【作者】 熊俊；

【导师】 汪戎；

【作者基本信息】 云南大学 ， 政治经济学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 信托作为一种极具特色、灵活自由的财产管理方式,历经数个世纪的演变与传播,已经日益成为一种横跨不同法系、不同国家或地区的世界性制度。追根溯源,信托业在我国的发展历史迄今已逾百年,但其间可谓是起起伏伏、时有时无,“舶来品”始终难以“本土化”,直至1978年,信托业才在改革开放的春风沐浴之下恢复发展,并尝试性的踏上了产业化发展之路。但令人遗憾的是,“摸着石头过河”的信托业与“受人之托、代人理财”的本源渐行渐远,最终沦为乱业经营的“金融杂货铺”,并时常弱化和冲击着国家宏观调控,由此招致了三番五次的行业性清理整顿,加之呈现出来的“边缘化”弱势状况,社会各界对信托业逐步产生了“中国信托业是金融界的‘坏孩子’吗?”、“中国到底需不需信托业?”、“中国信托业路在何方?”三大疑问,久而久之成为严重困扰和制约信托业稳健规范发展的全局重大问题。鉴于此,本文以新制度经济学为主要理论基础,在将信托业视为一个复杂有机制度系统的基础上,从其三大子系统即制度变迁系统、制度实施系统和制度创新系统从发,全面系统、深入细致一一剖析了上述信托业三大基本问题表象背后的实质,尝试着在把握全局的基础上将矛盾各个击破,对我国信托业如何实现又好又快的发展进行了有益的探索和思考。经由分析,本文认为:其一,把信托业展业不佳的所有罪责归因于其自身,有失客观公正,必须要为其正名,方能以正视听,同时要通过市场化最大限度的消除路径依赖性,助其与制度环境动态相容,加快制度内生进程;其二,信托业功能定位与监管模式不匹配是导致信托业存在与否隐忧的制度根源之一,我国不仅需要信托业,更需要进一步将其做优做强做大,搭建“综合金融服务提供商”与“功能监管”相称的基本框架,这是经济社会不断向前发展的内在要求;其三,信托业要以信托制度及其法理的比较优势和特许价值为基点,通过公募、私募、资产管理以及其他方式途径对业务模式进行转型升级,并结合自身资源禀赋的不同选择金融控股集团、银信联盟等组织模式,实现全方位、多层次的信托创新,唯有如此,才能走出差异化的可持续发展之路。更多还原

【Abstract】 To be a characteristic and freedom property management method, trust has been using and spreading for several centuries from different law systems and countries as a world institution. Trust industry has developed over 100 years in China, but the exotics has never been localization with fluctuation. After the years of 1978, trust industry has been recovery and development with reform and opening by the ways of industrialization, but it doesn’t take financing as a main business, and also weakens and impacts the national macro-control, as a results, it suffers some rectifications and regulations, and what’s more, with the marginalization situation, all circles has forms some questions about trust industry, such as“is trust industry a bad children of financial industry”,“does China need trust industry at all”,“where is the future of trust industry”and so on. It’s gradually and obviously that the three problems has been puzzled and restricted to the development of trust industry.According to the situation, this paper takes trust industry to be an institution system with the new institutional economics, and then uses three subsystems such as institutional transition system, institutional enforcement system, and institutional innovation system to deeply and painstaking analysis the trust industry problems, in order to grasp the cause of contradiction, which is helpful to the optimum development of China trust industry.This paper has three basic conclusions after analyses. Firstly, takes trust industry as a bad children is not objective and fair, we need eliminate the path dependence by marketization in order to accelerate endogenous institution process. Secondly, function orientation doesn’t match with supervision mode which leads to the questionof the value of trust industry, in fact, we need develop and strengthen by the ways of making the“comprehensive financial service offers”and“functional supervision”together. Thirdly, trust industry should start from the comparative advantage and chartered value of the trust institution and its legal principle, on the one hand, its business model needs transform and upgrade by the public offering, private placement, assets management and so on, on the other hand, its organization mode needs change with financial holding conglomerate or bank-trust alliance under the different resource endowment, in order to realize the omnidirectional and deeply innovation which is useful to the difference development road of trust industry.更多还原