:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:酒後駕車行為之取締的願付風險價值研究
書刊名:運輸計劃
作者:葉寶文傅祖壇 引用關係
作者(外文):Yeh, Po-wenFu, Tsu-tan
出版日期:2007
卷期:36:4
頁次:頁509-533
主題關鍵詞:酒後駕車假設市場評估法願付風險價值執法強度認知意外事故的風險認知Drunk drivingContingent valuation methodCVMWillingness to payEnforcement perceptionAccident risk perception
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(1) 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:1
  • 共同引用共同引用:44
  • 點閱點閱:140
本研究探討的非市場性財貨係屬具有風險性的酒後駕車行為,是假設「冒險」可以使得人們的滿足程度提升,所以人們選擇從事酒後駕車行為,代表此 一風險行為能提高其自身的滿足程度,基於此願意支付金額 (罰款) 去承擔一旦被取締的處罰,因此,取捨關係在此須視人們心目中對於執法機關取締酒後駕車的主觀認知強度,強度越高,人們會為了「冒險」而願意支付金額 (罰款) 從事此一風險行為的可能性越小,此願付金額即稱之為從事酒後駕車之願付的風險價值。由於理性個人之酒後駕車行為受其自身的取締強度認知及發生意外事故的風險認知影響,因此本研究利用假設市場評估法,引入上述理性個人的兩個認知,導出評估風險價值函數,用以進行酒後駕車之願付風險價值的估計。本研究實證估計酒後駕車被取締的願付風險價值約在 15,000~16,600元之間。
This paper attempts to use CVM to measure the willingness to pay (WTP) for drunk driving and risk a ban. We assume “adventure” might raise satisfaction. This is the reason why people drive while drunk, he/she must be willing to pay (the penalty) when arrested. The trade-off between satisfaction and penalty depends on the intensity of personal subjective perception of enforcement of drunk driving. The stronger the enforcement perception, the lower the possibility people are willing to pay the fine of this risky behavior. Rational people’s behavior for drunk driving is affected by his/her enforcement perception and accident risk perception. We use these two perceptions to evaluate risk. The results of our observed research indicate that the WTP amount for the risk of a ban is from 15 to 16.6 thousand NT dollars.
期刊論文
1.Zethraeus, N.(1998)。Willingness to pay for hormone replacement therapy。Journal of Health Economics,7(1),31-38。  new window
2.Thayer, Mark A.(1981)。Contingent Valuation Techniques for Assessing Environmental Impacts: Further Evidence。Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,8(1),27-44。  new window
3.Kenkel, Donald S.(1993)。Drinking, Driving, and Deterrence: The Effectiveness and Social Costs of Alternative Policies。The Journal of Law & Economics,36,877-913。  new window
4.劉錦添、陳宜廷(19960900)。罹病減輕的願付金額估計--臺灣都會區與石化專業區的比較。經濟論文,24(3),397-431。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.傅祖壇、周濟(19950900)。乘坐高速鐵路之支付意願及時間價值--假設評估法之應用。經濟論文叢刊,23(3),259-283。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.Bishop, Richard C.、Heberlein, Thomas A.(1979)。Measuring values of extra-market goods: Are indirect measures biased?。American Journal of Agricultural Economics,61(5),926-930。  new window
7.Polinsky, A. Mitchell、Shavell, Steven(1979)。The optimal tradeoff between the probability and magnitude of fines。The American Economic Review,69(5),880-891。  new window
8.劉錦添(19900900)。淡水河水質改善的經濟效益評估--封閉式假設市場評估法之應用。經濟論文,18(2),99-128。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.Hanemann, W. Michael(1984)。Welfare Evaluation in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses。American Journal of Agricultural Economics,66(3),332-341。  new window
10.Becker, Gary S.(1968)。Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach。Journal of Political Economy,76(2),169-217。  new window
11.蕭代基、錢玉蘭、蔡麗雪(19980100)。淡水河系水質與景觀改善效益之評估。經濟研究.臺北大學經濟學系,35(1),29-59。new window  延伸查詢new window
12.Polinsky, Mitchell、Shavell, Steven、Polinsky, A. M.、Shavell, S.(1991)。A Note on Optimal Fines When Wealth Varies Among Individuals。The American Economic Review,81,618-621。  new window
13.Bowker, J. M.、Stoll, John R.、Bowker, J.、Stoll, J.(1988)。Use of Dichotomous Choice Nonmarket Methods to Value the Whooping Crane Resource。American Journal of Agricultural Economics,70(2),372-381。  new window
14.Dickie, M.、Gerking, S.(1996)。Formation of risk beliefs, joint production and willingness to pay to avoid skin cancer。The Review of Economics and Statistics,3,451-463。  new window
15.Phelps, C. E.(1987)。Risk and Perceived Risk of Drunk Driving among Young Drivers。Journal of Policy Analysis and Management,6(4),708-714。  new window
16.Mullahy, J.、Sindelar, J. L.(1994)。Do Drinkers Know When to Say When? An Empirical Analysis of Drunk Driving。Economic Inquiry,32(3),383-394。  new window
17.Sloan, F. A.、Reilly, B. A.、Schenzler, C.(1995)。Effects of Tort Liability and Insurance on Heavy Drinking and Drinking and Driving。The Journal of Law & Economics,38,49-77。  new window
18.Kenkel, D. S.(1993)。Do Drunk Drivers Pay Their Way? A Note on Optimal Penalties for Drunk Driving。Journal of Health Economics,12,137-149。  new window
19.Chu, C. Y.、Jiang, N.(1993)。Are Fine More Efficient than Imprisonment?。Journal of Public Economics,51,115-124。  new window
20.Sloan, F. A.、Githens, P. B.(1994)。Drinking, Driving, and the Price of Automobile Insurance。The Journal of Risk and Insurance,61(1),33-58。  new window
21.Rice, D. P.、Mackenzie, E. J.、Max, W.(1990)。The Lifetime Cost of Injury。Inquiry,27,332-343。  new window
22.Rosen, S.(1981)。Valuing Health Risk。The American Economic Review,71(2),241-145。  new window
研究報告
1.Saffer, H.、Chaloupka, F. J.(1987)。Breath Testing and the Demand for Drunk Driving。  new window
圖書
1.Fisher, R. A.(1994)。The Design of Experiments。Edinburgh, U.K:Oliver and Boyd Ltd.。  new window
其他
1.(2004)。中華民國交通統計月報,臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
2.(2004)。臺北市交通統計年報,臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
3.(2004)。臺北市家庭收支概況調查報告,0。  延伸查詢new window
4.臺北縣政府民政局(2003)。臺北縣政府民政局1221-00-01-2報表,0。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE