:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:台灣家戶消費不均度與社會人口特性差異分析
作者:李巧琳
作者(外文):LEE, CHIAO-LING
校院名稱:國立暨南國際大學
系所名稱:國際企業學系
指導教授:陳建良
王銘杰
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2020
主題關鍵詞:人口老化所得不均消費不均住宅分配demographic ageingincome inequalityconsumption inequalityhousing distribution
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:1
  台灣在經濟的發展中經歷了起飛與停滯,在人口結構的改變中經歷了嬰兒潮、少子化及高齡化,在這樣的變遷過程中,無法避免的將產生家戶資源獲取及分配等問題,而造成不均現象。事實上,不論是從低度開發國家到成熟的已開發國家,分配不均都是經濟發展過程中無可避免的議題,也都是政府施政與社會關切的問題。本文採用行政院主計總處家庭收支調查資料,以橫跨40年的連續資料 (1976迄今),聚焦於台灣在人口結構改變導致家戶結構跟著變化的情況下,而可能面臨的福利水準變化。不同於過去國內文獻多以所得的角度來探討分配的問題,本文希望能從消費的角度來分析分配與與貧窮的問題,並特別針對消費不均的成因進行嚴謹的條件式迴歸分析,同時也連結住宅分配和家戶型態,嘗試重新對所得、消費、住宅支出和家戶結構,,做綜合性的分析和探討,期能對國內相關研究有所補充,同時提供政策上的建議。
Taiwan has experienced take-off and stagnation in its economic development, and has experienced baby boom, declining birthrate, and aging in the change of demographic structure. In this process of change, it is inevitable that household resource acquisition and distribution problems will arise. In fact, whether it is from a low-developed country to a mature developed country, inequailty is an unavoidable issue in the process of economic development, and it is also an issue of government governance and social concern. Purpose of this research is to focus on the changing welfare level of the elderly to considering the important role of housing distribution and housing welfare under the trend of fast population aging. This research employs Survey of Family Income and Expenditure conducted by DGBAS, Executive Yuan, from 1976 to date for consecutively 40 years into analysis. This research introduces new aspects on issues of elderly welfare from international literature. Hopefully findings of this research are able to provide complementary evidences to the related literature as well as constructive recommendation for ageing population policies.
參考文獻
一、中文文獻
王金利、林國榮 (1998):〈台灣社會福利水準與不均度研究〉,《經濟研究》,第35卷,頁61-81。
吳文傑、連賢明與林祖嘉 (2004) :〈居住住宅所有權屬與住宅品質對於老年人健康狀態的影響〉,《都市與計劃》,第31卷第4期,頁313-324。
洪明皇 (2012):〈台灣消費不均度的變化〉,《社會科學論叢》,第6卷第1期,頁73-116。
胡幼慧、周雅容 (1996) :〈婦女與三代同堂:老年婦女的經濟依賴與居住困境探索〉,《婦女與兩性學刊》,第7卷,27-58。
徐美、莊奕琦、陳晏羚 (2015):〈台灣家戶所得不均度來源分析初探〉,《社會科學論叢》,第9卷第1期,頁1-32。
國家發展委員會 (2016):《中華民國人口推估 (2018至2065年) 報告》。
張桂霖 (2013):〈老人居住安排滿意與否之改變〉,《住宅學報》,第22卷第1期,頁55-80。
張桂霖、張金鶚 (2010):〈老人居住安排與居住偏好之轉換:家庭價值與交換理論觀點的探討〉,《人口學刊》,第40卷,頁41-90。
張桂霖、張金鶚 (2013):〈年齡增長與居住安排:從初老到老老之相同樣本縱 斷面研究〉,《都市與計劃》,第40卷第2期,頁157-189。
張清和、陳建良、李巧琳 (2016):〈住宅不均與所得不均〉,《住宅學報》,第25卷第2期,頁1-29。
