Translated Titles

Public Choice And Environmental Risk Facility Control Policy Instrument Choice


洪鴻智(Hung-Chih Hung)

Key Words

環境風險 ; 不確定性 ; 財產權 ; 土地使用管制 ; 成本-效益分析 ; 公共選擇 ; environmental risk ; uncertainty ; property rights ; land-use control ; cost-benefit analysis ; public-choice



Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

27卷1期(2000 / 03 / 01)

Page #

47 - 63

Content Language


Chinese Abstract


English Abstract

Where the land-uses or facilities with potential environmental risk characteristic are often to be regarded as NIMBY facilities. It makes the control instruments choice of these facilities to be extraordinarily complex according to insufficiency in information, uncertainty in risk reducing cost-benefit, variety in land-use types and the interference of related public choice behaviors. Therefore, the main purpose of this paper is to employ the economic equilibrium analysis method to discuss how to select appropriate control instruments of environmental risk facilities. To this purpose, this paper incorporates with the uncertainty opinion and public choice theory, and using four case studies to investigate the risk control instruments choice with the viewpoint of cost-benefit analysis. Whether we chose price or quantity control instrument, it is found that there dose not exit any what is called the best or unique control instrument, but depends on the marginal cost-benefit function pattern of risk reducing and the risk perception attitudes of resident.

Topic Category 工程學 > 土木與建築工程
工程學 > 市政與環境工程
  1. Adar, Z., Griffin, J. M.(1976).Uncertainty and the choice of pollution control instruments.Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,3
  2. Aidt, T. S.(1998).Political internalization of economic externalities and environmental policy.Journal of Public Economics,69
  3. Babcock, R. F., Siemon, C. L.(1985).The Zoning Game Revisited.Cambridge, MA.:Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
  4. Baumol, W. J., Oates, W. E.(1988).The Theory of Environmental Policy.Cambridge, New York:Cambridge University Press.
  5. Buchanan, J. M.(1984).The Theory of Public Choice (II).Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press.
  6. Buchanan, J. M., Tullock, G.(1976).Polluters' Profits and Political Response: Direct Control Versus Taxes: Reply.American Economic Review,66
  7. Coase, R. H.(1988).The Firm, the Market, and the Law.Chicago, IL.:The University of Chicago Press.
  8. Coase, R. H.(1960).The Problem of Social Cost.Journal of Law and Economics,3
  9. Cutter, S. L.(1993).Living with Risk: The Geography of Technological Hazards.London:Edward Arnold.
  10. Fischel, W. A.(1987).The Economics of Zoning Laws: A property rights approach to American land use controls.Baltimore:The John Hopkins University Press.
  11. Greenwood, P. H., Ingene, C. A.(1978).Uncertain externalities, liability rules, and resource allocation.American Economic Review,68
  12. Jung, C., Krutilla, K., Viscusi, W. K., Boyd, R.(1995).The Coase theorem in rent-seeding society.International Review of Law and Economics,15
  13. Kraan, D. J.(1991).Environmental Protection: Public or Private Choice.London:Kluwer.
  14. Lai, W. C. L.(1997).Property rights justifications for planning and a theory of zoning.Progress in Planning,48
  15. Lai, W. C. L.(1994).The economics of land-use zoning: A literature review and analysis of the work of Coase.Town Planning Review,65
  16. Medema, S. G.(1997).Comment: The Coase theorem, rent seeding, and forgotten footnote.International Review of Law and Economics,17
  17. Miller, C.(1990).Development control as an instrument of environmental management: A review.Town Planning Review,61
  18. Miller, C.(1994).Planning, pollution and risk: Findings of recent research.Town Planning Review,65
  19. Miller, C., Fricker, C.(1993).Planning and hazards.Progress in Planning,40
  20. Popper, F.(1987).Resolving Locational Conflict.Center for urban policy, Rutgers University.
  21. Poulton, M. C.(1997).Externalities, transaction costs, public choice and the appeal of zoning: A response to Lai Wei Chung and Sorensen.Town Planning Review,68
  22. Poulton, M. C.(1991).The case of a positive planning theory (Part 2): A positive theory of planning.Environment and Planning, B,18
  23. Roberts, M. J., Spence, M.(1976).Effluent charges and licenses under uncertainty.Journal of Public Economics,5
  24. Sorensen, T.(1994).Further thoughts on Coasian approach to zoning: A response to Lai Wai Chung.Town Planning Review,65
  25. Stavins, R. N.(1996).Correlated uncertainty and policy instrument choice.Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,30
  26. Theeuwes, J.(1991).Environmental Protection: Public or Private Choice.London:Kluwer.
  27. Tisato, P.(1994).Pollution standards vs. charges under uncertainty.Environmental and Resource Economics,4
  28. Webster, C.(1998).Analytical public-choice planning theory: A response to Poulton.Town Planning Review,69
  29. Weitzman, M. L.(1974).Prices versus Quantities.The Review of Economic Studies,41
  30. 李永展 Lee, Yung-Jaan(1997)。鄰避症候群之解析 Re-Examining the NIMBY Syndrome。都市與計劃 City and Planning,24(1)
  31. 周育仁 Chou, Yu-Jen(1993)。政治與經濟之關係:台灣經驗與其理論意涵。台北:五南圖書出版公司。
  32. 洪鴻智 Hung, Hung-Chih(1996)。工業區環境風險管理:REACT模型之應用。法商學報 Journal of Law and Commerce,32
  33. 洪鴻智 Hung, Hung-Chih(1995)。空間衝突管理:策略規劃方法之應用。法商學報 Journal of Law and Commerce,31
  34. 洪鴻智 Hung, Hung-Chih(1995)。環境污染爭議事件之協商。規劃學報 Journal of Planning,22
Times Cited
  1. 曾奕筑(2009)。家戶選擇颱洪保險決策之探討-以台南縣麻豆鎮為例。長榮大學土地管理與開發研究所學位論文。2009。1-99。 
  2. 林相伯(2013)。黑面琵鷺保育特區治理模式之研究。臺灣大學建築與城鄉研究所學位論文。2013。1-73。 
  3. 吳念霖(2009)。台灣5歲幼兒教育政策議題之研究: 政策工具觀。政治大學公共行政研究所學位論文。2009。1-158。
  4. 張登傑(2012)。馬祖機場興建之公共選擇理論分析。臺灣大學政治學研究所學位論文。2012。1-196。