請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/7733
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 劉錦添(Jin-Tan Liu) | |
dc.contributor.author | Tsu-En Wang | en |
dc.contributor.author | 王祖恩 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-05-19T17:51:41Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2027-08-04 | |
dc.date.available | 2021-05-19T17:51:41Z | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2017-08-08 | |
dc.date.issued | 2017 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2017-08-07 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Reference
中文 劉錦添 (1992a),“環境風險降低的價值評估—台灣的實證研究”,經濟論文,20 (2):679-695。 劉錦添 (1992b),“台灣地區民眾對環境風險的認知與面對環境風險下的行為分析—台北及高雄地區”,行政院環保署委託研究報告。 劉錦添 (1993),“核電風險知覺與反核四的願付代價”,中國經濟學會年會論文集,45-65。 英文 Adler, M. D. (2004). Fear assessment: Cost-benefit analysis and the pricing of fear and anxiety. Chi.-Kent L. Rev., 79, 977. Akcura, E. (2013). Information effects on consumer willingness to pay for electricity and water service attributes. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Retrieved on, 7(6), 2016. Allman, W. (1985) “We Have Nothing to Fear,” Science, 86 (6): 38-41. Alvarez-Farizo, B., Hanley, N., Grande, J., Salt, C., & Wilson, M. (2001). Risk perceptions, risk-reducing behaviour and willingness to pay: radioactive contamination in food following a nuclear accident. Discussion papers in Economics, (01/4). Arnold, T. B., & Emerson, J. W. (2011). Nonparametric goodness-of-fit tests for discrete null distributions. The R Journal, 3(2), 34-39. Bolsen, Toby, and Fay L. Cook. (2008), “Public Opinion on Energy Policy: 1974-2006,” Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(2):364-388. Borchers, A. M., Duke, J. M., & Parsons, G. R. (2007). Does willingness to pay for green energy differ by source?. Energy policy, 35(6), 3327-3334. Burns, W. J., & Slovic, P. (2012). Risk perception and behaviors: anticipating and responding to crises. Risk Analysis, 32(4), 579-582. Cameron, T. A., DeShazo, J. R., & Johnson, E. H. (2008). Willingness to pay for health risk reductions: Differences by type of illness. Department of Economics, University of Oregon. Champ, P. A., & Bishop, R. C. (2001). Donation payment mechanisms and contingent valuation: an empirical study of hypothetical bias. Environmental and Resource Economics, 19(4), 383-402. Chan, C. C., & Chen, Y. M. (2011). A Fukushima-like nuclear crisis in Taiwan or a nonnuclear Taiwan?. East Asian Science, Technology and Society, 5(3), 403-407. Eiser JR., Hannover B. and Mann L. (1990) “Nuclear Attitudes after Chernobyl: A Cross-National Study,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 10 (2): 101-10. Eiser, J. Richard, Russell Spears, and Paul Webley. (1989), “Nuclear Attitudes before and after Chernobyl: Change and Judgment,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19(8):689-700. Gossling, S., Kunkel, T., Schumacher, K., Heck, N., Birkemeyer, J., Froese, J., ... & Schliermann, E. (2005). A target group-specific approach to “green” power retailing: students as consumers of renewable energy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 9(1), 69-83. Greenwell, R. N., & Finch, S. J. (2004). Randomized rejection procedure for the two-sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov statistic. Computational statistics & data analysis, 46(2), 257-267. Haab, Timothy C. and Kenneth E. McConnell (2002), Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources, UK: Edward Elgar. Hanemann, Michael (1984) “Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 66 (3): 332-41. Hansen, P. G., & Tostevin, J. A. (2003). Direct reactions with exotic nuclei. Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science, 53(1), 219-261. Hite, D., Duffy, P., Bransby, D., & Slaton, C. (2008). Consumer willingness-to-pay for biopower: Results from focus groups. Biomass and Bioenergy, 1(32), 11-17. Hoyos, D., & Mariel, P. (2010). Contingent valuation: Past, present and future. Prague economic papers, 4(2010), 329-343. Huang, Lei, Ying Zhou, Yuting Han, James K. Hammitt, Jun Bia,and Yang Liu. (2013), “Effect of the Fukushima nuclear accident on the risk perception of residents near a nuclear power plant in China,” Proceeding of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America, 110(49):19742-19747. Itaoka, K., A. Saito, A. Krupnick, W. Adamowicz, and T. Taniguchi (2006), “The Effect of Risk Characteristics on the Willingness to Pay for Mortality Risk Reductions from Electric Power Generation,” Environmental and Resource Economics, 33(3), 371-398. Kellstedt, P. M., Zahran, S., & Vedlitz, A. (2008). Personal efficacy, the information environment, and attitudes toward global warming and climate change in the United States. Risk Analysis, 28(1), 113-126. Kim, Y., Kim, M., & Kim, W. (2013). Effect of the Fukushima nuclear disaster on global public acceptance of nuclear energy. Energy Policy, 61, 822-828. Kockelman, K. M., & Kweon, Y. J. (2002). Driver injury severity: an application of ordered probit models. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 34(3), 313-321. Krupnick, A., Alberini, A., Cropper, M., Simon, N., O'brien, B., Goeree, R., & Heintzelman, M. (2002). Age, health and the willingness to pay for mortality risk reductions: a contingent valuation survey of Ontario residents. Journal of risk and Uncertainty, 24(2), 161-186. Lindell, M. K., & Perry, R. W. (1990). Effects of the Chernobyl accident on public perceptions of nuclear plant accident risks. Risk Analysis, 10(3), 393-399. Liu, Jin-Tan and V. Kerry Smith (1990) “Risk Communication and Attitude Change: Taiwan’s National Debate over Nuclear Power,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 3(4): 331-49. Midden CJH. and Verplanken B. (1990) “The Stability of Nuclear Attitudes after Chernobyl,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 10 (2): 111-9. Ming-Sho, H. (2003). The politics of anti-nuclear protest in Taiwan: A case of party-dependent movement (1980–2000). Modern Asian Studies, 37(03), 683-708. Nomura, N., & Akai, M. (2004). Willingness to pay for green electricity in Japan as estimated through contingent valuation method. Applied Energy, 78(4), 453-463. Mozumder, P., Vásquez, W. F., & Marathe, A. (2011). Consumers' preference for renewable energy in the southwest USA. Energy economics, 33(6), 1119-1126. Murakami, K., Ida, T., Tanaka, M., & Friedman, L. (2015). Consumers' willingness to pay for renewable and nuclear energy: A comparative analysis between the US and Japan. Energy Economics, 50, 178-189. Slovic, Paul, Baruch Fischhoff, and Sarah Lichtenstein. (1982), “Why Study Risk erception?” Risk Analysis 2:83-93. Smith, V. Kerry and William H. Desvousges (1988) “Risk Perception, Learning, and Individual Behavior,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 70: 1113-7. Smith, V. Kerry and R. Gregorg Michaels (1987) “How Did Households Interpret Chernobyl? A Bayesian Analysis of Risk Perception,” Economics Letters, 23: 359-64. Sun, C., & Zhu, X. (2014). Evaluating the public perceptions of nuclear power in China: Evidence from a contingent valuation survey. Energy Policy, 69, 397-405. Otway, H. J., & Fishbein, M. (1976). The determinants of attitude formation: An application to nuclear power. Pearce, D. W. (2000). Valuing risks to life and health: towards consistent transfer estimates in the European Union and accession states. Peters, E., & Slovic, P. (1996). The role of affect and worldviews as orienting dispositions in the perception and acceptance of nuclear Power1. Journal of applied social psychology, 26(16), 1427-1453. Prati, G., & Zani, B. (2013). The effect of the Fukushima nuclear accident on risk perception, antinuclear behavioral intentions, attitude, trust, environmental beliefs, and values. Environment and behavior, 45(6), 782-798. Rosa EA., Dunlap RE. (1994) “Nuclear Power: Three Decades of Public Opinion,” Public Opinion Quarterly, 58 (2): 295-324. Schneider, Y., & Zweifel, P. (2007). Spatial Effects in Willingness-to-Pay: The Case of Two