陳正芬與王彥雯 (2010):〈從生命週期觀點檢視台灣老人居住安排的模式與轉變〉,《台灣社會福利學刊》,第8卷第2期,頁67-116。
陳建良(2014) :〈臺灣家戶所得不均長期變化趨勢之分解〉,《臺灣經濟預測與政策》,第44卷第2期,頁1-44。
陳建良(2017) :〈工資、所得、消費及住宅財富分配不均度與社會人口特性之區域差異分析〉,科技部計畫MOST 106-2410-H-260-039-MY2。
陳建良(2019) :〈人口老化趨勢下中高齡人口之所得貧窮、消費貧窮與住宅分配〉,科技部計畫MOST 108-2410-H-260-038-MY2。
陳彥仲與陳靜怡 (2012):〈從高齡者自評健康條件、家庭資源及社會參與探討高齡者期望之居位安排〉,《台灣土地研究》,第15卷第2期,頁127-158。
陳淑美、林佩萱 (2014):〈台灣老人居住安排與生活滿意度關係之區域差異分析〉,《建築與規劃學報》,第15卷第1期,頁61-82。
陳淑美、林佩萱,2010:《親子世代的財務支援、照顧需要對老人居住安排與生 活滿意度影響之研究,住宅學報,第十九卷第一期,29-58。
陳淑美、張金鶚 (2004):〈家戶就業結構與通勤選擇之變遷分析--論 1990 年和 2000 年間台北市的變化〉,《都市與計劃》,第31卷第4期,頁295-312。
陳淑美與楊奕權 (2014):〈台灣老人遷移、住宅權屬決策與經濟狀況之研究〉,《物業管理學報》,春季號第5卷第1期,頁61-76。
陳肇男 (1996):〈晚年離子獨居台灣的例子〉,《台灣社會學刊》,第19卷,頁57-93。
彭建文與蔡怡純 (2017):〈人口結構變遷對房價影響分析〉,《經濟論文叢刊》,第45卷第1期,頁161-192。
彭素玲、郭迺鋒、周濟和方文秀 (2009):〈人口年齡結構、所得分配與產業結構轉型對臺灣民間消費與總體產出之影響〉,《臺灣經濟預測與政策》,第39卷第2 期,頁51-101。
曾瀝儀、張金鶚、陳淑美 (2006):〈老人居住安排選擇一代間關係之探討〉,《住宅學報》,第15卷第2期,頁45-64。
詹維玲 (2011):〈臺灣消費不均的研究〉,《行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告》。
魯慧中、鄭保志 (2012):〈孝道的認同與實踐-以「成年兒子與父母同住決策」為分析對象〉,《人口學刊》,第45卷,頁111-156。
謝博明 (2006) :〈台灣家庭所得與住宅消費之分配與變動:1980—2000〉,《住宅學報》,第15卷第1期,頁59-78。

二、英文文獻
Aguiar, M. and Mark Bils (2015). "Has Consumption Inequality Mirrored Income Inequality?" American Economic Review, 105 (9): 2725-56
Almas H. and R. Rudolf (2014). ”Income versus Consumption Inequality in Korea: Evaluating Stochastic Dominance Rankings by Various Household Attributes,” Asian Economic Journal, 28, 4413-436.
Alves, N. (2012). “The Impact of Education on Household Income and Expenditure Inequality,” Applied Economics Letters, 19(10), 915–919.
Ando, Albert, and Franco Modigliani (1963). “The “Life Cycle” Hypothesis of Saving: Aggregate Implications and Tests,” American Economic Review, 53 (1): 55–84.
Angelini and Laferre`rey (2012)
Attanasio, O. and Pistaferri, L. (2016). “Consumption Inequality,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 30(2), 3-28.
Bane, M.J. and Ellwood, D.T. (1986). “Slipping Into and Out of Poverty: The Dynamics of Spells, ” Journal of Human Resources, 21, 1–23.
Bian, Xun (2015). “Leverage and Elderly Homeowners’ Decisions to Downsize,” SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2569788 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2569788
Blundell R., L. Pistaferri and I. Preston (2008). “Consumption Inequality and Partial Insurance,” American Economic Review, 98(5), 1887-1921.
Blundell, R. and B. Etheridge (2009). “Consumption, Income, and Earnings Inequality in the UK.” Working Paper, UCL.
