韓國製造業의 總要素生産性推移 分析에 관한 硏究

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This paper studies the growth process of Korean manufacturing industry by adopting the TOTAL FACTOR PRODUCTIVITY (TFP) concept, which considers inputs of several production factors simultaneously as an analytical means, to evaluate the trend of efficiency improvement in the production process from 1966 to 1988. The scope of this paper is quite limited due to the inherent data constraints both in input and output sides, and that the paper focuses only on the study of the trend in the TFP change.
As the TFP approach invariably necessitates the value added data, it bears a considerable upward leaning in changes of measured TFP values by including the fundamental production factors (L, K ) while excluding the intermediate(s) from total quantity production function. Nevertheless, the author chooses the TFP concept for its relevant and realistic conception.
To seek TFP index using Growth Accounting approach, we need materials for value added, labor input, capital input and income distribution rate for the two factors of production. In this paper, Mr. Song Chi Young's material is used for capital stock and others are taken from the national income accountings, and most data are calculated on stocks concept of inputs in stead of flow. As mentioned the paper endorses the growth accounting method among various measuring methods of the TFP and used the method of estimating output by value added criterion. Also the paper adjusted the qualitative change in labor in calculating the labor input index according to Denison's claim but didn't consider the adjustment for capital input such as Jorgenson-Griliches's claim.
Survey results are quite obvious as followings, First, Korean manufacturing industry's productivity contribution rate to growth is very low. It shows that the growth has been led by factor input rather than productivity growth. The growth rate of Korean manufacturing industry between 1966 and 1988 was 17.223, while that of TFP was mere 5.37% and its contribution rate to growth is only 31.01%; i.e.; bout 69% of growth is made by the production factor input increments: labor and capital, It implies that the production factors had not been efficiently used and thus we can conclude that the growth of the manufacturing sector has been inefficient.
When we look into the productivity trend related to the Oil Shocks, there is a tendency of dampening of the TFP during the period of the Oil Shocks, The TFP between 1966-73, the pre-oil shock period, shows 6.72% of growth rate and in the period of the Oil Shocks from 1973 to 1979, it shows the lowest of 3.5% compared with other periods, and its contribut on for the growth was also fell from 30.88% t o 19.57%. This assures the growth pattern of input-factor bias of Korean manufacturing industry had deepened further after the Oil Shocks Analyzing the trend by sector, it becomes more clear that the capital productivity growth rate has been very low. Four industry sectors such as food, beverages and tabacco, paper & paper products, printing & publishing, Chemicals & petroleum, coal, rubber & plastic products, fabricated metal products, machinery & equipment industry can be grouped in this category. An important phenomenon is the fact that the more capital intensive industry demonstrates the lower capital productivity increase. It is manifested that Korean manufacturing industry's low TFP increase rate underlines that the capital input plays an important role in its growth.
The result of comparison by applying Purchasing Power appraisal through national economy of productivity criterion between countries and applying exchange rate shows that while the U.S's productivity growth rate is relatively low, Korea's one shows high growth rate and it is narrowing the productivity gap with the compared countries such as Taiwan, Singapore and Hong Kong.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목차 = ⅰ
• Ⅰ. 序論 = 1
• 1. 硏究의 目的 = 1
• 2. 硏究方法 및 分析對象期間 = 2
• Ⅱ. 生産性의 測定方法 = 3
• 1. 生産性에 관한 理論的 考察 = 3
• (1) 生産性의 理論的 根據 = 3
• (2) 生産性의 槪念과 問題點 = 4
• (3) 生産性槪念의 發展 = 8
• 2. 總要素生産性 測定方法 = 11
• (1) 生産性 測定方法의 發展過程 = 11
• (2) 總要素生産性 測走方法의 諸類型 = 13
• Ⅲ. 總要素生産性 推移分析 및 國際比較 = 25
• 1. 産出 및 投入의 推定과 問題點 = 25
• (1) 産出의 推定 = 25
• (2) 役入의 推定 = 25
• 2. 成長會計方式에 따른 總要素生産性 推移 = 33
• 3. 總要素生産性 推定結果分析 = 39
• 4. 産業別 生産性 推移 = 42
• 5. 生産性의 國際比較 = 44
• Ⅳ. 生産性變化의 要因分析 = 50
• Ⅴ. 結論 = 57
• 參考文獻 = 60
• SUMMARY = 65
• 附表 = 68