學術產出-學位論文
文章檢視/開啟
書目匯出
-
題名 都市計畫工業土地轉變使用交易成本之研究
A Study of Transaction Costs from Conversing the Use of Urban Industrial Land作者 吳室滿 貢獻者 邊泰明
吳室滿關鍵詞 交易成本
土地轉變使用
工業土地
Transaction cost
conversing use of land
industrial land日期 2013 上傳時間 1-十二月-2014 14:24:38 (UTC+8) 摘要 全球化發展及產業結構轉型,造成都市計畫工業土地需求降低,導致工業土地閒置。再者,因都市地區快速發展,都會區住宅需求增加,房價高漲,致引發開發商對取得成本相對較低之都市計畫工業土地開發動機。土地開發過程中,自土地取得、規劃、興建等一連串交易行為所衍生之交易成本不容小覷。當交易成本為零的情況下,財產權得被清楚界定,故賦予財產權予任何人,資源分配結果均不會受影響,此時透過私下協商即可達最有效率之使用,無需政府干預。然在現實生活中,交易成本大於零,使得財產權界定困難度增加。土地使用分區管制界定了土地財產權,致開發商為尋求更大租利,而藉由尋租行為改變土地使用管制環境,進而影響土地使用分區管制決策與財產權結構。 本研究從交易成本理論探討開發商就都市計畫工業土地轉變使用開發架構選擇,藉由就新北市都市計畫工業土地轉變使用與交易成本分析,瞭解開發商就該等土地進行開發時,採取合法或違規轉變使用開發架構選擇及其交易成本暨交易特性。再自土地開發過程、財產權界定、尋租及交易成本理論等相關文獻回顧及所蒐集之新北市都市計畫工業土地轉變使用建案資料中,選取適當變數,建立Logistic迴歸模型。經實證測試結果,影響開發商就都市計畫工業土地轉變使用開發架構選擇因素為建案規模之戶數、總樓地板面積、交易特性中資產特殊性之開發時機及時間之存續時間。最後,依據本研究成果,提供政府機關於管制都市計畫工業土地轉變使用之參考。
As a result of the development of globalization and the industrial restructuring, the demand of urban industrial land decreased, leaving the industrial land unused. Moreover, because of the rapid development in urban areas, the housing requirements in metropolis increased and the price rose highly, triggering off the motive for developers exploiting relatively low cost urban industrial land. During the process of land development, the transaction cost deriving from a series of trade behaviors including the acquisition of land, planning, construction is high. When the transaction cost turned zero, the property right should be defined obviously; therefore, the property right endued with anyone and the resource-allocation consequence won’t be influenced. Under this circumstance, it can reach the most efficient using via private negotiation, without the government’s intervention. However, the transaction cost is greater than zero in the real life, leading the definition of property right too difficultly. Zoning defined the land property right. In order to obtain more benefits, the developers change the regulatory environment of land use by rent seeking and then affect the decision of zoning and the structure of property right. This study discusses the developers’ choices for converse structure of the urban industrial land based on the transaction cost. According to the New Taipei City conversing use of the urban industrial land and the transaction cost, we could analyzed the developers adopted legal or illegal choices for conversing the exploitative structure and its transaction cost of trade characteristic. Furthermore, the study selects the appropriate variables to establish logistic regression models from the related literature reviews such as the process of land development, property right definition, rent seeking and transaction cost theory and the collected data of the New Taipei City. After actual proof, the factors influence developers’ choices for conversing the use of urban industrial land including the household scale of building project, total floor areas, the development timing and durations of asset specificity for trade characteristic. Lastly, this study will be a reference to provide government in controlling conversion the use of urban industrial land.參考文獻 一、中文文獻內政部營建署市鄉規劃局,2003,『全球化時代下都市計畫工業區規劃變更機制之研究-以高速公路中壢及內壢交流道附近特定區為例』。王濟川、郭志剛,2003,『Logistic迴歸模型-方法及應用』,台北,五南。石佾箴,2010,「寇斯定理對外部性問題解決策略之影響-以台北市輕井澤豪宅日照權問題為例」,逢甲大學土地管理學系碩士班碩士論文:台北。呂宗盈、林建元,2002,「由制度面探討台灣土地使用管理制度變遷之研究」,『建築與規劃學報』3(2):136-158。吳明隆,2008,『SPSS操作與應用問卷統計分析實務』,台北,五南。吳彩珠,2001,「開發管制對土地開發決策影響之研究」,頁1-13,收錄於『第二屆地政學術研討會論文集』,台北:政治大學地政系。林怡妏,2006,「應用交易成本理論檢討台灣現行土地開發機制-舊市區與新開發區之比較」,成功大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文:台南。林森田,2002,「土地使用分區之制度經濟分析」,『土地問題研究季刊』,1(1):9-18。柯伯煦、陳建元,2010,「社區環境品質自製或外購:交易成本的觀點」,『東吳會計學報』,2009諾貝爾得主Oliver Williamson論文獎專刊:29-59。