Brzozowski M., M Gervais, P Klein, M Suzuki (2010). “Consumption, Income, and Wealth Inequality in Canada,” Review of economic dynamics, 13 (1), 52-75.
Cutler, D. and L. Katz (1991). “Rising Inequality? Changes in the Distribution of Income and Consumption in the 1980s,” American Economic Review, 82, 546-551.
Cutler, D. M. and L. F. Katz (1992). “Rising Inequality? Changes in the Distribution of Income and Consumption in the 1980s,” American Economic Review, 82(2): 546–51.
Disney R. and S. Smith (2002). “The Labour Supply Effect of the Abolition of the Earnings Rule for Older Workers in the United Kingdom,” the Economic Journal, 112 (478), 136-152.
Edmonds (2004).”Rearranging the Family? Income Support and Elderly Living Arrangements in a Low Income Country,” NBER Working Paper No. 10306.
Fisher, J., D. S. Johnson, and T. M. Smeeding (2015). “Inequality of Income and Consumption in the U.S.: Measuring the Trends in Inequality from 1984 to 2011 for the Same Individuals,” Review Of Income And Wealth, 61(4), 630-650.
Gibbons, S and S. Machin (2006). “Paying for Primary Schools, Admission Constraints, School Popularity or Congestion,”The Economic Journalm, 116(510): 77-92.
Gibbons, S. and S. Machin (2003). “Valuing English Primary Schools,” Journal of Urban Economics. 53(2): 197-219.
Greene, W.H. (2003) Econometric Analysis. 5th Edition, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, 710-713.
Jappelli, T. and L. Pistaferri (2009). “Does Consumption Inequality Track Income Inequality in Italy?“ Center for Studies in Economics and Finance, Working paper, 229.
Krueger, D. and F. Perri (2006). “Does Income Inequality Lead to Consumption Inequality? Evidence and Theory,” Review of Economic Studies, 73 (1), 163–193.
Li, Y. and C. Moon (2016). “Taiwan's Economic Inequality and Distribution: Empirical Analysis Using Family Income and Expenditure Surveys,” Journal Of Economic Research, 21(1), 67-115.
Lise, J., N. Sudo, M. Suzuki, K. Yamada and T. Yamada (2014). “Wage, Income and Consumption Inequality in Japan, 1981-2008: From Boom to Lost Decades,” Review Of Economic Dynamics, 17(4), 582-612.
Lux, M. and Sunega P. (2014).”The Impact of Housing Tenure in Supporting Ageing in Place: Exploring the Links between Housing Systems and Housing Options for the Elderly,” International Journal of Housing Policy, 14(1), 30–55.
Machado, J. A. F. and J. Mata (2005), “Counterfactual Decomposition of Changes in Wage Distributions Using Quantile Regression,” Journal of Applied Econometrics, 20, 445–465.
Meyer, Bruce D., and James X. Sullivan (2013). "Consumption and Income Inequality and the Great Recession," American Economic Review, 103 (3): 178–183.
OECD (2012). "Inequality and Growth: the Role of Taxes and Transfers," OECD Economics.
Petev, I., L. Pistaferri and I. Saporta-Eksten (2012). “Consumption and the Great Recession” in The Great Recession, ed. D. Grusky, B. Western and C. Wimer. Russell Sage Foundation.
Rodgers, Joan R. (2012). “Living Arrangements and Income Poverty,”Australian Journal of Labour Economics, 15(3), 217–234.
Skaburskis, A. (2004). “Decomposing Canada’s Growing Housing Affordability Problem: Do City Differences Matter?” Urban Studies. 41(1): 117-149.
Slesnick, T. D. (1994). “Comsumption, Needs and Inequality,” International Economic Review, 35(3), 667-703.
Thalmann, P. (2003). “House Poor or Simply Poor?” Journal of Housing Economics. 12(4): 291-317.
Wooldridge, J. M. (2002). Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. MIT Press: Cambridge, Massachusetts, 457-458.
World Bank (2006a). “India Inclusive Growth and Service Delivery: Building on India's Success,” Development Policy Review Report, No. 34580, Washington, DC.

 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE