Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
Google ScholarTM
NCCU Library
Citation Infomation
Related Publications in TAIR
題名 銀行評估綠建築鑑價溢價率之研究
A Study on Banks’ Valuation Premiums for Green Buildings作者 黃宣賀
Huang, XUAN-HE貢獻者 孫振義
Sun, Chen-Yi
黃宣賀
Huang, XUAN-HE關鍵詞 綠建築
綠色金融
綠色授信
銀行鑑價
銀行估價
Green Building
Green Finance
Green Credit
Bank Appraisal
Property Valuation日期 2025 上傳時間 1-Sep-2025 14:33:20 (UTC+8) 摘要 隨著臺灣綠建築認證制度的持續發展，認證版本與等級日益多元，即便屬於同一版本與等級，不同建築在五大評估指標上的得分差異，亦可能造成綠建築價值的顯著落差。然而，在實務鑑價作業中，銀行鑑價人員往往受限於時間壓力與對綠建築指標理解程度不一，導致難以準確評估其實際價值。 本研究運用層級分析法（Analytic Hierarchy Process, AHP），分別針對銀行鑑價人員與綠建築相關領域之專家學者進行問卷調查，除釐清鑑價人員對各評估指標對不動產估值影響之權重外，亦探討專家學者在環境保護與永續發展脈絡下，對各指標相對重要性的排序。最終彙整雙方觀點，建構一套具實務參考價值之複合性參考指標。 調查結果顯示，銀行鑑價人員對取得單一綠建築標章之住宅，平均願意提高估值 6.64%；若該住宅同時獲得 EEWH 與 LEED 雙重認證，則平均可「再」提高估值 5.51%。在各項綠建築指標中，鑑價人員認為「E.空調與照明系統」、「B.綠化量」與「G. CO₂ 減量」對估值影響最為顯著；相對地，專家學者則基於永續性觀點，認為「D.外殼節能」、「E.空調與照明系統」與「I.室內環境」三項指標最具環境與健康意涵。 本研究進一步以兩組受訪者之評估結果為基礎，採中位數分析法將各指標劃分為四類：第一類為「估值影響高，且具高度永續重要性」，可作為銀行放貸與綠色金融評估之核心依據；第二類為「估值影響低，永續重要性亦低」，建議於綠建築評分制度中進行整併或精簡；第三類為「估值影響高，但永續重要性低」，可考慮適度調降其於評分體系中的比重；第四類則為「估值影響低，但永續重要性高」，應透過銀行內部教育訓練，協助鑑價人員理解如通風、採光、省水與資源回收等設施在減碳與促進健康面向的重要性，以促進永續建築理念與金融實務間的有效接軌。
The continuous development of Taiwan's green building certification systems leads to diverse certification versions and rating systems. Although some buildings are certified by the same version and rating systems, discrepancies in the scores of the five major evaluation indicators can lead to significant variation in the prices of the green building. However, in practical valuation operations, bank appraisers are often constrained by time pressures and differences in the understanding of the green building indicators, leading to difficulty in accurately assessing the actual value of the green buildings. This research applied the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to conduct surveys on the bank appraisers, green-building experts, and scholars to understand how appraisers weight green building evaluation indicators in property valuation, and how experts and scholars rank the importance of each indicator in the contexts of environmental protection and sustainable development. This research summarizes the perspectives of bank appraisers, experts, and scholars and establishes compound indicators that provide practical applicability and valuable reference. Research results show that bank appraisers are willing to increase the property valuation by 6.64%, on average, when the residential building acquires a single green-building certification. If the building is certified with both EEWH and LEED, an additional valuation increase of 5.51% can be witnessed. Among all the green-building indicators, the bank appraisers consider that indicator E: Air Conditioners and Lighting Systems, indicator B: Green Coverage Ratio, and indicator G: CO₂ Emission Reduction significantly affect the valuations. In contrast, based on the perspective of sustainable development, experts and scholars believe that three indicators, including indicator D: Energy-Efficient Building Envelope, indicator E: Air Conditioners and Lighting Systems, and indicator I: Indoor Environmental Quality, contain the most environmental and health implications. Based on the evaluation results of the