考慮不同通勤運具結合寧適效果的地租型態

Land Rent Patterns with A Consideration of Different Transportation Modes and Amenity Effects

蕭潤君(Jun-Chun Hsiao)

指導教授 ： 蔡智發

國立臺北大學/公共事務學院/都市計劃研究所/碩士(2014年)

摘要

本研究分析都市為單核心架構，住戶以汽車、機車、公車三種運具通勤，且考慮寧適性的情況下之都市地租型態。不同運具的通勤成本包含固定成本、時間成本、燃料成本及車禍成本。寧適性與住戶的土地大小成正比，並反應在效用函數中。
在模型中滿足效用極大時，可得到使用不同運具情況下之均衡地租。在各種運具成本的假設條件下，顯示居住在靠近市中心的住戶會使用機車通勤，其外圍的住戶使用公車，而最外圍的住戶使用汽車之結論。
本研究並以台北市文山區至中正區為通勤路段之例子，進行實際案例分析。且利用數值模擬分析各種不同參數變動下均衡的變化。由分析得知當寧適性要求增加時，住戶對於住宅大小的要求也隨之提昇，但在收入不變的情況下，住戶只好減少消費混合性財貨的數量，因此住戶滿足程度下降。

關鍵字

地租型態 ； 通勤運具 ； 單核心都市模型 ； 寧適性

並列摘要

The study analyzes the urban land rent pattern in the monocentric city with a consideration of amenity effect, and all commuters taking the automobiles, motorcycles or bus to work.
The commuting costs of different transportation modes include of fixed cost, time cost, fuel cost and accident cost. The amenity effects which reflect in a utility function increase in the land lot size. The equilibrium land rent with the different transportation mode can be obtained when the utility function is maximized. Under some assumptions of transportation cost, my study discovers the result that residents near the CBD will choose to ride motorcycles to work. With an increase of the distance to the CBD, residents will take buses to work, and the outermost residents will drive automobiles.
This is then applied model to the commuting line from Wenshan district to Zhongzheng district in Taipei. Some numerical simulation with small changes on the parameters of the model are made to explore the impacts on the equilibrium solution. Finally, it is shows that an increase of the amenity parameters will incur a decrease on households’ of utility level due to the higher desire for a larger land lot size result in the less composite goods under the same income level.

並列關鍵字

land rent pattern ； transportation mode ； monocentric city model ； amenity

參考文獻

1. Alonso, W. 1964, Location and land use: toward a general theory of land rent.

3. Brueckner, J. K., 1987, The structure of urban equilibria:a unified treatment of the Muth-Mills model, Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, pp.821-845.

6. Kim, J., 2012, Endogenous vehicle-type choices in a monocentric city, Regional Science and Urban Economics, Vol.42, pp.749-760.

7. LeRoy, S. F., and J. Sonstelie. 1983. Paradise lost and regained: transportation innovation, income and reidential location. Journal of Urban Econoics, Vol. 13, pp. 67-89.

8. Litman, T. A.,2009. Transportation Cost and Benefit Analysis II – Safety and Heath Costs, Victoria Transport Policy Institute.