Nuclear Risks (No. 0502). Socioeconomic Institute-University of Zurich. Slovic, Paul. (2000), The Perception of Risk. Risk, Society, and Policy Series. London, England: Earthscan Publications. Slovic, Paul, Baruch Fischhoff, and Sarah Lichtenstein. (1982), “Why Study Risk Perception?” Risk Analysis 2:83-93. Slovic, Paul, Baruch Fischhoff, and Sarah Lichtenstein. (1985), “Regulation of Risk: A Psychological Perspective,” Regulatory Policy and the Social Science, edited by R. Noll, 242-277, Berkeley: University of California Press. Stoutenborough, J. W., Sturgess, S. G., & Vedlitz, A. (2013), “Knowledge, risk, and policy support: Public perceptions of nuclear power. ” Energy Policy, 62, 176-184. Sun, C., Lyu, N., & Ouyang, X. (2014). Chinese public willingness to pay to avoid having nuclear power plants in the neighborhood. Sustainability, 6(10), 7197-7223. Van der Pligt J. (1985), “Public Attitude to Nuclear energy: Salience and Anxiety,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 5(1):87-97. Verplanken B. (1989) “Beliefs, Attitudes, and Intensions toward Nuclear Energy before and after Chernobyl in a Longitudinal Within-Subjects Design,” Environment and Behavior, 21 (4): 371- 92. Viscusi, W. Kip (1990) “Sources of Inconsistency in Societal Responses to Health Risks,” American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 80: 257-61. Viscusi, W. Kip and Charles J. O’Connor (1984) “Adaptive Responses to Chemical Labeling: Are Workers Bayesian Decision Makers?” American Economic Review, 74: 942-56. Viscusi, W. Kip. (2003), “The Value of a Statistical Life: A Critical Review of Market Estimates Throughout the World,” The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 27(1):5-76. Visschers VHM., Keller C. and Siegrist M. (2011) “Climate Change Benefits and Energy Supply Benefits as Determinants of Acceptance of Nuclear Power Stations: Investigating an Explanatory Model,” Energy Policy, 39 (6): 3621-9. Visschers, Vivianne H. M., and Michael Siegrist.(2013), “How a Nuclear Power Plant Accident Influences Acceptance of Nuclear Power: Results of a Longitudinal Study Before and After the Fukushima Disaster,” Risk Analysis, 33(2):333–347. Whitehead, J. C., & Cherry, T. L. (2007). Mitigating the hypothetical bias of willingness to pay: a comparison of ex-ante and ex-post approaches. Resource and Energy Economics, forthcoming. Yim, M. S., & Vaganov, P. A. (2003). Effects of education on nuclear risk perception and attitude: Theory. Progress in Nuclear Energy, 42(2), 221-235. Yoo, J., & Ready, R. C. (2014). Preference heterogeneity for renewable energy technology. Energy Economics, 42, 101-114. Yun, M., Lee, S. H., & Kang, H. G. (2016). Analysis of the Relationship between Risk Perception and Willingness to Pay for Nuclear Power Plant Risk Reduction. Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations, 2016. Zarnikau, J. (2003). Consumer demand for ‘green power’ and energy efficiency.Energy Policy, 31(15), 1661-1672. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/7733 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 本研究合併1992, 1993, 2000, 2016 與2017年共五次能源調查資料,探討將近二十五年來台灣民眾對於核能風險知覺、風險態度與反核的願付價格的變化。主要以ordered probit模型與ordered logit模型來估計民眾核能風險知覺對於核能風險態度的影響,並考慮時間、距離以及其他個人社會經濟變數。反核的願付價格則以假設性市場評價法(Contingent Valuation Method)來估計。
研究結果顯示,二十幾年來,民眾對於核能議題關心程度提升並逐漸能表達自己贊成或反對的態度。核能風險知覺愈高會增加反對核四的機率,而發生福島核災後,民眾對於核四的反對態度顯著上升。另外,並未發現先前文獻上的鄰避效應(NYMBY syndrome),顯示反核並無分地區性的因素。願付價格方面,風險態度較風險知覺有更決定性的影響,估計結果顯示各年度中,台北地區普遍比其他地區有較高的願付價格。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | This study is based on 1992, 1993, 2000, 2016 and 2017 of the nuclear energy survey data to examine the change of nuclear risk perception, risk attitude and the willingness to pay for anti-nuclear. We use ordered probit and ordered logit to estimate the impact of nuclear risk on risk attitude, and we also consider the effect of time, distance and other socio-economic variables. The willingness to pay (WTP) for anti-nuclear is estimated by Contingent Valuation Method.