two interview groups, this research employed the median analysis method to categorize the indicators into four types. The first category is high impact on valuation and with great importance of sustainability, which can be an evaluation criterion for bank loans and green finance. The second category is low impact of valuation with low importance of sustainability. It is suggested to consolidate or simplify within the green-building rating system. The third category is high impact on valuation but with low importance of sustainability. It is recommended that the weighting in the rating system be appropriately reduced. The fourth category is low impact on valuation but with high importance of sustainability. It is suggested that bank appraisers be trained to understand the importance of ventilation, lighting, water-saving, and recycling facilities in promoting carbon reduction and public health, as well as to bridge the gap between the concept of green building and the practices of financial valuation.參考文獻 一、中文文獻 (一)專書 內政部建築研究所，2019，『綠建築評估手冊─基本型』，臺北：內政部建築研究所。 內政部建築研究所，2019，『綠建築評估手冊─住宿型』，臺北：內政部建築研究所。 內政部建築研究所，2023，『綠建築評估手冊─基本型』，臺北：內政部建築研究所。 內政部建築研究所，2023，『綠建築評估手冊─住宿型』，臺北：內政部建築研究所。 (二)期刊論文 劉庭芬、陳清楠，2011，「國內外綠建築評估系統比較」，『中興工程』，113：87-94。 郭柏巖，2008，「亞熱帶的風土建築與綠建築設計」，『工程』，81(2)：69-82。 各國金融機構抵押貸款外部估價制度. (2017). 林左裕. 土地問題研究季刊， 16(4)，頁34-58。 孫振義、曹妤，2019，「綠建築評估項目對住宅不動產估價調整率之影響」. 住宅學報，28(1)，頁27-50. 許景德，2005，「金融機構不動產抵押估價問題之探討」，土地問題研究季刊，4(2)，104-109。 陳奉瑤、梁仁旭.，2018，「綠建築標章之溢價率分析—以新北市住宅大樓為例」，台灣土地研究，21(1)，頁61-85. 鄧振源、曾國雄. (1989年). 層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與應用（上）. 中國統計學報，27:6，頁5-22， 鄧振源、曾國雄. (1989年). 層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與應用（下）. 中國統計學報，27:6，頁1-15。 (三) 碩、博士論文 吳明助，2008，「推動綠建築證書與標章提升之策略探討」，桃園：國立中央大學土木工程研究所碩士論文。 王惟之，2022，「整體開發地區綠建築溢價之研究. 臺北：國立政治大學地政學系碩士論文. 楊雅婷.，2019，「綠認證對辦公大樓租金之影響－以台北市為例」，臺北：國立政治大學地政學系碩士論文。 盧裕文，2012，「綠建築成本分析與比較」，國立成功大學土木工程研究所碩士論文：台南。 蘇芳儀，2014，「集合住宅取得綠建築標章之成本分析 -以銀級升黃金級案例為例」，臺北：國立政治大學地政學系碩士論文。 (四) 其他 褚志鵬，2009，層級分析法(AHP)理論與實作，國立東華大學企業管理學系教學講義。 (一)外文文獻 1.專書 Kats, G., 2003, Green Building Costs and Financial Benefits, Massachusetts:Massachusetts Technology Collaborative. 2.期刊論文 Miller, N., Pogue, D., Saville, J., and Tu, C., 2010, “The Operations and Management of Green Buildings in the United States”, Journal of Sustainable Real Estate, 2(1):51-66. Andrea ChegutEichholtz and Nils KokPiet. (2014). Supply， Demand and the Value of Green. Urban Studies， 51(1)， 頁 22-43. DiazJ. (1997). An Investigation into the Impact of Previous Expert Value Estimates on Appraisal Judgment. Journal of Real Estate Research， 13(1)， 頁 57-66. Franz Fuerst and Patrick McAllister. (2011). Green Noise or Green Value? Measuring the Effects of Environmental Certification on Office Values. REAL ESTATE ECONOMICS， V39(1)， 頁 45-69. IrakozeHyun Kim and AminaDong. (2023). Identifying Market Segment for the Assessment of a Price Premium for Green Certified Housing: A Cluster Analysis Approach. Sustainability， 15(1). Tversky& Kahneman， DA.，. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science， 185(4157)， 頁 1124-1131. Weilin Li aFang b and Liu Yang bGuanyu. (2021). The effect of LEED certification on office rental values in China. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments， 45. Latif Onur Uğur and Neşe Leblebici.(2018). An examination of the LEED green building certification system in terms of construction costs. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews，Volume 81, Part 1, January 2018, 頁 1476-1483. Nazirah Mat Russ., Mahanim Hamid., Kho Mei Ye., 2018 “Literature Review on Green Cost Premium of Sustainable Building Construction”, International Journal of Technology, 9(8): 1715-1725. Luay N. Dwaikat., Kherun N. Ali., 2016 “Green buildings cost premium: A review of empirical evidence”, Energy and Buildings, Volume 110: 396-403. Michael Rehm., Rochelle Ade., 2013 “Construction costs comparison between ‘green’ and conventional office buildings”, Building Research & Information, Volume 41: 198-208 Chen-Yi Sun., Yin-Guang Chen., Rong-Jing Wang., Shih-Chi Lo., Jyh-Tyng Yau., Ya-Wen Wu., 2019 “Construction Cost of Green Building Certified Residence: A Case Study in Taiwan”, sustainability, 11(8): 2195 Gunnar Friede., Timo Busch., Alexander Bassen., 2015 “ESG and financial performance: aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies”, Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, Volume 5: 210-233 Georgios Zairis., Panagiotis Liargovas., Nikolaos Apostolopoulos., 2024 “Sustainable Finance and ESG Importance: A Systematic Literature Review and Research Agenda”, Sustainability, 16(7): 2878 Marzouk Osama., 2024“Evolution of the (Energy and Atmosphere) Credit Category in the LEED Green Buildings Rating System for (Building Design and Construction: New Construction), From Version 4.0 to Version 4.1”, Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development, volume 8, issue 8. 3.學位論文 Olsson Anna and Steko Anel（2015）. Defining a reference building according to LEED v4, to enable comparison of LCA alternatives （Master’s thesis）. Lunds Universitet, Skåne, Konungariket Sverige. 4.其他 Langdon, D., 2007, “Costs of Green Revisited”, AECOM. Steven Winter Associates, Inc., 2004, “LEED cost study”, U.S. General Service Administration 一、網頁參考資料 金融監督管理委員會-永續金融網，https://esg.fsc.gov.tw/。 財團法人台灣綠建築中心，http://gb.tabc.org.tw/。 美國LEED，https://www.usgbc.org/leed。 英國BREEM，https://www.breeam.com/。 韓國 G-SEED，http://gseed.or.kr/。 聯合國環境規畫署（United Nations Environment Programme，UNEP），https://www.unep.org/。 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
地政學系碩士在職專班
111923019資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111923019 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 孫振義 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Sun, Chen-Yi en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 黃宣賀 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Huang, XUAN-HE en_US dc.creator (作者) 黃宣賀 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Huang, XUAN-HE en_US dc.date (日期) 2025 en_US dc.date.accessioned 1-Sep-2025 14:33:20 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 1-Sep-2025 14:33:20 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Sep-2025 14:33:20 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0111923019 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/158970 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 地政學系碩士在職專班 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 111923019 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 隨著臺灣綠建築認證制度的持續發展，認證版本與等級日益多元，即便屬於同一版本與等級，不同建築在五大評估指標上的得分差異，亦可能造成綠建築價值的顯著落差。然而，在實務鑑價作業中，銀行鑑價人員往往受限於時間壓力與對綠建築指標理解程度不一，導致難以準確評估其實際價值。 本研究運用層級分析法（Analytic Hierarchy Process, AHP），分別針對銀行鑑價人員與綠建築相關領域之專家學者進行問卷調查，除釐清鑑價人員對各評估指標對不動產估值影響之權重外，亦探討專家學者在環境保護與永續發展脈絡下，對各指標相對重要性的排序。最終彙整雙方觀點，建構一套具實務參考價值之複合性參考指標。 調查結果顯示，銀行鑑價人員對取得單一綠建築標章之住宅，平均願意提高估值 6.64%；若該住宅同時獲得 EEWH 與 LEED 雙重認證，則平均可「再」提高估值 5.51%。在各項綠建築指標中，鑑價人員認為「E.空調與照明系統」、「B.綠化量」與「G. CO₂ 減量」對估值影響最為顯著；相對地，專家學者則基於永續性觀點，認為「D.外殼節能」、「E.空調與照明系統」與「I.室內環境」三項指標最具環境與健康意涵。 本研究進一步以兩組受訪者之評估結果為基礎，採中位數分析法將各指標劃分為四類：第一類為「估值影響高，且具高度永續重要性」，可作為銀行放貸與綠色金融評估之核心依據；第二類為「估值影響低，永續重要性亦低」，建議於綠建築評分制度中進行整併或精簡；第三類為「估值影響高，但永續重要性低」，可考慮適度調降其於評分體系中的比重；第四類則為「估值影響低，但永續重要性高」，應透過銀行內部教育訓練，協助鑑價人員理解如通風、採光、省水與資源回收等設施在減碳與促進健康面向的重要性，以促進永續建築理念與金融實務間的有效接軌。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) The continuous development of Taiwan's green building certification systems leads to diverse certification versions and rating systems. Although some buildings are certified by the same version and rating systems, discrepancies in the scores of the five major evaluation indicators can lead to significant variation in the prices of the green building. However, in practical valuation operations, bank appraisers are often constrained by time pressures and differences in the understanding of the green building indicators, leading to difficulty in accurately assessing the actual value of the green buildings. This research applied the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to conduct surveys on the bank appraisers, green-building experts, and scholars to understand how appraisers weight green building evaluation indicators in property valuation, and how experts and scholars rank the importance of each indicator in the contexts of environmental protection and sustainable development. This research summarizes the perspectives of bank appraisers, experts, and scholars and establishes compound indicators that provide practical applicability and valuable reference. Research results show that bank appraisers are willing to increase the property valuation by 6.64%, on average, when the residential building acquires a single green-building certification. If the building is certified with both EEWH and LEED, an additional valuation increase of 5.51% can be witnessed. Among all the green-building indicators, the bank appraisers consider that indicator E: Air Conditioners and Lighting Systems, indicator B: Green Coverage Ratio, and indicator G: CO₂ Emission Reduction significantly affect the valuations. In contrast, based on the perspective of sustainable development, experts and scholars believe that three indicators, including indicator D: Energy-Efficient Building Envelope, indicator E: Air Conditioners and Lighting Systems, and indicator I: Indoor Environmental Quality, contain the most environmental and health implications. Based on the evaluation results of the two interview groups, this research employed the median analysis method to categorize the indicators into four types. The first category is high impact on valuation and with great importance of sustainability, which can be an evaluation criterion for bank loans and green finance. The second category is low impact of valuation with low importance of