請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/85967
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 石曜合 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.advisor | Yau-Huo Shr | en |
dc.contributor.author | 劉宜瑱 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author | Yi-Tien Liu | en |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-03-19T23:30:52Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2024-04-03 | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2022-09-30 | - |
dc.date.issued | 2022 | - |
dc.date.submitted | 2002-01-01 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | 行政院環保署,2022。 「國家溫室氣體減量法規資訊網 | 溫室氣體減量及管理法」,(https://ghgrule.epa.gov.tw/action/action_page/52)
中央選舉委員會,2022。 「公民投票專區」,(https://web.cec.gov.tw/referendum) Brooks, J., Oxley, D., Vedlitz, A., Zahran, S., & Lindsey, C. (2014). Abnormal daily temperature and concern about climate change across the United States. Review of Policy Research, 31(3), 199–217. Bornstein, N., & Lanz, B. (2008). Voting on the environment: Price or ideology? Evidence from Swiss referendums. Ecological Economics, 67(3), 430–440. Borusyak, K., & Hull, P. (2021). Non-random exposure to exogenous shocks: Theory and applications. Working Paper. Bowler, S., & Donovan, T. (2013). Civic duty and turnout in the UK referendum on AV: What shapes the duty to vote? Electoral Studies, 32(2), 265–273. Burkhardt, J., & Chan, N. W. (2017). The dollars and sense of ballot propositions: Estimating willingness to pay for public goods using aggregate voting data. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 4(2), 479–503. Egan, P. J., & Mullin, M. (2012). Turning personal experience into political attitudes: The effect of local weather on Americans’ perceptions about global warming. The Journal of Politics, 74(3), 796–809. Fraga, B., & Hersh E. (2011). Voting costs and voter turnout in competitive elections. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 5(4), 339–356. Fort, R., & Bunn, D. N. (1998). Whether one votes and how one votes. Public Choice, 95, 51–62. Goebel, J., Krekel, C., Tiefenbach, T., & Ziebarth, N. R. (2015). How natural disasters can affect environmental concerns, risk aversion, and even politics: evidence from Fukushima and three European countries. Journal of Population Economics, 28(4). Graff Zivin, J., & Neidell, M. (2013). Environment, health, and human capital. Journal of Economic Literature, 51(3), 689–730. Hansford, T. G., & Gomez, B. T. (2010). Estimating the electoral effects of voter turnout. American Political Science Review, 104(2), 268–288. Hamilton, L. C., & Stampone, M. D. (2013). Blowin’ in the wind: Short-term weather and belief in anthropogenic climate change. Weather, Climate, and Society, 5(2), 112–119. Hazlett, C., & Mildenberger, M. (2020). Wildfire exposure increases pro-environment voting within democratic but not republican areas. American Political Science Review, 114(4), 1359–1365. Ho, M. S. (2014). The Fukushima effect: Explaining the resurgence of the anti-nuclear movement in Taiwan. Environmental Politics, 23(6), 965–983. Kim, P., Kim, J., & Yim, M. S. (2020). How deliberation changes public opinions on nuclear energy: South Korea's deliberation on closing nuclear reactors. Applied Energy, 270, 115094. Lavaine, E., & Neidell, M. (2017). Energy production and health externalities: Evidence from oil refinery strikes in France. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 4(2), 447–477. Leduc, L. (2002). Opinion change and voting behaviour in referendums. European Journal of Political Research, 41(6), 711–732. Li, D., Zhao, L., Ma, S., Shao, S., & Zhang, L. (2019). What influences an individual’s pro-environmental behavior? A literature review. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 146, 28–34. López-Mosquera, N., Lera-López, F., & Sánchez, M. (2015). Key factors to explain recycling, car use and environmentally responsible purchase behaviors: A comparative perspective. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 99, 29–39. Markandya, A., & Wilkinson, P. (2007). Electricity generation and health. The Lancet, 370(9591), 979–990. Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. (2021). Green Growth Strategy Through Achieving Carbon Neutrality in 2050 (https://www.meti.go.jp/english/policy/energy_environment/global_warming/ggs2050/index.html) IEA (2019). Nuclear power in a clean energy system. IEA. IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland. IPCC (2022). Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press. European Parliament (2022). Taxonomy: MEPs do not object to inclusion of gas and nuclear activities | News | European Parliament (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20220701IPR34365/taxonomy-meps-do-not-object-to-inclusion-of-gas-and-nuclear-activities) Thalmann, P. (2004). The public acceptance of green taxes: 2 million voters express their opinion. Public Choice, 119(1-2), 179–217. The White House. (2022). National climate task force. (https://www.whitehouse.gov/climate/) Rafaj, P., Kiesewetter, G., Krey, V., Schoepp, W., Bertram, C., Drouet, L., Fricko, O., Fujimori, S., Harmsen, M., Hilaire, J., Huppmann, D., Klimont, Z., Kolp, P., Aleluia Reis, L., & van Vuuren, D. (2021). Air quality and health implications of 1.5 °C–2 °C climate pathways under considerations of ageing population: a multi-model scenario analysis. Environmental Research Letters, 16(4), 045005. Severnini, E. (2017). Impacts