陳建元,2006,「土地使用制度的選擇與產權結構關係之研究-制度經濟的觀點與應用」,頁359-375,收錄於『2006海峽兩岸土地學術研討會論文集』,台北:中國地政研究所。陳建元,2010,「變遷的公共財理論與都市治理結構-從新古典到新制度經濟學之引介」,『地理學報』,58:65-88。許惠珠,2003,「交易成本理論之回顧與前瞻」,『Journal of China Institute of Technology』,28:79-98。張剛維,2008,「土地使用分區管制制度之執行與制度變遷-財產權觀點之分析」,政治大學地政學系博士論文:台北。張剛維、林森田,2008,「尋租行為與土地使用分區管制-財產權觀點之分析」,『臺灣土地研究』,11(2):127-153。新北市政府城鄉發展局,2012,『新北市政府對內政部訂定「100年度地方政府執行防範都市計畫工業區變相做住宅使用督導查核計畫」報告』。新北市政府城鄉發展局,2013,『新北市工業區作住宅使用之變更策略規劃案』報告。葉百修,1988,『從財產權保障觀點論公用徵收制度』,台北,著者。熊秉元,1993,「「市場之尺」和「心中之尺」-論釋寇斯定理和布坎楠對寇斯定理的質疑」,『經濟論文』,21(2):331-356。劉瑞華譯(道格拉斯諾斯著,1990),1995,『制度、制度變遷與經濟成就』,台北,時報。顏愛靜,2001,「新制度經濟學的評價-【制度與經濟理論】導讀」,『人與地』,201:19-36。邊泰明,2008,『土地使用規劃與財產權理論與實務』,台北,詹氏書局。二、外文文獻Aldrich, J. and Nelson, F. D., 1984, Linear Probability, Logit, and Probit Model, Newbury Park, CA:Sage Publications.Alexander, E. R., 2001a,“A transaction-cost theory of land use planning and development control: Towards the institutional analysis of public planning”, Town Planning Review, 72(1): 45-75.Alexander, E. R., 2001b,“Governance and transaction costs in planning systems: a conceptual framework for institutional analysis of land-use planning and development control - the case of Israel”, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 28: 755-776.Barzel, Y., 1997, Economic Analysis of Property right, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.Buitelaar, E., 2004, “A Transaction-cost Analysis of the Land Development Process”, Urban Studies, 41(13): 2539-2553.Calabresi, J. M., 1968, “Transaction Costs, Resource Allocation and Liability Rules - A Comment”, Journal of Law and Economics, 11: 67-74.Cooter, R., 1982, “The Cost of Coase”, Journal of Legal Studies, 11:1-33.Dahlman, C. J., 1979, “The Problem of Externality”, Journal of Law and Economics, 22(1): 141-162.Demsetz, H., 1967, “Toward a Theory of Property Right”, American Economic Review, 57(2): 347-359.Keogh, G. and Evans, A. W., 1992, “The Private and Social Costs of Planning Delay”, Urban Studies, 29(5): 687-699.Lai, L. W. C., 1994, “The economics of land-use zoning:A literature review and analysis of the work of Coase”, Town Planning Review, 65(1): 77-98.Lai, L. W. C., 1996, Zoning and Property Rights:A Hong Kong Case study, Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.North, D. C., 1990, “A Transaction Cost Theory of Politics”, Journal of Theoretical Politics, 2: 355-367.Tan, R., Beckmann, V., Qu, F. and Wu, C., 2012,“Governing Farmland Conversion for Urban Development from the Perspective of Transaction Cost Economics”, Urban Studies, 49(10): 2265-2283.Williamson, O. E., 1975, Markets and Hierarchies, New York:Free Press.Williamson, O. E., 1985, The Economic Institutions of Capitalism, New York:Free Press.Williamson, O. E., 1999, “Public and Private Bureaucracies: A Transaction Cost Economics Perspective”, The Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 15(1): 306-342. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
地政學系碩士在職專班
100923004
102資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0100923004 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 邊泰明 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (作者) 吳室滿 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) 吳室滿 zh_TW dc.date (日期) 2013 en_US dc.date.accessioned 1-十二月-2014 14:24:38 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 1-十二月-2014 14:24:38 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-十二月-2014 14:24:38 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G0100923004 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/71747 - 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) 100923004 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 102 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 全球化發展及產業結構轉型,造成都市計畫工業土地需求降低,導致工業土地閒置。