http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
農業部門 投資事業의 經濟的 效果分析의 規準設定에 관한 硏究
文八龍 건국대학교 1979 學術誌 Vol.23 No.1
The objective in undertaking a public investment is, in broad sense, to increase social welfare. Where investment resources are as limited as in the agricultural sector in Korea, it is of the greatest importance to establish "investment criteria" to make correct choices among alternative investment opportunities in accordance with this objective. It is generally accepted that social welfare is a function off number of variables which include economic efficiency, the distribution of income, regional development, and national defense, etc. It is ideal that one would design a model which would predict the effect of each investment project on these variables and obtain a complete ranking of the alternatives. In practice this ideal is seldom attainable, and the economic analyist should be content to present an incomplete display of the effects of each investment project on the important variables, leaving the problem of weighing the various consequences to policy decision maker. There is, however, a class of agricultural investments where economic efficiency may be assumed to be the primary objective, and for most agricultural programs the problem of choosing between alternative investments may be so structured that the choice can be made on the basis of efficiency criteria. Where increased economic efficiency is the primary objective, benefit cost analysis can be used to obtain a ranking of alternative investments. This paper outlines in chapter II the general framework of benefit cost analysis and gives the underlying rationale behind the procedure. If the objective of economic analysis of agricultural projects is to compare benefits with costs to determine which among alternative is more remunerative, then the costs and benefits have to be identified. In chapter III, the nature and the desired measure of benefits and costs are discussed. The treatment of identifying costs and benefits is directed toward practical, operating approaches to the appraisal of agricultural projects. Chapter IV discusses the problem of valueing costs and benefits. There have been controversies over wether current market prices correspond to the true social values in measuring the erects of public investments. It is a general concensus that market prices cannot be applied as a yardstick of true social value when the market functions imperfectly. In chapter V the various problems pertaining to determination of discount rate are discussed. One of the central problems in benefit cost analysis is how to make commensurable the values of benefits and coats which occur at different tines. Also three indicators of investment efficiency are explained: they are (1) benefit cost ratio, (2) net present worth, and to (3) the internal rate of return. Each of these indicators has merits and demerits depending on the purpose of its application and the nature of the investment to which it is applied. Finally, in chapter VI two case studies have been made on the irrigation projects : Taean pumping station project and Jongan reservoir project. On the basis of available data, various irrigation effects are measured, touch as the creation of farmland basis, changes in cropping pattern, increase in yield per hectare, and increase in labor productivity. Also the internal rate of return was computed for each project.
Distribution Effects of Agricultural Protection in South Korea
Moon, Pal Yong 建國大學校 經濟經營硏究所 1992 商經硏究 Vol.17 No.1
Overall, agricultural pricing policy per se resulted in modest size of financial flow from nonagricultural to agricultural sector throughout 1962∼89 period, but trade and exchange rate policy more than offset the effect of price policy and effected a resource flow in reverse direction in the 1960s. For other years through 1989, the resource flow into the agricultural sector far exceeded the flow out of agriculture, mainly because of intensive price supports. As for the effects on income distribution, the agricultural price support programs have tended to provide benefits primarily for larger farms and to upper income urban consumers. Conversely, a very large number of small farmers and urban lower income earners were helped relatively little by price supports. As the Korean economy continues to grow, however, product lines will become increasingly diversified, and the pattern of consumption will undergo a substantial change. As the variety and volume of nonagricultural goods in the domestic market increase, the relative share of food in household expenditure falls. The average share of food in the cost of living was 42.5 percent in 1975, but it declined to 22.6 percent in 1989. It is expected to decline further as real incomes grows. Consequently, the distributional impact of agricultural price support policy on urban wage earners will be much smaller than it is on farm producers.