台灣作為一個民主的國家，選民的支持度往往都是執政者非常注重的點，而選民中有一定比例為擁屋者，因此每當選舉到來執政者或是候選人都會提出利多的房市政策以獲得擁屋者的支持，除此之外，選舉作為一個重大事件，其結果的不同可能伴隨著政策與制度方面的重大變化，不論是金融市場或是不動產市場都會產生影響。本研究首先針對2018年九合一地方縣市長選舉，針對六都直轄市前後一年的房市交易資料中的房價與流通天數變化驗證是否存在政治景氣循環理論。實證結果發現，台北市在房價與流通天數上皆符合政治景氣循環理論，但僅有房價在統計上顯著。
為更進一步觀察2018年選舉中選舉不確定性較高的選區在選後住宅價格變化是否高於選舉不確定性較低的選區，採用差異中差異法，將選前民調差距小與政黨輪替的情況作為選舉不確定性較高的選舉，與其他地區做分析。實證結果發現，台中市作為選前民調接近的不可預期政黨輪替選舉具有較高的不確定性，因此相較於不確定性較低得選舉在選後住宅價格成長與流通天數減少幅度較大，符合不確定資訊假說中所謂不確定消失後，市場會有正向報酬率，分量回歸結果進一步看出台中市在低價位與中低價位房屋相較低不確定性地區變化程度較大，流通天數則是在高價位房屋變化程度較大。

In Taiwan, as a democratic country, voter support is often a key concern for those in power, and a certain percentage of voters are homeowners, so every time an election comes around, either the ruler or the candidate will propose favorable housing policies to gain the support of homeowners. Both financial and real estate markets will be affected. First, I examine whether there is a political cycle theory for the local mayoral election in 2018 by examining the changes in housing prices and days on market before and after the year of housing transactions. The results showed that both housing prices and days on market in Taipei City were consistent with the political cycle theory, but only housing prices were statistically significant.
To further observe whether the post-election changes in housing prices in constituencies with higher electoral uncertainty in the 2018 election were higher than those with lower electoral uncertainty, the difference-in-difference method was used to analyze the pre-election polls with small disparities and the change of political parties as elections with higher electoral uncertainty, compared to other districts. The empirical results show that Taichung City has a higher degree of uncertainty as an unpredictable election with close pre-election polls and party alternation, and therefore has a greater increase in residential price growth and a greater decrease in days on market after the election than a less uncertain election. The results of the quantile regression further show that Taichung City has experienced a greater degree of change and that the change is not significant across all price of houses, mainly in the lower and lower-middle price ranges.

第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究問題 4
第三節 研究架構與流程 5
第二章 文獻回顧 7
第一節 政治景氣循環理論 7
第二節 不確定資訊假說 9
第三節 差異中差異法（DID） 11
第三章 研究方法 13
第一節 建立假說 13
第二節 研究方法 15
第三節 實證模型 18
第四節 變數選取說明 22
第四章 實證結果 26
第一節 樣本分析 26
第二節 政治景氣循環理論回歸實證結果 34
第三節 不確定資訊假說實證結果 40
第四節 實證小節 55
第五章 結論與建議 58
第一節 結論 58
第二節 建議與限制 59
參考文獻 60
附錄一 2018年六都市長候選人房市相關政見 64

中文參考文獻
李春長、梁志民、林豐文（2016）。捷運系統對鄰近住宅價格之影響 – 以差異中之差異法估計。台灣土地研究，第20卷第2期，31-58。
陳怡諠、卓翠月、白詩婷（2017）。總統選舉事件對股市之影響。選舉研究，第24卷第1期，33-60。
陳怡諠、許安儀（2020）。縣市長選舉對股市之影響。管理與研究，第27卷第1期，1 - 30。
毛治文、吳文傑（2016）。以差異中差異配對分析法檢驗雙元所得稅制度對經濟成長的影響。經濟研究，第52卷第2期，169 – 205。
張怡文、江穎慧、張金鶚（2009）。分量迴歸在大量估價模型之應用 - 非典型住宅估價之改進。都市與計畫，第36卷第3期，281 – 304。
林左裕、陳慧潔、蔡永利（2010）。影響住宅大樓價格因素之探討。評價學報，第3期，13 – 23。
李春長、游淑滿、張維倫（2012）。公共設施、環境品質與不動產景氣對住宅價格影響之研究─兼論不動產景氣之調節效果。住宅學報，第21卷第1期，67 – 87。
張貴婷、陳青浩、林明俊和隋安莉(2006)，總統及北高市長選舉事件對股市報酬率之影響，嘉南學報，第三十二期，350- 363。
彭建文、張金鶚、林恩從（1998），房地產景氣對生產時間落差之影響，經濟論文叢刊，26(4)，409 – 429 。
 
英文文參考文獻
Aha ,B. Higgins, B. Lee, T. United Kingdom general elections and the impact on house prices. International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, 1753-8270.
Brender, A, (2003).The Effect of Fiscal Performance on Local Government Election Results in Israel: 1989 – 1998. Journal of Public Economics, 87, 2187-2205
Brown, Keith C., Harlow, W. V. and Tinic Seha (1988). Risk aversion, uncertain
information, and market efficiency. Journal of Financial Economics , 22 (3), 355 – 385.
Carnahan & Saiegh (2020). Electoral uncertainty and financial volatility: Evidence. from two-round presidential races in emerging markets. Economics & Politics, 33(1), 109 – 132.
Card and Krueger (1994). Comment on David Neumark and William Wascher, “Employment Effects of Minimum and Subminimum Wages: Panel Data on State Minimum Wage Laws”. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 47(3).
Cervero,R. and Duncan,M. (2004). Neighbourhood Composition and Residential Land Prices: Does Exclusion Raise or Lower Values?. Urban Studies, 41(2), 299 – 315.
Clair,T. and Cook,T. (2015). DIFFERENCE-IN-DIFFERENCES METHODS IN PUBLIC FINANCE. National Tax Journal, 68 (2), 319 – 338.
Contat, J C ., Turnbull, G.K. and Waller, B.D(2019). Politics and Prices : Presidential Elections and the Housing Market . Working paper.
David M. Geltner, Norman G. Miller, Clayton,J. and Elchholtz,P. (2007). Commercial real estate Analysis and Investments. West Group Eagan, MN.
Frew,J. and Jud,G. (2003). Estimating the Value of Apartment Buildings. Journal of Real Estate Research. 25(1), 77 – 86.
Heckman,J. Smith,J. and Clements,N. (1997). Making The Most Out Of Programme. Evaluations and Social Experiments: Accounting For Heterogeneity in Programme Impacts. The Review of Economic Studies, 64(4), 487 – 535.
Higgins, D and Reddy , W 2010 ). The impact of political risk on Australian house
prices. Australian and New Zealand Property Journal , 2(7), 413 422
Huang, B. Wu, B. Barry,M (2010). Geographically and temporally weighted regression for modeling spatio-temporal variation in house prices. International Journal of Geographical Information Science. 24(3), 383 – 401.
Jens,C. (2017). Political uncertainty and investment: Causal evidence from U.S. gubernatorial elections. Journal of Financial Economics, 124(3), 563 – 579.
Kang,H. and Gardner,M. (1989). Selling Price and Marketing Time in the Residential Real Estate Market. Journal of Real Estate Research, 4(1), 21 – 35.
Kapur, D, and M. Vaishnav (2013), “Quid Pro Quo: Builders, Politicians, and Election Finance in India”, Working paper.
Kavetsos. G. (2011). The Impact of the London Olympics Announcement on Property Prices. Urban Studies,49(7),1453 – 1470.
Kiel and McClain (1995). House Prices during Siting Decision Stages: The Case of an Incinerator from Rumor through Operation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 28(2), 241 – 255.
Koenker,R. and Bassett,G. (1978). Regression Quantiles. Econometrica. 46(1). 33 -50.
Mehdian, Nas and Perry (2008), An examination of investor reaction to unexpected. political and economic events in Turkey. Global Finance Journal , 18(3), 337 – 350.
Li , J. and Born,J. (2006). Presidential election uncertainty and common stock returns in the United States. Journal of Financial Research, 29(4), 609 – 622.
Liu . L (2006). The housing business cycle of local public finance: empirical evidence from Taiwan. Journal of Asian Public Policy,14(3), 375 – 390.
Nordhaus, W .（1975 ). The Political Business Cycle . The Review of Economic
Studies, 42(2), 169-190.
Pantzalis , Christos , Stangeland , David A . and Turtle , Harry J . (2000), Political
Elections and the resolution of uncertainty : The international evidence. Journal of Banking & Finance ,24(10), 1575 – 1604.
Pettersson-Lidbom, P (2008), Do Parties Matter For Economic Outcomes? A Regression-Discontinuity Approach, Journal of the European Economic Association, 6(5), 1037-1056
Sirmans,G. Macpherson,D. and Zietz,E. The Composition of Hedonic Pricing Models. Journal of Real Estate Literature. 13(1), 3 – 43.
Sunak,Y. and Madlener,R. (2014). Local Impacts of Wind Farms on Property. Values: A Spatial Difference-In-Differences Analysis. FCN Working Paper.