效率呈下降趋势，TFP指数均值为0.942。新能源企业的技术进步指数与全要素生产率指数变化基本一致，呈现先上涨后下降的趋势，企业的技术进步指数是经营绩效提高的主要动力，结合我国新能源产业目前研发技术水平与发达国家相比还存在很大的差距的实际情况，技术进步还存在很大空间。从长远角度来看，推进企业的技术进步以及提高技术效率变化指数，尤其是改善企业的规模效率，对企业的经营绩效改善有相当大的潜力。最后从产业的宏观角度给出完善产业发展规划及配套政策实施细则；建设新能源相关技术标准体系；注重技术研发和产业基础性研究投入等三方面的对策。从企业微观角度给出重视技术创新；优化资源配置；创新思维等三个方面的建议。
[Abstract]:The global new energy development rapidly in recent years, the technology gradually mature, the economy is gradually accepted by people, according to the forecast, by 2050, solar energy, wind energy, biomass energy in the energy structure in the world accounted for visible ratio will reach 50%. in twenty-first Century, is a large-scale development and utilization of new century energy. At the same time, vigorously develop and use new energy is our country to optimize energy structure, improve the ecological environment, one of the important strategic measures to promote the sustainable development of economy and society. However, facing the development process of China's new energy industry in technology, market, management and environment and many other risks are generally ignored, making the crisis highlights the potential industry, coupled with reduced demand in foreign markets, the majority of enterprises loss of production, the whole industry into the shuffle stage in advance. This put forward higher requirements of new energy business performance, new energy enterprises how to optimize the allocation of internal resources, adjustment The whole business structure, improving the efficiency of operation and output, has become an urgent problem to be thought and solved.
According to the existing research results on the performance, the performance evaluation related concepts, expounds the development course of foreign performance evaluation research, combing the domestic factors affecting the performance and use of performance evaluation methods, the research of new energy enterprise performance status. Secondly, study the factors affecting the development of new energy industry the stage of development, industrial chain and scale growth situation, analysis of the total assets of the new energy listed companies, equity scale, financial condition and results of operations, and compares several performance evaluation methods and the advantages and disadvantages in comparison of SFA parameter method given in the selection of DEA evaluation basis. Thirdly, respectively from two the static and dynamic evaluation of the new energy industry, the performance of Listed Companies in the DEA model of non parameter method to measure the static performance of the new energy listed companies; Malmquist index scale We have measured the dynamic performance of new energy listed companies, and analyzed the total factor productivity and its changing trend from two angles: horizontal companies and vertical different years.
(a) of China's listed companies of the new energy input-output efficiency is not too high, in 2009 to 2012 years, 65 new energy listed companies respectively, 20,23,16,21 company is pure technical efficiency and scale efficiency effectively at the same time, the selected enterprises accounted for 30.77%, 35.38%, 24.62%, 32.31%; in the scale of effective enterprise the proportion of the total sample were 58.46%, 46.15%, 36.92%, 36.92%; decreasing returns to scale the company's share proportion in the sample were 24.62%, 36.92%, 49.23%, 50.77%; (two) analysis of the sample performance of New Energy Company projection, input redundancy in the 5 input variables exist, but mainly concentrated in the capital investment, labor force three. Input and innovation input output deficiency concentrated in net profit and earnings per share; (three) in the sample during the study period, the operating efficiency of the new energy industry listed companies declined, the TFP index value of 0.942. new energy The changes of enterprise technological progress index and total factor productivity index is basically the same, showing a downward trend after the first rise, enterprise technological progress index is the main power of performance improvement, combined with the current level of R & D technology actual situation is still a big gap compared with the developed countries of China's new energy industry, there are still a lot of technical progress space. From a long-term perspective, to promote enterprise technological progress and improve the technical efficiency change index, especially the improvement of enterprise scale efficiency, improve operating performance of the enterprises have considerable potential.
Finally, from the macro angle of the industry is to improve the industrial development planning and policy implementation rules; the construction of new energy related technical standard system; three countermeasures focus on technology research and development and the basic research investment. The importance of technological innovation from the micro perspective is given; optimizing the allocation of resources; three aspects of innovative thinking suggestions.

【学位授予单位】：南京工业大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：F406.7;F426.2

【参考文献】