sustainability. It is suggested to consolidate or simplify within the green-building rating system. The third category is high impact on valuation but with low importance of sustainability. It is recommended that the weighting in the rating system be appropriately reduced. The fourth category is low impact on valuation but with high importance of sustainability. It is suggested that bank appraisers be trained to understand the importance of ventilation, lighting, water-saving, and recycling facilities in promoting carbon reduction and public health, as well as to bridge the gap between the concept of green building and the practices of financial valuation. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1-１ 第一節 研究動機與目的 1-１ 第二節 研究範圍與方法 1-5 第三節 研究架構與流程 1-8 第二章 文獻回顧 2-1 第一節 綠建築認證制度 2-1 第二節 綠建築溢價與成本 2-13 第三節 銀行不動產授信與鑑價 2-17 第四節 小結 2-26 第三章 研究設計 3-1 第一節 層級分析法 3-1 第二節 問卷評估項目篩選 3-10 第四章 問卷調查與資料分析 4-1 第一節 問卷調查分析-第一部分 4-1 第二節 問卷調查分析-第二部分 4-24 第三節 優先評估指標項目分析 4-55 第五章 結論與建議 5-1 第一節 結論 5-1 第二節 建議 5-3 參考文獻 參-1 附錄一 第一部分專家問卷 附-1 附錄二 第二部分銀行鑑價人員問卷 附-12 附錄三 階層分析法－專家問卷一致性檢定 附-23 附錄四 階層分析法－銀行鑑價人員問卷一致性檢定 附-25 zh_TW dc.format.extent 7348026 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111923019 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 綠建築 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 綠色金融 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 綠色授信 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 銀行鑑價 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 銀行估價 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Green Building en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Green Finance en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Green Credit en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Bank Appraisal en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Property Valuation en_US dc.title (題名) 銀行評估綠建築鑑價溢價率之研究 zh_TW dc.title (題名) A Study on Banks’ Valuation Premiums for Green Buildings en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 一、中文文獻 (一)專書 內政部建築研究所，2019，『綠建築評估手冊─基本型』，臺北：內政部建築研究所。 內政部建築研究所，2019，『綠建築評估手冊─住宿型』，臺北：內政部建築研究所。 內政部建築研究所，2023，『綠建築評估手冊─基本型』，臺北：內政部建築研究所。 內政部建築研究所，2023，『綠建築評估手冊─住宿型』，臺北：內政部建築研究所。 (二)期刊論文 劉庭芬、陳清楠，2011，「國內外綠建築評估系統比較」，『中興工程』，113：87-94。 郭柏巖，2008，「亞熱帶的風土建築與綠建築設計」，『工程』，81(2)：69-82。 各國金融機構抵押貸款外部估價制度. (2017). 林左裕. 土地問題研究季刊， 16(4)，頁34-58。 孫振義、曹妤，2019，「綠建築評估項目對住宅不動產估價調整率之影響」. 住宅學報，28(1)，頁27-50. 許景德，2005，「金融機構不動產抵押估價問題之探討」，土地問題研究季刊，4(2)，104-109。 陳奉瑤、梁仁旭.，2018，「綠建築標章之溢價率分析—以新北市住宅大樓為例」，台灣土地研究，21(1)，頁61-85. 鄧振源、曾國雄. (1989年). 層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與應用（上）. 中國統計學報，27:6，頁5-22， 鄧振源、曾國雄. (1989年). 層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與應用（下）. 中國統計學報，27:6，頁1-15。 (三) 碩、博士論文 吳明助，2008，「推動綠建築證書與標章提升之策略探討」，桃園：國立中央大學土木工程研究所碩士論文。 王惟之，2022，「整體開發地區綠建築溢價之研究. 臺北：國立政治大學地政學系碩士論文. 楊雅婷.，2019，「綠認證對辦公大樓租金之影響－以台北市為例」，臺北：國立政治大學地政學系碩士論文。 盧裕文，2012，「綠建築成本分析與比較」，國立成功大學土木工程研究所碩士論文：台南。 蘇芳儀，2014，「集合住宅取得綠建築標章之成本分析 -以銀級升黃金級案例為例」，臺北：國立政治大學地政學系碩士論文。 (四) 其他 褚志鵬，2009，層級分析法(AHP)理論與實作，國立東華大學企業管理學系教學講義。 (一)外文文獻 1.專書 Kats, G., 2003, Green Building Costs and Financial Benefits, Massachusetts:Massachusetts Technology Collaborative. 2.