再者,因都市地區快速發展,都會區住宅需求增加,房價高漲,致引發開發商對取得成本相對較低之都市計畫工業土地開發動機。土地開發過程中,自土地取得、規劃、興建等一連串交易行為所衍生之交易成本不容小覷。當交易成本為零的情況下,財產權得被清楚界定,故賦予財產權予任何人,資源分配結果均不會受影響,此時透過私下協商即可達最有效率之使用,無需政府干預。然在現實生活中,交易成本大於零,使得財產權界定困難度增加。土地使用分區管制界定了土地財產權,致開發商為尋求更大租利,而藉由尋租行為改變土地使用管制環境,進而影響土地使用分區管制決策與財產權結構。 本研究從交易成本理論探討開發商就都市計畫工業土地轉變使用開發架構選擇,藉由就新北市都市計畫工業土地轉變使用與交易成本分析,瞭解開發商就該等土地進行開發時,採取合法或違規轉變使用開發架構選擇及其交易成本暨交易特性。再自土地開發過程、財產權界定、尋租及交易成本理論等相關文獻回顧及所蒐集之新北市都市計畫工業土地轉變使用建案資料中,選取適當變數,建立Logistic迴歸模型。經實證測試結果,影響開發商就都市計畫工業土地轉變使用開發架構選擇因素為建案規模之戶數、總樓地板面積、交易特性中資產特殊性之開發時機及時間之存續時間。最後,依據本研究成果,提供政府機關於管制都市計畫工業土地轉變使用之參考。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) As a result of the development of globalization and the industrial restructuring, the demand of urban industrial land decreased, leaving the industrial land unused. Moreover, because of the rapid development in urban areas, the housing requirements in metropolis increased and the price rose highly, triggering off the motive for developers exploiting relatively low cost urban industrial land. During the process of land development, the transaction cost deriving from a series of trade behaviors including the acquisition of land, planning, construction is high. When the transaction cost turned zero, the property right should be defined obviously; therefore, the property right endued with anyone and the resource-allocation consequence won’t be influenced. Under this circumstance, it can reach the most efficient using via private negotiation, without the government’s intervention. However, the transaction cost is greater than zero in the real life, leading the definition of property right too difficultly. Zoning defined the land property right. In order to obtain more benefits, the developers change the regulatory environment of land use by rent seeking and then affect the decision of zoning and the structure of property right. This study discusses the developers’ choices for converse structure of the urban industrial land based on the transaction cost. According to the New Taipei City conversing use of the urban industrial land and the transaction cost, we could analyzed the developers adopted legal or illegal choices for conversing the exploitative structure and its transaction cost of trade characteristic. Furthermore, the study selects the appropriate variables to establish logistic regression models from the related literature reviews such as the process of land development, property right definition, rent seeking and transaction cost theory and the collected data of the New Taipei City. After actual proof, the factors influence developers’ choices for conversing the use of urban industrial land including the household scale of building project, total floor areas, the development timing and durations of asset specificity for trade characteristic. Lastly, this study will be a reference to provide government in controlling conversion the use of urban industrial land. 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 研究範圍與內容 4第三節 研究方法與流程 6第二章 文獻回顧與理論基礎 9第一節 土地開發相關文獻回顧 9第二節 交易成本理論 15第三節 小結 22第三章 新北市都市計畫工業土地轉變使用與交易成本分析 25第一節 新北市都市計畫工業土地轉變使用現況分析 25第二節 土地轉變使用開發架構分析 47第三節 開發架構交易成本分析 52第四章 研究設計 57第一節 研究架構 57第二節 實證研究方法及訪談分析 59第三節 研究對象與研究變數 68第四節 研究假設 71第五章 實證結果分析 73第一節 敘述性統計分析 73第二節 實證結果分析 82第三節 假說驗證 84第六章 結論與建議 87第一節 結論 87第二節 建議 90參考文獻 93 zh_TW dc.format.extent 2041113 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.language.iso en_US - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0100923004 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 交易成本 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 土地轉變使用 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 工業土地 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Transaction cost en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) conversing use of land en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) industrial land en_US dc.title (題名) 都市計畫工業土地轉變使用交易成本之研究 zh_TW dc.title (題名) A Study of Transaction Costs from Conversing the Use of Urban Industrial Land en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 一、中文文獻內政部營建署市鄉規劃局,2003,『全球化時代下都市計畫工業區規劃變更機制之研究-以高速公路中壢及內壢交流道附近特定區為例』。