家戶住宅區位選擇與地方財政分配之實證研究

Residential Location Choice and Tiebout Hypothesis

陳彥仲(Yen-Jong Chen)；吳京玲(Ching-Ling Wu)

Tiebout假說 ； 區位選擇 ； Logit模型 ； 地方財政 ； 高雄縣 ； Tiebout hypothesis ； Location choice ； Logit model ； Local finance ； Kaohsiung County

都市與計劃

25卷2期（1998 / 09 / 01）

223 - 238

繁體中文

C.Tiebout於1956年提出地方化財政理論，認為家戶會依各住宅區位所提供之公共設施服務水準、地方稅之課徵及住宅支出等來決定其選擇。而地方政府則依據家戶所負擔之地方稅賦來從事公共設施服務水準之提升。台灣地區實施地方自治，地方財政分配之合理性乃實為政府施政之思考重點。目前關於Tiebout假說之研究，大多為理論性的探討，本文則嘗試利用不連續選擇理論之Logit模型，以高雄縣為研究地區，建構家戶住宅區位之選擇模型。再經由模型計算家戶對住宅區位之選擇機率，進而將選擇機率加總，求出各分區之期望家戶數。最後將各分區選擇之相對比例之預測結果與實際地方財政之分配結果相互比較。本研究之實證結果顯示高雄縣之地方財政分配與居民之期望選擇結果一致。而經替選方案指定方式之比較結果發現，若以毗鄰之鄕鎮為家戶住宅區位選擇之替選方案，則模型之解釋能力較佳。

The distribution of fiscal budget between local governments is an important issue. In 1956 Chales Tiebout provides a theoretical model of testing the competition between local governments. It is assumed that household choose the housing location according to the public service level, the housing price and the local taxes as well. In this study we test the Tiebout hypothesis by directly estimating the probability of residential location choice for each household and aggregating the choice probability for each residential zone. We compare the distribution of predicted probability of housing choice against the current fiscal distribution to test the consistency of the two distributions. The empirical result shows that the probability distribution of residential choice is consistent to the fiscal distribution. We also conclude that the logit model structure is applicable in testing the fiscal distribution embodied on the Tiebout hypothesis.

1. 陳彥仲 Chen, Yen-Jong(1997)。住宅選擇之程序性決策模式 The Sequential Decision Models for Housing Choice。住宅學報 Journal of Housing Studies，5
   連結：
2. Cebula, R. J., Koch, J. V.(1989).Welfare Policies and Migration of the Poor in the United States - An empirical note.Public Choice,61
3. Dowding, K. P., John, P., Biggs, S.(1994).Tiebout, A Survey of Empirical Literature.Urban Studies,31
4. Edel, M., Sclar, E.(1974).Taxes, Spending, and Property Values: Supply Adjustment in a Tiebout-Oates Model.Journal of Political Economy,82(5)
5. Englund, P.(1986).Transaction Costs, Capital Gains Taxes, and Housing Demand.Journal of Urban Economics,20
6. Heinberg, J., Oates, W.(1970).The Incidence of Differential Property Taxes on Urban Housing: A comment and some further evidence.National Tax Journal,23
7. Manski, C. F., McFadden, D.(1981).Structural Analysis of Discrete Data with Econometric Applications.Cambridge, Massachusetts:The MIT Press.
8. McDougall, G. A.(1976).Local Public Goods and Residential Property Insights and Extension.National Tax Journal,29
9. Mieszkowski, P., Zodrow, G. R.(1989).Taxation and the Tiebout Model: The Differential Effects of Head Taxes, Taxes on Land Rents, and Property Taxes.Journal of Economic Literature,27
10. Noiset, L.(1995).Pigou, Tiebout, Property Taxation, and the Underprovision of Local Public Goods: Comment.Journal of Urban Economics,38
11. Oates, W. E.(1969).The Effects of Property Taxes and Local Public Spending on Property Values: An Empirical Study of Tax Capitalization and the Tiebout Hypothesis.Journal of Political Economy,77(6)
12. Pollakowski, H. O.(1973).The Effects of Property Taxes and Local Spending on Property Values: A comment and further results.Journal of Political Economy,81
13. Reschovsky, A.(1979).Residential Choice and the Local Public Sector: An Alternative Test of the Tiebout Hypothesis.Journal of Urban Economy,6
14. Rosen, H. S., Fullerton, D. J.(1977).A Note on Local Tax Rates, Public Benefit Levels, and Property Values.Journal of Polities Economy,85(2)
15. Schneider, M., Logan, J. R.(1982).The Effects of Local Government Finances on Community Growth Rates: a test of the Tiebout model.Urban Affairs Quarterly,18(1)
16. Tiebout, C. M.(1956).A pure Theory of Local Expenditures.Journal of Political Economy,64(5)
17. Tullock, G.(1971).Public Decisions as Public Goods.Journal of Political Economy,79
18. Zodrow, G. R., Mieszkowski, P.(1986).Pigou, Tiebout, property taxation, and the underprovision of local public goods.Journal of Urban Economics,19
19. 朱敬一 Chu, Chin-Yi、 紀志毅 Chi, Woody Chih-Yi(1988)。論城市鄉村間公共財的最適配置－Tiebout與Todaro模型之綜合。經濟論文叢刊 Taiwan Economic Review，16(1)
20. 李泳龍 Lee, Yung-Lung(1988)。國立政治大學地政研究所。
21. 段良雄 Duann, Liang-Shyong、 劉慧燕 Liu, Hui-Yen(1996)。敘述偏好模式之實驗設計與校估方法 Stated Preference Models: Experimental Design and Calibration Methods。運輸計劃 Transportation Planning Journal，25(1)
22. 陳荔芬(1992)。國立政治大學地政研究所。
23. 蔡吉源 Tsai, Chi-Yuan(1980)。租稅與居所選擇。中央研究院三民主義研究所。
24. 謝靜琪 Hsieh, Jing-Chzi(1984)。國立中興大學都市計畫研究所。

1. 陳淑美、張金鶚、朱芳妮(2008)。已購屋者及購屋搜尋者之購屋需求決策比較分析—兼論顯示性偏好及敘述性偏好之差異。都市與計劃，35(4)，339-359。