| Project/Area Number |
17K03685
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Multi-year Fund |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Research Field |
Economic policy
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Kobe University |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
|
|---|
| Co-Investigator(Kenkyū-buntansha) |
中村 絵理 神戸大学, 経営学研究科, 准教授 (00611071)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2017-04-01 – 2021-03-31
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 2020)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥4,030,000 (Direct Cost: ¥3,100,000、Indirect Cost: ¥930,000)
Fiscal Year 2020: ¥1,040,000 (Direct Cost: ¥800,000、Indirect Cost: ¥240,000)
Fiscal Year 2019: ¥1,040,000 (Direct Cost: ¥800,000、Indirect Cost: ¥240,000)
Fiscal Year 2018: ¥1,040,000 (Direct Cost: ¥800,000、Indirect Cost: ¥240,000)
Fiscal Year 2017: ¥910,000 (Direct Cost: ¥700,000、Indirect Cost: ¥210,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | 組織 / ガバナンス / 公益企業 / 組織規模 / 効率性 / 構造分離 |
|---|
| Outline of Final Research Achievements |
The main results are as follows. (i) Governance factors such as ownership by domestic companies and individual shareholders clearly reduce inefficiency, but industry-level factors such as regulation and competition increase inefficiency. (ii) In the rail industry, the cost advantageous vertical structure can be explained by the degree of train density. At smaller (larger) train density, vertical separation (integration) is best. At medium train density, an intermediate organization is best. (iii) In the vertical integrated rail companies, Informal communication is significant for overall coordination, and mechanisms enhancing informal communication are observed mainly at individual levels. In contrast, mechanisms enhancing formal communication are observed mainly at the organizational level.
|
| Academic Significance and Societal Importance of the Research Achievements |
従来の公益事業を改善するための方法として、競争原理の導入、民営化、規制改革などが考えられてきた。これに対し、民間企業で広く議論されているコーポレート・ガバナンスの様々な方法を適用した場合にはどうなるのかという、いわゆるガバナンスの問題はあまり研究されてこなかった。ここでの研究成果は、学術面において新たな新規性を提示しているという貢献がある。さらに、実際面においても、従来の改善方法は産業自体を改革するという点で社会的費用が高くなるのに対して、ガバナンス改革では比較的低コストでしかも企業の状況に応じて改革が可能になるため、社会的意義も大きいことが期待される。
|