期刊論文 Miller, N., Pogue, D., Saville, J., and Tu, C., 2010, “The Operations and Management of Green Buildings in the United States”, Journal of Sustainable Real Estate, 2(1):51-66. Andrea ChegutEichholtz and Nils KokPiet. (2014). Supply， Demand and the Value of Green. Urban Studies， 51(1)， 頁 22-43. DiazJ. (1997). An Investigation into the Impact of Previous Expert Value Estimates on Appraisal Judgment. Journal of Real Estate Research， 13(1)， 頁 57-66. Franz Fuerst and Patrick McAllister. (2011). Green Noise or Green Value? Measuring the Effects of Environmental Certification on Office Values. REAL ESTATE ECONOMICS， V39(1)， 頁 45-69. IrakozeHyun Kim and AminaDong. (2023). Identifying Market Segment for the Assessment of a Price Premium for Green Certified Housing: A Cluster Analysis Approach. Sustainability， 15(1). Tversky& Kahneman， DA.，. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science， 185(4157)， 頁 1124-1131. Weilin Li aFang b and Liu Yang bGuanyu. (2021). The effect of LEED certification on office rental values in China. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments， 45. Latif Onur Uğur and Neşe Leblebici.(2018). An examination of the LEED green building certification system in terms of construction costs. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews，Volume 81, Part 1, January 2018, 頁 1476-1483. Nazirah Mat Russ., Mahanim Hamid., Kho Mei Ye., 2018 “Literature Review on Green Cost Premium of Sustainable Building Construction”, International Journal of Technology, 9(8): 1715-1725. Luay N. Dwaikat., Kherun N. Ali., 2016 “Green buildings cost premium: A review of empirical evidence”, Energy and Buildings, Volume 110: 396-403. Michael Rehm., Rochelle Ade., 2013 “Construction costs comparison between ‘green’ and conventional office buildings”, Building Research & Information, Volume 41: 198-208 Chen-Yi Sun., Yin-Guang Chen., Rong-Jing Wang., Shih-Chi Lo., Jyh-Tyng Yau., Ya-Wen Wu., 2019 “Construction Cost of Green Building Certified Residence: A Case Study in Taiwan”, sustainability, 11(8): 2195 Gunnar Friede., Timo Busch., Alexander Bassen., 2015 “ESG and financial performance: aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies”, Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, Volume 5: 210-233 Georgios Zairis., Panagiotis Liargovas., Nikolaos Apostolopoulos., 2024 “Sustainable Finance and ESG Importance: A Systematic Literature Review and Research Agenda”, Sustainability, 16(7): 2878 Marzouk Osama., 2024“Evolution of the (Energy and Atmosphere) Credit Category in the LEED Green Buildings Rating System for (Building Design and Construction: New Construction), From Version 4.0 to Version 4.1”, Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development, volume 8, issue 8. 3.學位論文 Olsson Anna and Steko Anel（2015）. Defining a reference building according to LEED v4, to enable comparison of LCA alternatives （Master’s thesis）. Lunds Universitet, Skåne, Konungariket Sverige. 4.其他 Langdon, D., 2007, “Costs of Green Revisited”, AECOM. Steven Winter Associates, Inc., 2004, “LEED cost study”, U.S. General Service Administration 一、網頁參考資料 金融監督管理委員會-永續金融網，https://esg.fsc.gov.tw/。 財團法人台灣綠建築中心，http://gb.tabc.org.tw/。 美國LEED，https://www.usgbc.org/leed。 英國BREEM，https://www.breeam.com/。 韓國 G-SEED，http://gseed.or.kr/。 聯合國環境規畫署（United Nations Environment Programme，UNEP），https://www.unep.org/。 zh_TW
