지역농협의 경영평가 방법에 관한 연구 : DEA 모형을 중심으로 = (A) Study on the Management Evaluation of the Korean Regional Agricultural Cooperatives : With a Special Reference to DEA Model

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

* The main purpose of this research is aiming at evaluating the managerial efficiency of Agricultural Cooperatives, this research compared and analyzed ① the result of managerial evaluation executed by the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation ② the estimated result of managerial efficiency to which the DEA model was applied and ③ the result of evaluation by member farmers on their own cooperatives.
* The specific objectives of this research are focussed on the followings ;
First, the result of managerial evaluation executed by the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation in 2002 to evaluate the managerial efficiency of Agricultural Cooperatives, member cooperative, was analyzed.
Second, the overall efficiency, technical efficiency, and scale efficiency of all the Agricultural Cooperatives and those on the basis of location type (urban, rural) were evaluated, and analyzed by applying the managerial coefficient data of member cooperatives of the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation in 2002 to the model of DEA.
Third, after dividing efficient and inefficient cooperatives on the basis of efficiency of Agricultural Cooperatives evaluated by the DEA model, questionnaire was executed to the member farmers in which they were asked to reveal their satisfaction on the business of their own cooperatives.
Fourth, Spearman's rank of order correlation was analyzed to grasp the correlation between the result of managerial evaluation, the method used by the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation to evaluate Agricultural Cooperatives and the result of analyzing the efficiency of Agricultural Cooperatives analyzed by the DEA model.
Fifth, cooperatives evaluated to be efficient or inefficient by the DEA model were evaluated by the member farmers and the subsequent result was analyzed.
Sixth, the objective is to seek rational method to evaluate the Agricultural Cooperatives by comparing and analyzing their managerial analysis result and evaluation result of member farmers.
* This dissertation can be summarized as follows.
* As of June 2002, the agricultural cooperative of Korea has 1,121 Agricultural Cooperatives and 136 Livestock Cooperatives as regional cooperatives nationwide. Meanwhile, the Commodity Cooperatives are composed of 49 Agricultural Cooperatives, 13 Ginseng Cooperatives and 36 Livestock Cooperatives. And the united body of these organizations, the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation is financial institute, composed of 1 head office, 16 regional head offices, 156 city ＆ county offices. It is running 478 branch offices and 237 local offices. Totalling the regional cooperatives and commodity cooperatives, there are some 2,390,000 member farmers.
* In 2002, the business scale of Korean Agricultural Cooperatives except the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation amounted to W7 trillion and 658.7 billion in banking and credit business, W1 trillion and 674.5 billion in non-banking business and ￦413.2 billion in mutual-aid business. Comparing with this overall business scale, the individual Agricultural Cooperatives has merely 1,804 member farmers and asset of ￦9.2 billion in average, showing pettiness.
* Meanwhile, the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation generally evaluates the management of Agricultural Cooperatives, the member cooperatives, on the basis of regular index at the end of each year, the result of which is advised to related Agricultural Cooperatives and utilized as the basic standard of various instruction and support. The related cooperatives report the evaluation result to the general meeting and board of director so as to enhance the transparency of cooperative management. Based on this evaluation result, the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation awards the prize of excellent management and improved management to the Agricultural Cooperatives.
* Analyzing the result of managerial evaluation executed by the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation in 2002 to evaluate the managerial efficiency of Agricultural Cooperatives, we found that 909 of total 1,115 Agricultural Cooperatives(81.5%) got high mark over 80 points in managerial evaluation.
* Meanwhile, with regard to the result of managerial evaluation of Agricultural Cooperatives for the conditions of location, the average mark of urban and rural Agricultural Cooperatives are 90.6 points and 87.0 points respectively, showing slight difference of just 3.6 points. 86.5% (287 units) of urban Agricultural Cooperatives (332 units) and 79.5%(622 units) of rural ones(783 units) got high mark over 80 points in the managerial evaluation. Therefore, it is judged that the evaluation index of the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation is inappropriate to evaluate the Agricultural Cooperatives owing to lack of discriminating ability.
* Analyzing the efficiency of overall Agricultural Cooperatives by applying the DEA model (Data Envelopment Analysis), we found that the range of efficiency was 68.0%~81.0%, i.e., the model of CCR (overall efficiency) showing average of 0.68, the model of BCC (technical efficiency), 0.79 and the scale efficiency, 0.81.
* According to the number of Agricultural Cooperatives in the light of range of efficiency, 30.3 %(337 units) of CCR model (overall efficiency) out of total 1,115 units, 42.7%(476 units) of BCC model (technical efficiency) and 82.8%(924 units) of Agricultural Cooperatives showed high efficiency over 80% (1.0~0.8). Except scale efficiency, the CCR model (overall efficiency) and BCC model (technical efficiency) showed lower values than those evaluated by the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation (81.5% over 80 points), implying that the evaluation method of DEA model has higher discriminating ability than that of the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation.