The results show that the concern of nuclear issue is increasing and people are more willing to express their attitude toward nuclear issues over the past twenty-four years. The nuclear risk perception has positive effect on the attitude of anti-nuclear. After the Fukushima nuclear disaster, the attitude of against the fourth nuclear power plant significantly increased. Nevertheless, we did not find the NYMBY (Not in My Backyard) Syndrome in the attitude toward the nuclear power plant in Taiwan, suggesting that the attitude of anti-nuclear all over Taiwan. The consumers’ willingness to pay is in line with the bid, and attitude has more prevailing effect than risk perception in deciding the WTP. Generally, the Taipei area has higher willingness to pay than the non-Taipei area in each year. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-05-19T17:51:41Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-106-R04323007-1.pdf: 3726899 bytes, checksum: 8b3ec667fe93c99235e857e115997012 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員會審定書 …………………………………...…………………………… i
謝辭 ..…………..……………………………. ……………………………………... ii 中文摘要………………….………………… ……………………………………… iii Abstract………………………….…………. ………………………………………. iv 1 Introduction…………………………………...……………………………1 2 Literature Review…………………………………...………………3 2.1 Nuclear attitude across time………………. ……………… 3 2.2 Nuclear attitude considering distance……….……5 2.3 Willingness to pay for anti-nuclear……………………6 3 The background and development of the fourth nuclear power plant……………………………...………………8 4 Data Sources and Empirical Strategies………………………………11 4.1 Data………………………………………………………...……………………………11 4.1.1 Data Source ……………..…………………………………………… 11 4.2 Empirical Strategy……………..………………………………… 16 4.2.1 The attitude toward the fourth nuclear power plant……………16 4.2.2 The willingness to pay for anti-nuclear power…………………………18 5 Empirical results…………………………………………………………………20 5.1 The risk attitude toward the fourth nuclear power plant …………………20 5.2 The willingness to pay for anti-nuclear power ………………………...…26 5.3 The willingness to pay for anti-nuclear power (predicted attitude) …….. 39 6 Discussion and Conclusion………………………………………41 Reference……………………………………………………44 Appendix……………………………………………………51 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.title | 核能風險知覺、態度與風險價值的評估:台灣的實證 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Nuclear Risk Perception, Risk Attitude and Risk Valuation: An Empirical Study in Taiwan | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 105-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 樊家忠(Elliott Fan),駱明慶(Ming-Ching Luoh) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 核能,風險認知,核電廠態度,願付價格,假設性市場評價法, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Nuclear Power,Risk Perception,Attitude toward the Nuclear Power Plant,Willingness to Pay,Contingent Valuation Method, | en |
dc.relation.page | 64 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201702600 | |
dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | |
dc.date.accepted | 2017-08-07 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 社會科學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 經濟學研究所 | zh_TW |
dc.date.embargo-lift | 2027-08-04 | - |
顯示於系所單位: | 經濟學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-106-1.pdf 此日期後於網路公開 2027-08-04 | 3.64 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。