快樂與公共財的價值-以空氣污染為例

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：29

、訪客IP：18.119.103.40

姓名

王國仲(Kuo-Chung Wang) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

產業經濟研究所

論文名稱

快樂與公共財的價值-以空氣污染為例

相關論文

★ 資訊科技的使用對製造業廠商生產力之影響	★ 寶島債介紹及發展前景
★ 電腦軟體與資料庫的採用與對廠商績效的影響- 台灣製造業的研究	★ 中國新高技術園區技術效率及其影響因素的研究
★ 政府管控房地產政策對不動產市場及銀行不動產授信業務之影響	★ 鶯歌捷運線對房價的影響
★ 貿易、技術與薪資溢酬	★ 聚集與生產力:台灣紡織產業的實證研究
★ 勞工派遣與正職受僱型態之實證研究－金融海嘯前後之分析比較	★ 影響政府採購效率之實證研究—以某縣市政府為例
★ 台灣民眾轉換從業身分的決策以及「不景氣-推擠」假說之檢定	★ 汽車燃油效率、反彈效果與特徵價格之研究
★ Three Essays on the Industrial Economics	★ 研究發展與技術購買-台灣製造業之實證研究
★ 合併廠商的績效表現與決策因素分析	★ 合併型態對廠商績效與股票報酬的影響

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)

人類追求經濟發展以提升生活品質，同時卻造成了環境上的污染。在這兩難的課題下，我們試著在不改變自身快樂程度之下來找出兩者之間的平衡點。
本研究使用2004-2010年台灣社會變遷基本調查中的受訪者快樂指數和社經特徵，以及環保署在各地設立的空氣品質測站所監測到的空氣污染物和氣候特徵，然後利用受訪者戶籍郵遞區號和受訪日去合併兩種資料。最後採用Levinson(2012)的實證方法和Ordered Probit Model去估計台灣民眾的快樂指數。
實證結果發現，受訪者社經特徵和當日氣候都會對快樂指數有顯著的影響。受訪者所得會顯著正向影響快樂指數，而空氣污染物會負面影響快樂指數但在統計上不顯著。根據這兩者間的抵換關係，我們推導出所得和空氣污染之間的平均邊際替代率進而得出公共財空氣品質的願付價格。結論為每天台灣民眾願意支出1,154元來換取環境中空氣污染物懸浮微粒濃度一個標準差的改善。

摘要(英)

The Human Pursuit of economic development to improve the quality of life,and cause environmental pollution at the same time. In this dilemma, we tried to maintain the level of happiness and to found a balance between this two.
This study used the level of respondents happiness and socioeconomic characteristics from Taiwan Social Change Survey in 2004-2010 , as well as the pollutants and climatic characteristics from EPA air quality monitoring stations,and then we used registration date and zip code to merge this two data.Finally, we followed Levinson(2012) empirical methods and used Ordered Probit Model to estimate the level of Taiwan people′s level of happiness.
The empirical results showed that respondents socioeconomic characteristics and daily weather had a significant impact on the level of happiness .The respondents income had a significant positive effect on the level of happinese , while the air pollutants had a negative effect on the level of happiness but statistically not significant. According to the trade-off relationship between this two, we derived the average marginal rate of substitution between income and air pollution,that is, the willingness to pay of air quality.Conclusion suggested people in Taiwan willing to spend 1,154 dollars per day in exchange for one standard deviation improvement of particulates concentration in airborne.

關鍵字(中)

★ 快樂指數
★ 空氣污染
★ 願付價格

關鍵字(英)

★ level of happiness
★ air pollution
★ willingness to pay

論文目次

表目錄 ii
圖目錄 iii
第一章緒論 1
第一節研究背景與動機 1
第二節研究架構 2
第二章文獻回顧 3
第一節國外文獻 3
2.1.1 快樂指數和生活滿意度方法在非市場財貨上的使用 3
2.1.2 以快樂指數或生活滿意度衡量空氣污染的研究 5
第二節國內文獻 8
2.2.1 快樂指數和生活滿意度相關研究 8
2.2.2 在台灣以快樂指數或生活滿意度衡量空氣污染的研究 9
第三章實證方法 10
第一節研究方法 10
第二節模型設定 12
第四章資料來源與敘述統計 14
第一節資料來說明 14
第二節解釋變數與敘述統計分析 17
第五章實證分析與結果 27
第一節空氣污染指標物、社經特徵和氣候變數對快樂指數影響的估計 27
5.1.1 空氣污染物只使用懸浮微粒的估計結果 27
5.1.2 其它空氣污染指標物的估計結果 34
第二節考量受訪者平均所得和區域內平均空氣品質的估計結果 35
第三節分析各模型之下民眾對空氣品質的願付價格 37
第六章結論與建議 40
第一節結論 40
第二節研究建議與未來研究方向 41
參考文獻 42
附錄 45

參考文獻

一. 文獻部分
1. Alesina, Alberto, Rafael Di Tella, and Robert MacCulloch. 2004. “ Inequality and Happiness: Are Europeans and Americans Different ? ” Journal of Public Economics, 88(9–10): 2009–2042.
2. Becchetti, Leonardo, Stefano Castrioto, and Londono Bedoya David Andres. 2007. “Climate,Happiness and the Kyoto Protocol: Someone Does not Like it Hot” Tor Vergata University Working Paper No. 247.
3. Blanchflower, David and Andrew Oswald. 2000. “ Well being over time in Britain and the U.S.” NBER Working Paper 7487.
4. Di Tella, Rafael, Robert MacCulloch and Andrew Oswald. 2001. “ Preferences over Inflation and Unemployment: Evidence from Surveys of Happiness” American Economic Review 91(1): 335-341.
6. Di Tella, Rafael and Robert MacCulloch. 2006. “ Gross National Happiness as an Answer to the Easterlin Paradox ?” Journal of Development Economics 86(1): 22-42.
7. Easterlin, R. 1974. “ Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot? Some Empirical Evidence.” In Nations and Households in Economic Growth: Essays in Honour of Moses Abramovitz, ed. P.A. David and M.W. Reder, 89–125. New York: Academic Press.
8. Finkelstein, Amy, Erzo F.P. Luttmer, and Matthew J. Notowidigdo. 2008. “ What Good is Wealth without Health? The Effect of Health on the Marginal Utility of Consumption.” NBER Working Paper 14089.
9. Frey, Bruno, Simon Luechinger, and Alois Stutzer. 2009. “ The Life Satisfaction Approach to Valuing Public Goods: The Case of Terrorism.” Public Choice, 138(3–4): 317–345.
10. Frey, B.S., S. Luechinger and A. Stutzer, (2010) ” The life satisfaction approach to environmental valuation,” Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, 2(1), 139-160.
11. Kahneman, Daniel. 2000. “ Experienced Utility and Objective Happiness: A Moment-Based Approach.” In Choices, Values and Frames, ed. D. Kahneman and A. Tversky, 673–692.New York: Cambridge University Press.
12. Liao, Pei-shan. 2009. “Parallels between objective indicators and subjective perceptions of quality of life: A study of metropolitan and county areas in Taiwan,” Social Indicators Research, 91(1), 99-114.
13. Levinson, Arik . 2012. “ Valuing Public Goods Using Happiness Data: The Case of Air Quality,” Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(9), pages 869-880.
14. Lu, L. 1995. “ The relationship between subjective well-being and psychosocial variables in Taiwan. ” Journal of Social Psychology. 135, 351-357.
15. Lu, L. 1999. “ Personal and environmental causes of happiness: A longitudinal analysis. ” Journal of Social Psychology, 139, 79-90.
16. Luechinger, Simon. 2009. “ Valuing Air Quality Using the Life Satisfaction Approach ” Economic Journal, 119, C34-C45.
17. Luechinger, Simon and Paul A. Raschky. 2009. “ Valuing Flood Disasters Using the Life Satisfaction Approach ” Journal of Public Economics, 93, 620-633.
18. MacKerron, G. and S. Mourato. 2009. “ Life satisfaction and air quality in London. ” Ecological Economics, 68, 1441-1453.
19. Maddison, David and Kartin Rehdanz. 2011. “The impact of climate on life satisfaction,” Ecological Economics, 70, 2437-2445.
20. Ng, Yew-Kwang. 1997. “ A Case for Happiness, Cardinalism, and Interpersonal Comparability.” The Economic Journal, 107(445): 1848–1858.
21. Shaw, Daigee, Yih-Ming Lin, and Pei-Shan Liao. 2012. “Environmental quality and happiness: Subjective vs. objective measures of environmental quality,” paper presented at 環境：台灣社會變遷基本調查第十七次研討會, 中央研究院: 中央研究院社會學研究所, 2012-02-24.
22. Tsou, Meng-Wen and Jin-Tan Liu. 2001). “Happiness and Life Satisfaction in Taiwan,” Journal of Happiness Studies (Econlit) 2, 2001, 269-288.
23. Van Praag, Bernard M.S., and Barbara E. Baarsma. 2005. “ Using Happiness Surveys to Value Intangibles: The Case of Airport Noise.” The Economic Journal, 115(500): 224–246.
24. Weinhold, Diana. 2008. “ How Big a Problem Is Noise Pollution? A Brief Happiness Analysis by a Perturbable Economist.” LSE Working Paper.
25. Welsch, Heinz. 2002. “ Preferences over Prosperity and Pollution: Environmental Valuation based on Happiness Surveys.” Kyklos 55: 473-494.
26. Welsch, Heinz. 2006. “ Environment and Happiness: Valuation of Air Pollution Using Life Satisfaction Data.” Ecological Economics, 58: 801–813.
二. 網頁部份
1. 行政院環保署－空氣品質監測網 http://taqm.epa.gov.tw/taqm/zh-tw/default.aspx
2. 台灣社會變遷基本調查-中央研究院調查研究專題中心-學術調查研究資料庫
https://srda.sinica.edu.tw/group/scigview/1/2
3. 朱淑娟網誌環境報導-環保署今發布 PM2.5納入空氣品質標準
http://shuchuan7.blogspot.tw/2012/05/pm25.html

指導教授

鄒孟文

審核日期

2014-7-16

推文