學術產出-學位論文
文章檢視/開啟
書目匯出
-
題名 消費者面對環保政策的願付價格差異－以中國汽車市場為例
Differences in Consumer Willingness-to-Pay for Environmental Policies: A Case Study of the Chinese Automobile Market作者 束良鴻
Shu, Liang-Hong貢獻者 胡偉民<br>廖仁哲
Hu, Wei-Min<br>Liao, Jen-Che
束良鴻
Shu, Liang-Hong關鍵詞 特徵價格法
汽車排放法規
願付價格
中國汽車排放標準
歐洲汽車排放標準
Hedonic Price Model
Emission Standards
Willingness to Pay
China Vehicle Emission Standards
European Vehicle Emission Standards日期 2024 上傳時間 5-八月-2024 13:36:44 (UTC+8) 摘要 本文利用特徵價格法研究中國從2007年到2009年之間實行國三政策下消費者願付價格差異，討論汽車性能與油耗無顯著提升的情況裡，不同族群消費者為排放較優且加裝偵測系統之車輛願付價格改變。利用消費者實際購買價格、居住地及中國國家數據統計網的資料，通過五個不同變數設定的特徵價格模型研究不同社會經濟條件下強制性（中國減排法規）與非強制性（歐洲減排法規）法規環保特徵對願付價格的影響，並以估計之價格提升區間計算新法規之減排成本。研究發現，擁有新環保特徵的車款購買價格有所提升，消費者對中國和歐洲法規下減排特徵的願付價格提升區間分別為3770到5860元和3590到3880元，且願付價格可能隨著擁有更多的環保特徵而提高。地區虛擬變數估計結果顯示，居住在較發達地區的消費者對強制性法規下的環保特徵改變願付價格下降，但對非強制性法規的願付價格上升，這樣的異質性可能來源於消費者對車輛性能的覺察力差異導致；加入人均GDP和環境保護支出的估計結果發現，環保支出的上升可能會降低消費者對環保車款的願付價格，人均GDP的估計結果在經濟意義上則與地區差異一致。此外，雙重差分法對銷量的估計結果與願付價格在經濟意義上一致，購車預算較低的消費者相對於預算較高的消費者對環保車的偏好有更大幅度的上升。
This paper employs the Hedonic Price Model to study the differences in consumers' willingness to pay under the implementation of the China III emissions standards from 2007 to 2009. It discusses the changes in WTP for vehicles with superior emissions and equipped with detection systems among different consumer groups, under the scenario where there is no significant improvement in vehicle performance and fuel efficiency. By utilizing consumers' actual purchase prices, residence locations, and data from the National Bureau of Statistics of China, this study examines the impact of mandatory and non-mandatory regulation on vehicle WTP under various socioeconomic conditions through Hedonic Price Model with four different settings. The WTP increase for emission reduction features under Chinese and European regulations ranges from 3,770 to 5,860 RMB and 3,590 to 3,880 RMB, respectively. Consumers' WTP for environmental features may increase as the number of environmental features grows. The estimation results of regional dummy variables indicate that consumers living in more developed areas show a decreased WTP for environmental features under mandatory regulations but an increased WTP under non-mandatory regulations. The inclusion of per capita GDP and environmental protection expenditure in the estimation reveals that an increase in environmental protection expenditure might reduce consumers' WTP for environmentally friendly vehicles. Difference-in-Differences estimation results indicating that consumers with lower purchase budgets exhibit a larger increase in preference for environmentally friendly vehicles compared to those with higher budgets.參考文獻 Bartik, T. J. (1987). The estimation of demand parameters in hedonic price models. Journal of political Economy, 95(1):81–88. Becker, G. S. (2010). The economics of discrimination. University of Chicago press. Bunch, D. S., Bradley, M., Golob, T. F., Kitamura, R., and Occhiuzzo, G. P. (1993). Demand for clean-fuel vehicles in california: a discrete-choice stated preference pilot project. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 27(3):237–253. Costa, E., Montemurro, D., and Giuliani, D. (2019). Consumers’willingness to pay for green cars: a discrete choice analysis in italy. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 21:2425–2442. Dou, X. and Linn, J. (2020). How do us passenger vehicle fuel economy standards affect new vehicle purchases? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 102:102332. Erdem, C., Şentürk, İ., and Şimşek, T. (2010). Identifying the factors affecting the willingness to pay for fuel-efficient vehicles in turkey: A case of hybrids. Energy policy, 38(6):3038–3043. Ewing, G. and Sarigöllü, E. (2000). Assessing consumer preferences for clean-fuel vehicles: A discrete choice experiment. Journal of public policy & marketing, 19(1):106– 118. Goldberg, P. K. (1998). The effects of the corporate average fuel efficiency standards in the us. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 46(1):1–33. Gruenspecht, H. K. (1982). Differentiated regulation: The case of auto emissions standards. The American Economic Review, 72(2):328–331. Hackbarth, A. and Madlener, R. (2013). Consumer preferences for alternative fuel vehicles: A discrete choice analysis. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 25:5–17. Hidrue, M.K., Parsons, G.R., Kempton, W., andGardner, M.P.(2011). Willingnesstopay for electric vehicles and their attributes. Resource and energy economics, 33(3):686– 705. Jacobsen, M. R. and Van Benthem, A. A. (2015). Vehicle scrappage and gasoline policy. American Economic Review, 105(3):1312–1338. Klier, T. and Linn, J. (2012). New-vehicle characteristics and the cost of the corporate average fuel economy standard. The RAND Journal of Economics, 43(1):186–213. Lamb, W. F., Wiedmann, T., Pongratz, J., Andrew, R., Crippa, M., Olivier, J. G., Wiedenhofer, D., Mattioli, G., Al Khourdajie, A., House, J., et al. (2021). A review of trends and drivers of greenhouse gas emissions by sector from 1990 to 2018. Environmental research letters, 16(7):073005. Lane, B. and Potter, S. (2007). The adoption of cleaner vehicles in the uk: exploring the consumer attitude–action gap. Journal of cleaner production, 15(11-12):1085–1092. Manski, C. F. and Sherman, L. (1980). An empirical analysis of household choice among motor vehicles. Transportation Research Part A: General, 14(5-6):349–366. Poder, T. G. and He, J. (2017). Willingness to pay for a cleaner car: The case of car pollution in quebec and france. Energy, 130:48–54. Potoglou, D. and Kanaroglou, P. S. (2007). Household demand and willingness to pay for clean vehicles. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 12(4):264–274. Qian, L. and Soopramanien, D. (2011). Heterogeneous consumer preferences for alternative fuel cars in china. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 16(8):607–613. Rosen, S. (1974). Hedonic prices and implicit markets: product differentiation in pure competition. Journal of political economy, 82(1):34–55. Wu, Y., Zhu, Q., and Zhu, B. (2018). Decoupling analysis of world economic growth and co2 emissions: A study comparing developed and developing countries. Journal of Cleaner production, 190:94–103. Zhang, D., Liu, J., and Li, B. (2014). Tackling air pollution in china—what do we learn from the great smog of 1950s in london. Sustainability, 6(8):5322–5338. Zhang, Z., Sheng, N., Zhao, D., Cai, K., Yang, G., and Song, Q. (2023). Are residentsmore willing to buy and pay for electric vehicles under the “carbon neutrality”? Energy Reports, 9:510–521. Zhou, M., He, G., Fan, M., Wang, Z., Liu, Y., Ma, J., Ma, Z., Liu, J., Liu, Y., Wang, L., etal. (2015). Smog episodes, fine particulate pollution and mortality in china. Environmental research, 136:396–404. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
經濟學系
111258017資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111258017 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 胡偉民<br>廖仁哲 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Hu, Wei-Min<br>Liao, Jen-Che en_US dc.contributor.author (作者) 束良鴻 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (作者) Shu, Liang-Hong en_US dc.creator (作者) 束良鴻 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Shu, Liang-Hong en_US dc.date (日期) 2024 en_US dc.date.accessioned 5-八月-2024 13:36:44 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 5-八月-2024 13:36:44 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 5-八月-2024 13:36:44 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G0111258017 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/152700 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 經濟學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 111258017 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本文利用特徵價格法研究中國從2007年到2009年之間實行國三政策下消費者願付價格差異，討論汽車性能與油耗無顯著提升的情況裡，不同族群消費者為排放較優且加裝偵測系統之車輛願付價格改變。