of nuclear plant shutdown on coal-fired power generation and infant health in the Tennessee Valley in the 1980s. Nature Energy, 2(4). Sovacool, B. K., & Monyei, C. G. (2021). Positive externalities of decarbonization: Quantifying the full potential of avoided deaths and displaced carbon emissions from renewable energy and nuclear power. Environmental Science & Technology, 55(8), 5258–5271. Stadelmann-Steffen, I., & Gerber, M. (2019). Voting in the rain: the impact of rain on participation in open-air assemblies. Local Government Studies, 46(3), 414–435. Tolbert, C. J., Bowen, D. C., & Donovan, T. (2009). Initiative campaigns. American Politics Research, 37(1), 155–192. | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/85967 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 核能發電因排放相對較少的空氣汙染物與溫室氣體,而被視為在能源轉型中,可用來取代火力發電的短期解方。本文探討當民眾暴露於較嚴重的空氣汙染時,是否會更傾向支持核能發電。我們使用2018年公民投票中的第16案,「您是否同意廢除電業法第95條第1項,即廢除『核能發電設備應於中華民國一百十四年以前,全部停止運轉』之條文?」及2021年公投中的第17案,「您是否同意核四啟封商轉發電?」。儘管兩提案均是與核能有關,但他們的主訴求卻大相逕庭。第16案的支持者以使用核能將可以降低空氣汙染為宣傳主軸,然而支 i持第17案的人則著重核能將為穩定電力供給帶來助益。為處理非隨機變化之空氣品質與公投結果兩者之間的內生性問題,我們使用公投日前七天與過去同期平均空氣品質之差值為工具變數。研究結果顯示,在2018年公投時,若投票日前七天之細懸浮微粒濃度相較過去同期平均上升1 μg/m3 (1%),第16案之同意率會上升0.3% (0.06%)。然而在2021年公投中,我們並未發現投票日前七天與過去同期平均之空氣品質差異對第17案贊成比率有顯著的影響。除了空氣品質與核能相關提案贊成率之間的因果關係,我們也探討空氣品質對核能提案投票率的影響;研究結果顯示,當投票日前七天之空氣品質比過去同期平均增加1 μg/m3,第16案的投票率將上升0.55%;但在2021公投中空氣品質短期變化對第17案並沒有顯著的效果。我們也討論空氣品質的效果對投票率在較高污染、高收入或較多國民黨支持者的村里是否有不同變化。結果顯示在2018公投時,居住相對有錢的村里民眾,其投票率上升幅度比在收入較低的村里低0.09%。以上實證結果呈現出資訊、認知及選民實際行為之相互作用。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | How does personal experience of air quality influence people’s demand for low-emission energy? Nuclear energy emits little greenhouse gases and brings immediate environmental benefits to citizens by reducing air pollution. In this paper, we investigate whether people exposed to elevated levels of air pollution are more likely to support the two pro-nuclear referendum proposals in Taiwan: Proposal 16, in the 2018 referendum, on repealing the law of nuclear phase-out and Proposal 17 on resuming the construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in the 2021 referendum. To overcome endogeneity between air quality and referendum outcomes, we use a recentered instrument approach to induce exogenous variations in air quality. The results show that air quality only affects citizens’ support for Proposal 16, which was intensively advocated as a solution for reducing air pollution. Specifically, a 1 μg/m3 (1%) increase in the PM2.5 concentration grows the approval rate of Proposal 16 by 0.3% (0.06%). However, we find no effect of air quality on the approval rate of Proposal 17, which was primarily considered as a solution for meeting the energy demand. Additionally, we explore the impact of air quality on the turnouts for pro-nuclear proposals. The result shows that the turnout for Proposal 16 rises by 0.55% when the PM2.5 concentration increases by 1 μg/m3; however, the effect of air quality on the turnout for Proposal 17 is insignificant . We further investigate the heterogeneity, regarding village with high actual PM2.5, higher-income level and more the KMT supporters. The result suggests that such effect on the turnout for Proposal 16 in villages with higher-income level is weaker than those without it, at -0.09%. These findings highlight the interactions between information, perception, and voters’ behavioral consequences. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2023-03-19T23:30:52Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 U0001-2009202211205900.pdf: 624236 bytes, checksum: 9fdc0fa51d307ea8d88faee25b692305 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2021 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | Acknowledgements i
摘要 ii Abstract iii Contents v List of Figures vi List of Tables vii 1. Introduction 1 2. Background 6 3. Data 10 3.1 Elections and referenda 10 3.2 Air quality and atmospheric conditions 10 3.3 Socioeconomic characteristics 12 3.4 Data description 12 4. Empirical Strategy 16 5. Results 20 5.1 Air quality and the approval rates 20 5.2 Socioeconomic characteristics and the approval rates 26 5.3 Asymmetric/heterogeneous effects of air quality on the approval rates 27 5.4 Air quality and the turnouts 31 6. Conclusion 33 References 36 Appendix 41 | - |
dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
dc.title | 空氣品質對民眾核能偏好之影響-以臺灣兩場公投為例 | zh_TW |
dc.title | The Effects of Air Quality on Citizens’ Preferences for Nuclear Energy: Evidence from Two Referenda in Taiwan | en |
dc.type | Thesis | - |
dc.date.schoolyear | 110-2 | - |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 蔡佳妤;陳方隅 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Chia-Yu Tsai;Fang-Yu Chen | en |
dc.subject.keyword | 空氣汙染,能源轉型,公投,個人經驗,工具變數, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | air pollution,energy transition,referendum,personal experience,recentered instrument, | en |
dc.relation.page | 43 | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202203627 | - |
dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | - |
dc.date.accepted | 2022-09-22 | - |
dc.contributor.author-college | 生物資源暨農學院 | - |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 農業經濟學系 | - |
dc.date.embargo-lift | 2022-09-30 | - |
顯示於系所單位: | 農業經濟學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-110-2.pdf | 609.82 kB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
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。