Short Cut list

Agri-Policy Focus

제4유형
  • A Study on the Performance Analysis of Fiscal Investment and Loan in the Agricultural Sector
  • 보고서 이미지 없음

    저자
    Kim, Meebok , 박성재; 임지은
    등록일
    2013.12.30

    ※ 원문보기 클릭 시 에러가 나는 경우 조치 방법 : "고객센터 - 자주하는 질문" 참조

  • Research Background
    In the food, agriculture and forestry sector, fiscal investment of 2012 expanded 1.5 times more than 2001. The budget increased to KRW 18.1 trillion (5.6%) in 2012 from KRW 11.3 trillion (8.3%) in 2001. Its proportion has continuously decreased in the 2000s. However, the absolute amount has grown, which causes controversial issues about the proper size. On the one hand, the real growth rate in the food, agriculture and forestry sector is quite fluctuating and remains at 1%, triggering criticism over the excessive budget investment. On the other hand, there is an opinion if the government reduces fiscal investment, the agricultural sector will lose their power to overcome difficulties. With these debates, it is necessary to review the proper size of fiscal investment and its effect.

    Research Method
    For this study, three methods are applied. First, an index for international comparison is provided in order to decide the proper size of fiscal investment in the agricultural sector. Second, the econometric method is used for analyzing effects of the total amount of investment in the sector. Third, on the individual categories’ fiscal investment, the general performance review is provided and issues related to each category are drawn. For the “strengthening agriculture” category, the in-depth performance review is presented using input, output, and outcome indices.

    Conclusion and Implication of Research
    Several indices are used to decide the proper budget size in the agriculture sector, such as the sector’s proportion in the total budget and the budget proportion against the proportion of GDP. Those simple indices are not appropriate since it can exaggerate results. When the budget is adjusted except the one for Rural Welfare and Food and Nutrition related projects, it is found that the Korean government less invests in the agriculture sector than Japan and spends similarly to the United States that invests much in nutritional food supplements.
    To measure the agriculture competitiveness, total factor productivity (TFP) is used as an index. As a result, TFP contribution toward total output is much higher in the agriculture sector than in other industries. In particular, TFP contribution increased from 34.58 in the 1980s to 43.32 in the 1990s and rose to 123.21 in the 2000s. In the same vein, when it comes to its accumulation of capital, Korea has significantly higher productivity (1.94) than other countries. This also reflects that agricultural production has expanded thanks to restructuring and improved market efficiency, not just capital accumulation. These indices have the limit in that the performances do not result from only fiscal investment.
    The quantitative analysis was conducted by using the ECM model in order to examine the effect of total fiscal input. According to the result, an input of KRW 1 leads to more than KRW 2 of positive effect on average. A large decrease has been witnessed since the beginning of the 2000s. In the environment that imports increase dramatically and the rural society is aged seriously, the government not just expects a growth effect of expanded spending but takes into account various facets including improved welfare, development in agricultural areas, export expansion, and income preservation.
    In chapter 4 and 5, the result shows that the policies for “income preservation and management stability” were implemented as planned. However, it seems to be hard to succeed in stabilizing the farm-household income. Furthermore, the government’s performance needs to be adjusted. In “retail improvement” and “rural area development” categories, the short-term management was well carried out. In the category of “strengthening agriculture”, the performance was generally good according to output-outcome indices.

    Researchers: Mee-bok Kim, Seong-Jae Park, Ji-Eun Lim
    Research Period: 2013. 1 〜 2013. 12
    E-mail address: mbkim@krei.re.kr

  • 목차

    • 제1장 서 론
      제2장 농업 재정투융자 적정규모에 대한 판단
      제3장 농업 재정투융자 총량성과평가
      제4장 농업 재정투융자 사업분야별 성과평가
      제5장 사업분야별 심층평가 사례: 체질강화
      제6장 농업부문 재정투융자 종합평가

    요약문

    Research Background
    In the food, agriculture and forestry sector, fiscal investment of 2012 expanded 1.5 times more than 2001. The budget increased to KRW 18.1 trillion (5.6%) in 2012 from KRW 11.3 trillion (8.3%) in 2001. Its proportion has continuously decreased in the 2000s. However, the absolute amount has grown, which causes controversial issues about the proper size. On the one hand, the real growth rate in the food, agriculture and forestry sector is quite fluctuating and remains at 1%, triggering criticism over the excessive budget investment. On the other hand, there is an opinion if the government reduces fiscal investment, the agricultural sector will lose their power to overcome difficulties. With these debates, it is necessary to review the proper size of fiscal investment and its effect.