* With regard to the result of efficiency evaluation of the Agricultural Cooperatives on the conditions of location, the rural Agricultural Cooperatives exhibited efficiency of 71.0%~87.0%, i.e., CCR model (overall efficiency) showing 0.71, BCC model (technical efficiency), 0.81 and scale efficiency, 0.87. With regard to the number of Agricultural Cooperatives in accordance with the range of efficiency, 37.1%(123 units) of 332 rural ones in CCR model (overall efficiency), 54.8%(182 units) in BCC model (technical efficiency) and 74.5%(247 units) in scale efficiency showed high efficiency over 80%(1.0~0.8).
* The rural Agricultural Cooperatives exhibited efficiency of 73.0%~90.0%, i.e., CCR model (overall efficiency) showing 0.71, BCC model (technical efficiency), 0.81 and scale efficiency, 0.90. With regard to the number of Agricultural Cooperatives in accordance with the range of efficiency, 37.5%(294 units) of 783 rural ones in CCR model (overall efficiency), 51.7%(405 units) in BCC model (technical efficiency) and 84.6%(663 units) in scale efficiency showed high efficiency over 80%(1.0~0.8).
* Considering this result, we have found that the method to analyze the efficiency of Agricultural Cooperatives by applying the DEA model has higher discriminating ability than that of the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation.
* Estimating Spearman's rank of order correlation with the evaluation results of Agricultural Cooperatives executed by the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation and those executed by applying the DEA model to verify the mutual concurrence of two evaluation methods, Spearman's rank of order correlation in the overall Agricultural Cooperatives exhibited very low correlation between the two evaluation methods, i.e., CCR model (overall efficiency) showing 0.200, BCC model (technical efficiency), 0.066 and scale efficiency, 0.275. However, the mark of Spearman's rank of order correlation turned out positive(+), implying same direction.
* According to verification for the conditions of location, while Spearman's rank of order correlation for urban Agricultural Cooperatives turned out 0.252 in CCR model(overall efficiency), 0.027 in BCC model (technical efficiency) and 0.343 in scale efficiency, the rural Agricultural Cooperatives showed 0.192 in CCR model(overall efficiency), 0.106 in BCC model (technical efficiency) and 0.152 in scale efficiency, still implying lower correlation between the two evaluation methods. However, the sign of rank of order correlation turned out positive(+), implying same direction.
* Accordingly, this result signifies that evaluation results of Agricultural Cooperatives made by the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation does not coincide with those made by applying the DEA model. The efficiency of Agricultural Cooperatives measured by the DEA model with apparently relative discriminating ability, and the evaluation method for Agricultural Cooperatives used by the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation seems to be problematic as evaluating tools. However, their directions are in conformity.
* After analyzing the managerial efficiency of Agricultural Cooperatives by the DEA model, we made up questionnaire to the member farmers of cooperatives with high efficiency and low efficiency, utilizing reference group as relative standard and the efficiency result. Then, the cooperatives with high efficiency showed higher evaluating points than those with low efficiency in items such as ① managerial mind of the chief of cooperatives, ② leadership of the chief of cooperatives, ③ evaluation on the service done by staffs of Agricultural Cooperatives for member farmers, ④ evaluation on the benefit(services) from Agricultural Cooperatives, ⑤ evaluation on the guidance and extension service activities, ⑥ evaluation on the warehouse and utilization, ⑦ evaluation on the banking and credit business except purchasing and selling business.
* Executing independent samples T-test to verify the coincidence of evaluation of member farmers on their cooperatives evaluated to be efficient or inefficient by the DEA model, appreciable difference was noticed in the evaluation on efficient and inefficient Agricultural Cooperatives made by member farmers.
* However, converting the evaluation on Agricultural Cooperatives made by member farmers into marks, the average marks of efficient and inefficient Agricultural Cooperatives are 16.4 points and 15.2 points respectively, showing that the member farmers evaluate efficient Agricultural Cooperatives slightly higher than inefficient ones. Though the difference is not large, just 1.2 points, it is very difficult to conclude that the two evaluation results coincide, but the direction seems to be in conformity.
* Evaluating the above analysis results overall, the present managerial evaluation method used by the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation does not largely discriminate the managerial efficiency among cooperatives.
* However, the method of DEA model to evaluate the Agricultural Cooperatives seems to be superior in discriminating cooperatives notwithstanding its limit.
* The evaluation result of member farmers on their cooperatives, though result on just partial sample cooperatives, does not show high discriminating ability in the evaluation on cooperatives notwithstanding the concreteness of evaluated items.
* Thus, based on this research, the managerial efficiency of Agricultural Cooperatives is expected to be evaluated more objectively by supplementing the managerial evaluation method of the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation in consideration of the major variables used in the DEA model.