利用消費者實際購買價格、居住地及中國國家數據統計網的資料，通過五個不同變數設定的特徵價格模型研究不同社會經濟條件下強制性（中國減排法規）與非強制性（歐洲減排法規）法規環保特徵對願付價格的影響，並以估計之價格提升區間計算新法規之減排成本。研究發現，擁有新環保特徵的車款購買價格有所提升，消費者對中國和歐洲法規下減排特徵的願付價格提升區間分別為3770到5860元和3590到3880元，且願付價格可能隨著擁有更多的環保特徵而提高。地區虛擬變數估計結果顯示，居住在較發達地區的消費者對強制性法規下的環保特徵改變願付價格下降，但對非強制性法規的願付價格上升，這樣的異質性可能來源於消費者對車輛性能的覺察力差異導致；加入人均GDP和環境保護支出的估計結果發現，環保支出的上升可能會降低消費者對環保車款的願付價格，人均GDP的估計結果在經濟意義上則與地區差異一致。此外，雙重差分法對銷量的估計結果與願付價格在經濟意義上一致，購車預算較低的消費者相對於預算較高的消費者對環保車的偏好有更大幅度的上升。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) This paper employs the Hedonic Price Model to study the differences in consumers' willingness to pay under the implementation of the China III emissions standards from 2007 to 2009. It discusses the changes in WTP for vehicles with superior emissions and equipped with detection systems among different consumer groups, under the scenario where there is no significant improvement in vehicle performance and fuel efficiency. By utilizing consumers' actual purchase prices, residence locations, and data from the National Bureau of Statistics of China, this study examines the impact of mandatory and non-mandatory regulation on vehicle WTP under various socioeconomic conditions through Hedonic Price Model with four different settings. The WTP increase for emission reduction features under Chinese and European regulations ranges from 3,770 to 5,860 RMB and 3,590 to 3,880 RMB, respectively. Consumers' WTP for environmental features may increase as the number of environmental features grows. The estimation results of regional dummy variables indicate that consumers living in more developed areas show a decreased WTP for environmental features under mandatory regulations but an increased WTP under non-mandatory regulations. The inclusion of per capita GDP and environmental protection expenditure in the estimation reveals that an increase in environmental protection expenditure might reduce consumers' WTP for environmentally friendly vehicles. Difference-in-Differences estimation results indicating that consumers with lower purchase budgets exhibit a larger increase in preference for environmentally friendly vehicles compared to those with higher budgets. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機與目的 1 第二節 研究架構 4 第二章 文獻回顧 5 第一節 消費者特徵對環保車輛願付價格影響之研究 5 第二節 減排與燃油標準下汽車特徵與市場反應之研究 8 第三章 中國汽車市場與環保法規發展歷程 11 第四章 資料集、變數建立與敘述統計 13 第一節 中國汽車銷售資料 13 第二節 汽車特徵遺失值處理 13 第三節 研究變數建立 14 第五章 研究架構與實證模型 22 第六章 實證結果與分析 27 第一節 研究模型估計結果 27 第二節 消費者在新法規之下對不同排放物花費之減碳成本 33 第七章 減排法規對汽車市場銷量的影響 34 第一節 政策實行後的銷售趨勢－使用雙重差分法進行估計 34 第二節 實證估計結果 35 第八章 結論與政策建議 38 第一節 研究結論 38 第二節 研究限制 39 參考文獻 40 附錄A 43 zh_TW dc.format.extent 1866970 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111258017 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 特徵價格法 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 汽車排放法規 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 願付價格 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 中國汽車排放標準 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 歐洲汽車排放標準 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Hedonic Price Model en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Emission Standards en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Willingness to Pay en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) China Vehicle Emission Standards en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) European Vehicle Emission Standards en_US dc.title (題名) 消費者面對環保政策的願付價格差異－以中國汽車市場為例 zh_TW dc.title (題名) Differences in Consumer Willingness-to-Pay for Environmental Policies: A Case Study of the Chinese Automobile Market en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Bartik, T. J. (1987). The estimation of demand parameters in hedonic price models. Journal of political Economy, 95(1):81–88. Becker, G. S. (2010). The economics of discrimination. University of Chicago press. Bunch, D. S., Bradley, M., Golob, T. F., Kitamura, R., and Occhiuzzo, G. P. (1993). Demand for clean-fuel vehicles in california: a discrete-choice stated preference pilot project. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 27(3):237–253. Costa, E., Montemurro, D., and Giuliani, D. (2019). Consumers’willingness to pay for green cars: a discrete choice analysis in italy. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 21:2425–2442. Dou, X. and Linn, J. (2020). How do us passenger vehicle fuel economy standards affect new vehicle purchases? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 102:102332. Erdem, C., Şentürk, İ., and Şimşek, T. (2010). Identifying the factors affecting the willingness to pay for fuel-efficient vehicles in turkey: A case of hybrids. Energy policy, 38(6):3038–3043. Ewing, G. and Sarigöllü, E. (2000). Assessing consumer preferences for clean-fuel vehicles: A discrete choice experiment. Journal of public policy & marketing, 19(1):106– 118. Goldberg, P. K. (1998). The effects of the corporate average fuel efficiency standards in the us. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 46(1):1–33. Gruenspecht, H. K. (1982). Differentiated regulation: The case of auto emissions standards. The American Economic Review, 72(2):328–331. Hackbarth, A. and Madlener, R. (2013). Consumer preferences for alternative fuel vehicles: A discrete choice analysis. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 25:5–17. Hidrue, M.K., Parsons, G.R., Kempton, W., andGardner, M.P.(2011). Willingnesstopay for electric vehicles and their attributes. Resource and energy economics, 33(3):686– 705. Jacobsen, M. R. and Van Benthem, A. A. (2015). Vehicle scrappage and gasoline policy. American Economic Review, 105(3):1312–1338. Klier, T. and Linn, J. (2012). New-vehicle characteristics and the cost of the corporate average fuel economy standard. The RAND Journal of Economics, 43(1):186–213. Lamb, W. F., Wiedmann, T., Pongratz, J., Andrew, R., Crippa, M., Olivier, J. G., Wiedenhofer, D., Mattioli, G., Al Khourdajie, A., House, J., et al. (2021). A review of trends and drivers of greenhouse gas emissions by sector from 1990 to 2018. Environmental research letters, 16(7):073005. Lane, B. and Potter, S. (2007). The adoption of cleaner vehicles in the uk: exploring the consumer attitude–action gap. Journal of cleaner production, 15(11-12):1085–1092. Manski, C. F. and Sherman, L. (1980). An empirical analysis of household choice among motor vehicles. Transportation Research Part A: General, 14(5-6):349–366. Poder, T. G. and He, J. (2017). Willingness to pay for a cleaner car: The case of car pollution in quebec and france. Energy, 130:48–54. Potoglou, D. and Kanaroglou, P. S. (2007). Household demand and willingness to pay for clean vehicles. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 12(4):264–274. Qian, L. and Soopramanien, D. (2011). Heterogeneous consumer preferences for alternative fuel cars in china. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 16(8):607–613. Rosen, S. (1974). Hedonic prices and implicit markets: product differentiation in pure competition. Journal of political economy, 82(1):34–55. Wu, Y., Zhu, Q., and Zhu, B. (2018). Decoupling analysis of world economic growth and co2 emissions: A study comparing developed and developing countries. Journal of Cleaner production, 190:94–103. Zhang, D., Liu, J., and Li, B. (2014). Tackling air pollution in china—what do we learn from the great smog of 1950s in london. Sustainability, 6(8):5322–5338. Zhang, Z., Sheng, N., Zhao, D., Cai, K., Yang, G., and Song, Q. (2023). Are residentsmore willing to buy and pay for electric vehicles under the “carbon neutrality”? Energy Reports, 9:510–521. Zhou, M., He, G., Fan, M., Wang, Z., Liu, Y., Ma, J., Ma, Z., Liu, J., Liu, Y., Wang, L., etal. (2015). Smog episodes, fine particulate pollution and mortality in china. Environmental research, 136:396–404. zh_TW
