臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

台灣地區無論是國內線機場或國際機場，其高利用率帶來航空業極大
的商機，但也由於民眾環境意識逐漸抬頭，對於居住環境品質的要求亦隨
之升高。於是，機場鄰近地區居民在長期以來必須忍受機場噪音巨大衝擊
，品質極度惡劣的生活環境下，漸生不滿，而開始要求種種公平的補償與
改善措施。回顧以往國內對於機場噪音的研究文獻均偏重於噪音的防制與
監測，缺乏經濟面的探討，故本文以經濟觀點出發，一方面回顧目前國內
對於機場噪音解決的作法，一方面研究機場本身所具有之經濟特性，以及
改善方案之初步評估。　　由於噪音所污染的對象是寧靜的環境，為不具
有價格市場的環境財貨，這使得航空公司在營運時並不須對其產生的噪音
付出任何代價，形成外部成本造成對鄰近居民衝擊。在經濟觀點上須透過
政府的干預，以徵稅、管制或賦予財產權等方式，將外部成本內部化，使
得噪音的污染情況能達到一個最適水準。至於噪音成本的估算上，可以非
市場評估方法的特徵價格法或條件評估法進行；而在噪音成本的徵收分派
上，則有誘使防制噪音法、訂定噪音標準、依房地產價格跌幅與訂定影響
指數等方法。　　本研究並對幾種改善或補償方案，在機場噪音問題的三
關係者（政府、航空公司、機場鄰近地區居民）各有追求的目標下，以多
評準方法進行一簡單評估，以政府之角度，在追求社會總福利極大與行政
成本極小目標下，衡量各方案的執行順序。在政府偏重社會福利的情形下
，改善效果好的方案，如機場遷建等順序較前；而偏重行政成本極小時，
則以管制措施等較受青睞。而航空器的改善由於政府需動用的成本少，順
序均為第一。　　本文最後建議政府在處理噪音問題時，應組織一問題處
理委員會，以中央與地方政府代表，機場鄰近地區居民代表與航空業者代
表組成，共同解決機場噪音問題。同時並建議此一機構負起監測、改善與
補償制度研擬責任，以及成立專款專用之信託基金。

The great growth of civil aviation brings good prospects
to airlines. At the same time, residents in the neighborhood of
airports ask for quiet environ-ment because of their awaking
environmental awareness. In the past, the studies about airport
noise in our country paid more attention to monitoring and
abate-ment techniques of airport noise. There were few studies
exploring the problem of airport noise from economic aspect.
Therefore this study reviews the methodsused to solve the
problem of airport noise,explores the economic characteristicsof
airport noise and establishes and evaluates improvement
alternatives fromeconomic viewpoints. Noise pollutes quiet
environments, but there is no price market for quiet-ness.
Airlines do not pay for making noise because there is no price
mechanism.It brings external cost to affect the resident.
Economically , the governmentshould intervene the market by
taxation, regulations or ownership of propertyrights to
internalize the external cost.And it will help to achieve the
optimallevel of pollution. The study first establishes
several alternatives of improvements or compe-nsation under
their own objectives of government authority, airlines and
resi-dents and then applies multiple criteria evaluation method
to evaluate them. Itcould be shown from the evaluation that the
alternatives of improvement or air-crafts and airport relocation
would be preferred under the objective of maximal social welfare
, while the alternatives of alternatives of improvements
ofaircrafts and airlines regulations would be preferred under
the objectives of minimal implementation cost. Fianlly, the
study proposes government can organize an ad hoc committee,
which consists of representatives of central and local
governments,residents inthe neighborhood of airports and
operators of airlines,to deal with the problemof airport noise.
This committee should be responsible for monitoring,mechanismof
improvements and compensations, and establishing a trust fund
used specially to solve the problem of airport noise.