    Research Method
    For this study, three methods are applied. First, an index for international comparison is provided in order to decide the proper size of fiscal investment in the agricultural sector. Second, the econometric method is used for analyzing effects of the total amount of investment in the sector. Third, on the individual categories’ fiscal investment, the general performance review is provided and issues related to each category are drawn. For the “strengthening agriculture” category, the in-depth performance review is presented using input, output, and outcome indices.

    Conclusion and Implication of Research
    Several indices are used to decide the proper budget size in the agriculture sector, such as the sector’s proportion in the total budget and the budget proportion against the proportion of GDP. Those simple indices are not appropriate since it can exaggerate results. When the budget is adjusted except the one for Rural Welfare and Food and Nutrition related projects, it is found that the Korean government less invests in the agriculture sector than Japan and spends similarly to the United States that invests much in nutritional food supplements.
    To measure the agriculture competitiveness, total factor productivity (TFP) is used as an index. As a result, TFP contribution toward total output is much higher in the agriculture sector than in other industries. In particular, TFP contribution increased from 34.58 in the 1980s to 43.32 in the 1990s and rose to 123.21 in the 2000s. In the same vein, when it comes to its accumulation of capital, Korea has significantly higher productivity (1.94) than other countries. This also reflects that agricultural production has expanded thanks to restructuring and improved market efficiency, not just capital accumulation. These indices have the limit in that the performances do not result from only fiscal investment.
    The quantitative analysis was conducted by using the ECM model in order to examine the effect of total fiscal input. According to the result, an input of KRW 1 leads to more than KRW 2 of positive effect on average. A large decrease has been witnessed since the beginning of the 2000s. In the environment that imports increase dramatically and the rural society is aged seriously, the government not just expects a growth effect of expanded spending but takes into account various facets including improved welfare, development in agricultural areas, export expansion, and income preservation.
    In chapter 4 and 5, the result shows that the policies for “income preservation and management stability” were implemented as planned. However, it seems to be hard to succeed in stabilizing the farm-household income. Furthermore, the government’s performance needs to be adjusted. In “retail improvement” and “rural area development” categories, the short-term management was well carried out. In the category of “strengthening agriculture”, the performance was generally good according to output-outcome indices.

    Researchers: Mee-bok Kim, Seong-Jae Park, Ji-Eun Lim
    Research Period: 2013. 1 〜 2013. 12
    E-mail address: mbkim@krei.re.kr

    저자에게 문의

    김미복 이미지

    저자소개
    김미복 (Kim, Meebok)
    - 선임연구위원
    - 소속 : 농업관측센터
    저자에게 문의

    보고서 이미지

    게시물 작성 입력폼

    구매안내

    KREI의 출판물은 판매 대행사 (정부간행물판매센터)와 아래 서점에서 구입 하실 수 있습니다.

    판매대행사
    (주)정부간행물판매센터http://www.gpcbooks.co.kr사이트 바로가기
    서울특별시 중구태평로 1가 25번지
    TEL 02) 394-0337, 734-6818
    FAX 02) 394-0339
    판매서점
    판매서점
    교보문고 http://www.kyobobook.co.kr/
    영풍문고 http://www.ypbooks.co.kr/
    알라딘 http://www.aladin.co.kr/


    활용도 정보
    활용도 정보
    상세정보 조회 좋아요 다운로드 스크랩 SNS공유
    36226 0 53 0 0
    • 같은 분야 보고서가 없습니다.
    • 같은 분야 인기 보고서가 없습니다.
    의견남기기

601, Bitgaram-ro, Naju-si, Jeollanam-do, 58217, KOREA TEL : +82-61-820-2000 FAX : +82-61-820-2211
COPYRIGHT ⓒ 2018 KOREA RURAL ECONOMIC INSTITUTE. All Rights Reserved.