人口政策與生男偏好之城鄉分析

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：48

、訪客IP：18.116.40.47

姓名

鄭倩如(Chien-Ju Cheng) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

經濟學系

論文名稱

人口政策與生男偏好之城鄉分析
(Population Policy and Son Preference in Taiwan: A District-Level Analysis)

相關論文

★ 國際貿易對勞動需求彈性之影響分析－以臺灣上市櫃製造業公司為例	★ 組織變革與技術別薪資差異之關係：以臺灣製造業為例
★ 心理資本、薪資水準與工作努力程度關係之研究：以某跨國企業為例	★ 臺灣本籍與外籍配偶生育差異之分析
★ 全民健保與少子高學歷對台灣老人居住安排之影響分析	★ 會計師執照價值及其薪資不均之研究
★ 效率工資理論測試--離職率模型台灣之實証研究	★ 台灣學用配合度與經濟成長關係之研究
★ 工作風險對世代間行業選擇之影響－以製造業為例	★ 長期照護機構之勞動要素需求探討
★ The Impact of Unemployment on Crime in Europe	★ 中國大陸薪資不均、教育溢酬與貿易開放關係之研究
★ 三角貿易、利潤分享與薪資成長:以台灣製造業為例	★ 職業區隔程度對男女薪資差異之影響分析
★ Phillips Curve from Psychological Perspectives	★ 台灣景氣循環對勞動市場影響之探討

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

少子化為臺灣近年來最嚴重的人口問題，政府自1990年開始提出相關的措施，希望能提升生育率。生男偏好是少數國家特有的文化現象。本文利用Differences-in-Differences(DID)和Panel的研究方法，透過1980年至2005年的鄉鎮別和鄉鎮-教育別之生育率資料，探討生男偏好和政府政策對臺灣總生育率(Total fertility)的影響。政府政策分成兩種虛擬變數，分別討論宣導政策(口號)和實質補助政策對生育率的影響，並透過區域和教育程度虛擬變數研究不同群體受生男偏好和政策的影響差異。
本文實證結果顯示：生男偏好對臺灣總生育率的影響雖然存在，但並不嚴重；宣導政策對生育率的影響並不明確，實質補助政策對生育率的影響為正向顯著，政策效果會依不同教育程度存在差異，而女性教育程度的提高是使生育率下降的主因。

摘要(英)

This research employs Taiwan’s fertility rate data from 1980 to 2005 to investigate the effects of son preference and government policy on fertility rate. Econometrically, both the Differences-in- Differences method and Panel analysis are adopted. We aim to understand the causes of low fertility rate and different impacts of the son preference and government policy across various groups of people.
The main findings of this paper include the following: (1) son preference could affects people’s fertility decision, but the marginal effect of son preference is insignificant; (2) policies related to oral propaganda and monetary subsidies are of significantly positive effects on women’s fertility decision but the marginal effect varies by region. Its effects also vary with people’s educational levels (3) female’s education has adverse impact on the rate of fertility..
It is concluded that the low rate of fertility in Taiwan is mainly due to the enhancement of female’s educational attachment. While government policies such as birth subsidies could, more or less, improve Taiwan’s fertility problem.

關鍵字(中)

★ 總生育率
★ 人口政策
★ 家庭計畫
★ 生男偏好
★ Differences-in-Differences分析法

關鍵字(英)

★ Total fertility rate
★ population policy
★ family planning
★ son preference
★ Differences-in-Differences method