王濟川、郭志剛,2003,『Logistic迴歸模型-方法及應用』,台北,五南。石佾箴,2010,「寇斯定理對外部性問題解決策略之影響-以台北市輕井澤豪宅日照權問題為例」,逢甲大學土地管理學系碩士班碩士論文:台北。呂宗盈、林建元,2002,「由制度面探討台灣土地使用管理制度變遷之研究」,『建築與規劃學報』3(2):136-158。吳明隆,2008,『SPSS操作與應用問卷統計分析實務』,台北,五南。吳彩珠,2001,「開發管制對土地開發決策影響之研究」,頁1-13,收錄於『第二屆地政學術研討會論文集』,台北:政治大學地政系。林怡妏,2006,「應用交易成本理論檢討台灣現行土地開發機制-舊市區與新開發區之比較」,成功大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文:台南。林森田,2002,「土地使用分區之制度經濟分析」,『土地問題研究季刊』,1(1):9-18。柯伯煦、陳建元,2010,「社區環境品質自製或外購:交易成本的觀點」,『東吳會計學報』,2009諾貝爾得主Oliver Williamson論文獎專刊:29-59。陳建元,2006,「土地使用制度的選擇與產權結構關係之研究-制度經濟的觀點與應用」,頁359-375,收錄於『2006海峽兩岸土地學術研討會論文集』,台北:中國地政研究所。陳建元,2010,「變遷的公共財理論與都市治理結構-從新古典到新制度經濟學之引介」,『地理學報』,58:65-88。許惠珠,2003,「交易成本理論之回顧與前瞻」,『Journal of China Institute of Technology』,28:79-98。張剛維,2008,「土地使用分區管制制度之執行與制度變遷-財產權觀點之分析」,政治大學地政學系博士論文:台北。張剛維、林森田,2008,「尋租行為與土地使用分區管制-財產權觀點之分析」,『臺灣土地研究』,11(2):127-153。新北市政府城鄉發展局,2012,『新北市政府對內政部訂定「100年度地方政府執行防範都市計畫工業區變相做住宅使用督導查核計畫」報告』。新北市政府城鄉發展局,2013,『新北市工業區作住宅使用之變更策略規劃案』報告。葉百修,1988,『從財產權保障觀點論公用徵收制度』,台北,著者。熊秉元,1993,「「市場之尺」和「心中之尺」-論釋寇斯定理和布坎楠對寇斯定理的質疑」,『經濟論文』,21(2):331-356。劉瑞華譯(道格拉斯諾斯著,1990),1995,『制度、制度變遷與經濟成就』,台北,時報。顏愛靜,2001,「新制度經濟學的評價-【制度與經濟理論】導讀」,『人與地』,201:19-36。邊泰明,2008,『土地使用規劃與財產權理論與實務』,台北,詹氏書局。二、外文文獻Aldrich, J. and Nelson, F. D., 1984, Linear Probability, Logit, and Probit Model, Newbury Park, CA:Sage Publications.Alexander, E. R., 2001a,“A transaction-cost theory of land use planning and development control: Towards the institutional analysis of public planning”, Town Planning Review, 72(1): 45-75.Alexander, E. R., 2001b,“Governance and transaction costs in planning systems: a conceptual framework for institutional analysis of land-use planning and development control - the case of Israel”, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 28: 755-776.Barzel, Y., 1997, Economic Analysis of Property right, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.Buitelaar, E., 2004, “A Transaction-cost Analysis of the Land Development Process”, Urban Studies, 41(13): 2539-2553.Calabresi, J. M., 1968, “Transaction Costs, Resource Allocation and Liability Rules - A Comment”, Journal of Law and Economics, 11: 67-74.Cooter, R., 1982, “The Cost of Coase”, Journal of Legal Studies, 11:1-33.Dahlman, C. J., 1979, “The Problem of Externality”, Journal of Law and Economics, 22(1): 141-162.Demsetz, H., 1967, “Toward a Theory of Property Right”, American Economic Review, 57(2): 347-359.Keogh, G. and Evans, A. W., 1992, “The Private and Social Costs of Planning Delay”, Urban Studies, 29(5): 687-699.Lai, L. W. C., 1994, “The economics of land-use zoning:A literature review and analysis of the work of Coase”, Town Planning Review, 65(1): 77-98.Lai, L. W. C., 1996, Zoning and Property Rights:A Hong Kong Case study, Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.North, D. C., 1990, “A Transaction Cost Theory of Politics”, Journal of Theoretical Politics, 2: 355-367.Tan, R., Beckmann, V., Qu, F. and Wu, C., 2012,“Governing Farmland Conversion for Urban Development from the Perspective of Transaction Cost Economics”, Urban Studies, 49(10): 2265-2283.Williamson, O. E., 1975, Markets and Hierarchies, New York:Free Press.Williamson, O. E., 1985, The Economic Institutions of Capitalism, New York:Free Press.Williamson, O. E., 1999, “Public and Private Bureaucracies: A Transaction Cost Economics Perspective”, The Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 15(1): 306-342. zh_TW