:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:住戶逃避鄰避設施之自我防衛支出--以垃圾處理場為實証對象
書刊名:都市與計劃
作者:曾明遜謝潮儀
出版日期:1995
卷期:22:2
頁次:頁217-233
主題關鍵詞:鄰避設施地方外部成本特徵價格不確定自我防衛支出NIMBYsLocalized externalities costsHedonic priceUncertaintySelf-protection expenditures
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(7) 博士論文(2) 專書(1) 專書論文(1)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:7
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:52
     鄰避設施的設置,經常由附近社區居民承擔地方外部成本,而遠離此外部成本的 社區居民卻享受此類設施提供的效益。本文的目的即利用特徵價格方法來估計此類設施所 產生的外部成本,並納入損害風險的不確定性,而以福德坑衛生掩埋場與安康焚化爐兩種 不同型態為個案研究,其外部成本以住戶自我防衛支出來衡量。我們採用行政院主計處民 國七十年至七十七年的資料做測試,統計結果顯示(1)不同垃圾處理場型態有不同自我防衛 支出,福德坑衛生掩場在長期情況大於安康焚化爐,短期情況則小於安康焚化爐。(2)不同 營運年期亦有不同自我防衛支出,福德坑衛生掩場其長期大於短期,而在安康焚化爐則短 期大於長期。(3)每遠離垃圾處理場一百公尺,平均邊際自我防衛支出每坪約在二百元至一 仟六百元之間,而呈遞減的現象。
     For a site of NIMBYs (Not in My Backyard) facilities, such as samitary landfills, the host community frequently incurs localized extermalities costs while other communities receive the benefits. The purpose of this paper is to apply hedonic price approach to estimate the externalities costs, measured by self-protection expenditures of avoiding living near sanitary landifills, under conditions of uncertainty where is from damages occurring in this type of facility. In this paper, we take AN KANG and FWU DER KENG, the two variant types of sanitary landfills, as case examples. Applying housing datum in 1981-1988 from Surveys conducted by Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics, the statistical analysis shows (1) different types have different self-protectino expenditures. FWU DER KENG is larger than AN KANG in the long-run and smaller in the short-run. (2) different operating years also have different self-protection expenditures. Long-run is larger than short-run in FWU DER KENG and short-run is larger than long-run in AN KANG. (3) Under the conditon that 100 meter is moved outward, the average level of marginal self-protction expenditures is between $200 to $1600 per 'ping' (Japanese measurement) and is decreasing with the distance from the sanitary landfills.
期刊論文
1.Kunreuther, Howard、Fitzgerald, Kevin、Aarts, Thomas D.(1993)。Siting Noxious Facilities: A Test of the Facility Siting Credo。Risk Analysis,13,301-318。  new window
2.Kohlhase, Janet E.(1991)。The Impact of Toxic-Waste Sites on Housing Values。Journal of Urban Economics,30(1),1-26。  new window
3.曾明遜(19940600)。淺論鄰避設施的風險知覺。人與地,126,36-40。  延伸查詢new window
4.Ehrlich, Isaac、Becker, Gary S.(1972)。Market insurance, self-insurance, and self-protection。Journal of Political Economy,80(4),623-648。  new window
5.Gamble, Hays B.、Downig, Roger H.(1982)。Effects of nuclear power plant on residential property values。Journal of Regional Science,22,457-478。  new window
6.李永展(19940600)。如何克服「鄰避」(Nimby)併發症。人與地,126,24-31。  延伸查詢new window
7.任覺民(19850500)。興建焚化爐的再思考:我們沒有更好的方式來處理垃圾嗎?。聯合月刊,46,29-32。  延伸查詢new window
8.林秋國(19871000)。垃圾焚化處理廠造成空氣污染問題之探討。工業污染防治,6(4)=24,153-158。  延伸查詢new window
9.簫新煌(1994)。台灣環保抗爭運動的性格與變遷。日本文摘,8(12),33-49。  延伸查詢new window
10.Cassel, Eric、Mendelsohn, Robert(1985)。The Choice of Functional Froms for Hedonic Price Equations: Comment。Journal of Urban Economics,18,135-142。  new window
11.Kask, S. B.、Maani, S. A.(1992)。Uncertainty, Information, and Hedonic Pricing。Land Economics,68(2),170-184。  new window
12.Gregory, Michaels R.、Kerry Smith, V.(1990)。Market Segmentation and Valuing Amenities with Hedonic Models: The Case of Hazardous Waste Sites。Journal of Urban Economics,28(2),223-242。  new window
13.Waiter, Milon J.、Gressel, Jonathan、Mulkey, David(1984)。Hedonic Amenity Valuation and Functional Form Specification。Land Economics,60(4),378-387。  new window
14.Shogren, J. F.、Crocker, T. D.(1991)。Risk, Self-Protection, and Ex Ante Economic Value。Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,20,1-15。  new window
15.Smith, V. Kerry、Desvousges, William H.(1986)。The Value of Avoiding a LULU: Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites。The Review of Economics and Statistics,68,293-299。  new window
16.Slovic, Paul(1987)。Perception of Risk。Science,236(4799),280-285。  new window
17.Renn, Ortwin、Burns, William J.、Kasperson, Jeanne X.、Kasperson, Roger E.、Slovic, Paul(1992)。The Social Amplification of Risk: Theoretical Foundations and Empirical Applications。Journal of Social Issues,48(4),137-160。  new window
18.Rosen, Sherwin(1974)。Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition。Journal of Political Economy,82(1),34-55。  new window
19.Brookshire, D. S.、Thayer, M.、Tschirhart, J.、Schulze, W.(1985)。A Test of the Expected Utility Model: Evidence from Earthquake Risks。Journal of Political Economy,93(2),369-389。  new window
20.MacDonald, D. N.、Murdoch, J. C.、White, H. L.(1987)。Uncertain Hazards, Insurance and Consumer Choice: Evidence from Housing Markets。Land Economics,63(4),361-371。  new window
學位論文
1.陳明吉(1990)。房地產價格變動因素及影響之研究(碩士論文)。國立政治大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Ekins, P.(1992)。The GAIA Atlas of Green Economics。New York:Anchor Books。  new window
2.劉錦添(1989)。汙染性設施設置程序之研究。臺北:行政院經濟建設委員會。  延伸查詢new window
3.Maler, Karl-Goran(1974)。Environmental Economics: A Theoretical Inquiry。Baltimore:London:Resources For The Future, Inc.。  new window
4.Whyte, A. V.(1980)。Environmeiitai Risk Assessment。New York:John Wiley & Sons。  new window
5.Wilson, A. R.(1991)。Emdronmental Risk: Identification and Management。Lewis Publishers Inc。  new window
6.Edelstein, M.(1988)。Contaminated communities: The social and psychological impacts of residential toxic exposure。Boulder:London:Westview Press。  new window
圖書論文
1.林鴻祺(1988)。垃圾焚化廠環境影響評估。環境影響評估講習教材及參考資料。中華民國環境工程學會。  延伸查詢new window
2.張祖恩(1988)。衛生掩埋場環境影響評估。環境影響評估講習教材及參考資料。中華民國環境工程學會。  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
 
QR Code
QRCODE