* The limit of this research is not seeking more rational and realistic evaluation index in the method to evaluate Agricultural Cooperatives. Thus, there remain tasks such as result of evaluating efficiency by the technique of DEA which is widely applied in general business administration, method to evaluate Agricultural Cooperatives by the managerial coefficient of the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation and development of evaluation method by which the intention of member farmers can be reflected.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목차 = ⅰ
• 第1章 序論 = 1
• 1. 문제의 제기 = 1
• 2. 연구의 목적 = 3
• 3. 연구의 방법 및 범위 = 4
• 4. 선행연구에 관한 고찰 = 6
• 1). DEA 모형에 관한 선행연구 = 6
• (1). 협동조합에 적용한 연구 = 6
• (2). 농업부문에 적용한 연구 = 11
• (3). 일반 경영부문에 적용한 연구 = 13
• 2). 협동조합의 경영성과 및 평가에 관한 선행연구 = 17
• 5. 논문의 구성 = 19
• 第2章 지역농협의 일반 현황 = 21
• 1. 일반 개요 = 21
• 2. 조직 현황 = 23
• 3. 사업 현황 = 25
• 4. 재무 현황 = 26
• 5. 손익 현황 = 29
• 1) 손익 현황 = 29
• 2) 사업 관리비 현황 = 30
• 3) 조수익 현황 = 32
• 第3章 농협중앙회의 지역농협 평가체계 = 34
• 1. 지역농협 경영평가 = 34
• 1). 지역농협 경영평가 지표 = 34
• (1). 재무관리 지표 = 36
• (2). 농업인 실익사업 지표 = 41
• (3). 가감점 지표 = 45
• 2. 지역농협 경영평가 결과 분석 = 49
• 1). 전체 지역농협의 경영평가 결과 분석 = 49
• 2). 입지유형별 지역농협의 경영평가 = 50
• 第4章 DEA모형과 지역농협의 효율성분석 = 53
• 1. DEA모형의 개요 = 53
• 2. DEA모형의 특징 = 54
• 3. DEA모형의 한계 = 55
• 4. DEA모형에 의한 지역농협의 효율성 평가 = 56
• 1). 자료 및 변수의 선정 = 56
• (1). 분석대상 자료의 선정 = 56
• (2). 분석대상 변수의 선정 = 57
• 2). 분석 방법 및 절차 = 63
• 3). 분석 결과 및 고찰 = 64
• (1). 변수의 기술통계치 = 64
• (2). 기술효율요인 분석 결과 = 65
• 가). 전체 지역농협의 효율성 분석 = 65
• 나). 지역농협의 입지유형에 따른 효율성 분석 = 68
• (3). 규모의 경제성 분석 결과 = 72
• 가). 전체 지역농협의 규모의 경제성 분석 = 72
• 나). 지역농협의 입지유형에 따른 규모의 경제성 분석 = 74
• (4). 비효율적인 경영에 대한 개선 방안 = 75
• (5). 농협중앙회의 지역농협 경영평가 결과와 DEA모형의 비교 = 77
• 第5章 조합원에 의한 지역농협의 평가 = 79
• 1. 조사 개요 = 79
• 2. 응답자의 특성 = 81
• 3. 조합원에 의한 지역농협의 평가 = 83
• 1). 조합장의 경영마인드에 대한 평가 = 83
• 2). 조합장의 리더쉽에 대한 평가 = 84
• 3). 조합원에 대한 서비스 평가 = 85
• 4). 지역농협으로부터 받는 혜택(편익)에 대한 평가 = 86
• 5). 지도사업에 대한 평가 = 87
• 6). 구매사업에 대한 평가 = 88
• 7). 판매사업에 대한 평가 = 89
• 8). 광고 및 이용사업에 대한 평가 = 90
• 9). 신용사업에 대한 평가 = 91
• 4. 조합원에 의한 지역농협 평가와 DEA모형에 의한 평가 결과 비교 = 92
• 5. 농협중앙회의 지역농협 경영평가에 대한 종합적 판단 = 95
• 1). 농협중앙회의 지역농협 경영평가의 문제점 = 95
• 2). DEA모형에 의한 지역농협의 효율성 평가 분석 = 96
• 3). 농협중앙회의 지역농협에 대한 평가 결과와 DEA모형에 의한 평가 결과의 비교 = 96
• 4). 조합원에 의한 지역농협 평가 결과와 DEA모형에 의한 평가 결과의 비교 = 97
• 第6章 요약 및 결론 = 98
• 부록1 지역 농협의 발전방향에 대한 설문조사(조합원용) = 105
• 부록2〈효율성 평가 방법으로서의 DEA 모형〉 = 116
• 부록3〈조합원에 의한 지역농협의 평가 설문조사〉 = 172
• SUMMARY = 184
• ＜참고 문헌＞ = 194