論文目次

摘要 i
Abstract ii
誌謝 iii
目錄 iv
表目錄 vi
圖目錄 vi
第一章緒論 1
1-1研究動機、研究目的 1
1-2研究架構 2
第二章文獻回顧 3
2-1生男偏好 3
2-2人口政策 5
2-3臺灣生育率文獻 6
第三章臺灣生育概況 8
3-1臺灣近年生育率概況 8
3-2家庭計畫政策 9
第四章研究方法與模型設定 11
4-1研究方法 11
4-1-1Differences-in-Differences (DID) 11
4-1-2模型設定 12
4-2Panel模型 15
4-3資料來源與變數說明 16
4-3-1鄉鎮別資料庫(DATA CD) 17
4-3-2鄉鎮-教育別資料庫(DATA ED) 21
4-4基本統計分析 23
4-4-1鄉鎮別資料庫(DATA CD) 23
4-4-2鄉鎮-教育別資料庫(DATA ED) 24
4-5生男偏好 25
第五章實證分析 29
5-1DID法 29
5-1-1鄉鎮別資料庫(DATA CD) 29
5-1-2鄉鎮-教育別資料庫(DATA ED) 34
5-2PANEL模型 39
5-2-1鄉鎮別資料庫(DATA CD) 39
5-2-2鄉鎮-教育別資料庫(DATA ED) 40
5-3預期與實證結果 41
5-3-1鄉鎮別資料庫(DATA CD) 41
5-3-2鄉鎮-教育別資料庫(DATA ED) 42
第六章結論 43
6-1 結論 43
6-2政策建議 44
6-2-1臺灣目前的生育補助 44
6-2-2 政策建議 46
參考文獻 48
附錄 52

參考文獻

﹝1﹞ Adsera, A., “Marital Fertility and Religion in Spain, 1985 and 1999”, Population Studies, Vol.60 (2), pp205-221, 2006.
﹝2﹞ Ahn, N., “Measuring the Value of Children by Sex and Age using A Life-cycle Model of Fertility”, Discussion paper no.648, Economic Growth Center, Yale University, 1991.
﹝3﹞ Ahn, N., “The Effects of the One Child Family Policy on the Second and Third Birth in Three Provinces of China”, Economic Growth Center, Yale University, 1992.
﹝4﹞ Al-Qudsi, S., “The Demand for Children in Arab Countries: Evidence from Panel and Count Data Models”, Journal of Population Economics, Vol.11,pp 435-452, 1998.
﹝5﹞ Arnold, F., M. K. Choe and T.K. Roy, “Son Preference, the Family-Building Process and Child Mortality in India”, Population Studies, Vol.52, pp301-315, 1998.
﹝6﹞ Ashenfelter, O. and D. Card, “Using the Longitudinal Structure of Earnings to Estimate the Effect of Training Programs”, Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 67 (4), pp648-660, 1985.
﹝7﹞ Borooah, V. K., “The Politics of Demography: A Study of Inter-Community Fertility Differences in India”, European Journal of Political Economy, Vol.20, pp551-578, 2004.
﹝8﹞ Becker, G. S., “A Treatise on the Family”, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1981.
﹝9﹞ Belanger, D., “Son Preference in a Rural Village in North Vietnam”, Studies in Family Planning, Vol.33 (4), pp321-334,December 2002.
﹝10﹞ Ben-Porath, Y., “Labor-force participation rates and the supply of labor.” Journal of Political Economy, Vol.81 (3), 697–704, 1973.
﹝11﹞ Bhattacharya, P. C., “Gender Inequality, and Demographic Outcomes: Evidence from India”, Population and Development Review, Vol. 32(2), pp263-291, June 2006.
﹝12﹞ Campbell, M, N. S. Sahin-Hodoglugil and M. Potts, “Barriers to Fertility Regulation: A Review of the Literature”, Studies in Family Planning, Vol.37 (2),pp87-98, 2006.
﹝13﹞ Card, D. and A. Krueger, "Minimum Wages and Employment: A Case Study of the Fast Food Industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania," American Economic Review, Vol.84 (4), pp772-93 1994.
﹝14﹞ Cheng, B. S, “Cointegration and Causality between Fertility and Female Labor Participation in Taiwan: A Multivariate Approach”, Atlantic Economic Journal, Vol. 27(4), pp422-434, 1999.
﹝15﹞ Chung, W. and M. Das Gupta, “Why is Son Preference Declining in South Korea? The Role of Development and Public Policy, and the implication for China and India”, The World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4373, 2007.
﹝16﹞ Costa, D. L., “Hours of Work and the Fair Labor Standards Act: A Study of Retail and Wholesale Trade, 1938-1950”, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 53 (4) pp648-664, 2000.
﹝17﹞ Das Gupta, M. and P. N. Mari Bhat, “Fertility Decline and Increased Manifestation of Sex Bias in India”, Population Studies, Vol.51, pp307-315, 1997.
﹝18﹞ Dreze,J. and M. Murthi, “Fertility, Education and Development: Evidence from India”, Population and Development Review,27(1),pp33-63, March 2001.
﹝19﹞ Guilmoto, C. Z. and S. I. Rajan, “Spatial Patterns of Fertility Transition in Indian Districts”, Population and Development Review, Vol. 27(4), pp713-738, December 2001.
﹝20﹞ Hashimoto, M., “Economics of Postwar Fertility in Japan: Differentials and Trends”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol.82, pp170–194,1974
﹝21﹞ Isabelle, A., “China’s Family Planning Policy: An Overview of Its Past and Future”, Studies in Family Planning,Vol.33(1),pp103-113,2002.
﹝22﹞ Johnston, J. and Dinardo, J., “Econometric Methods”, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1997.
﹝23﹞ Murthi, M., A. G. Guio and J. Dreze, “Mortality, Fertility and Gender Bias in India: A District –Level Analysis”, Population and Development Review, Vol.21 (4), pp745-782, December 1995.
﹝24﹞ Narayan, P. K. and X. Peng, “Japan’s Fertility Transition: Empirical Evidence from the Bounds Testing Approach to Cointegration”, Japan and then World economy, Vol.19, pp263-278, 2007.
﹝25﹞ Park, C. B., “Preference for Sons, Family Size, and Sex Ratio: an Empirical Study in Korea”, Demography, Vol.20 (3), pp333-352, Aug.,1983.
﹝26﹞ Park, C., “How Effective are Pronatalist Benefits? A Literature Survey and A Study on Singapore’s Qualified Child Relief”, The Singapore Economic Review, Vol.50 (1), pp9-23, 2005.
﹝27﹞ Parrado, E. A., “Social Change, Population Policies, and Fertility Decline in Colombia and Venezuela”, Population Research and Policy Review, Vol. 19, pp421-457, 2000.
﹝28﹞ Rajan, S. I., S. Sudha and P. Mohanachandran, “Fertility Decline and Worsening Gender Bias in India: Is Kerala No Longer an Exception?”, Development and Change, Vol. 31, pp1085-1092, 2000.
﹝29﹞ Rosenzweig, M. P. and O. Stark, “Handbook of Population and Family Economics”, New York, 1997.
﹝30﹞ Schultz, T. P., “Population Policies, Fertility, Women Human Capital, and Child Quality”, Economic Growth Center Discussion paper no.495, May 2007.
﹝31﹞ Stock, J. and M. Watson, “Introduction to Econometrics”, Pearson Education,Inc,2003
﹝32﹞ Vlassoff, M., “Labor Demand and Economic Utility of Children: A Case Study in Rural India”, Population Studies, Vol. 36(1), March 1982.
﹝33﹞ Weinstein, M., T. H. Sun, M. C. Chang, and R. Freedman, “Household Composition, Extended Kinship, and Reproduction in Taiwan 1965-1985”,Population Studies, Vol.44, pp217-239,1990.
﹝34﹞ Yang, D. T., D. Chen, “Transformations in China’s Population Policies and Demographic Structure”, Pacific Economic Review, Vol.9 (3), pp269-290, 2004.
﹝35﹞ 內政部人口政策委員會，「人口政策資料彙集」，2007。
﹝36﹞ 方新惟，「家庭生育決策之因素分析」，國立東華大學，碩士論文，2006。
﹝37﹞ 孫得雄、陳肇男和李棟明，「台灣家庭計畫之轉折與政策經驗」，臺灣經濟預測與政策，32(1)，2002。
﹝38﹞ 陳彥仁，「台灣生育率下降因素之實證探討」，國立成功大學，碩士論文，2006。
﹝39﹞ 陳肇男、孫得雄、李棟明合著，「台灣的人口奇蹟─家庭計畫政策成功探源」，台北：聯經出版，2003。
﹝40﹞ 黃修梅，「台灣婦女教育程度與龍虎年效應對生育率之影響」，國立政治大學，碩士論文，2006。
﹝41﹞ 劉錦龍、許菁君，「孩童養育成本衡量─台灣實證研究」，人文及社會科學集刊，15(1)，113-143頁，2003。

指導教授

黃麗璇(Li-Hsuan Huang)

審核日期

2008-7-8

推文