臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

社會折現率的數值對於公共投資計畫與公共政策進行社會成本效益分析所計算之淨現值影響重大，然其理論與實證方法之觀點分歧，可分為社會時間偏好率與社會機會成本率兩大類；又我國行政院經濟建設委員會制定之「公共建設計畫經濟效益評估及財務計畫作業手冊」對於社會折現率之規範與建議不明確，使得實務應用上無一致之規範，因此本研究綜整社會折現率之理論與實證方法，並且實證估算台灣社會折現率。
因為對於社會機會成本率理論與實證方法之批評眾多，故本研究建議以社會時間偏好率作為社會折現率並將所估計之台灣純時間偏好率、人均實質消費成長率、邊際效用之消費彈性代入Ramsey公式、包含預防效果之Ramsey公式實證估算台灣社會折現率。利用台灣過去男女各年齡死亡機率、平均餘命、人口數等資料估算之台灣純時間偏好率為0.0121；利用台灣過去實質國民消費、人口數等資料估算之台灣人均實質消費成長率為0.0194；利用台灣過去實質國民消費、實質食品及非酒精消費、人口數、食物類消費者物價指數、不含食物之消費者物價指數等資料，運用固定彈性模型、近似理想需求體系、二次近似理想需求體系等模型估計之台灣邊際效用之消費彈性為0.0524。由於本研究未深入探討長期跨代社會折現率之議題，故所實證估算的台灣社會折現率數值建議運用於50年期以內之短期公共投資計畫。實證結果顯示不包含與包含預防效果之台灣社會折現率分別為0.0223與0.0222，然而本研究建議將不同世代的社會福利等同視之，純時間偏好率設定為零，則不包含與包含預防效果之台灣社會折現率分別為0.0102與0.0101，因此建議利用包含預防效果之台灣社會折現率0.0101評估50年期以內之公共投資計畫與公共政策。

Social discount rate is important to the net present value of public investment projects and public policies when applying social cost-benefit analysis (CBA). However, there are two main alternative approaches to determine social discount rate which are the social time preference rate approach and the social opportunity cost rate approach. Moreover, no consistent standard of social discount rate for practitioners to implement CBA in Taiwan’s government owing to the standard and the recommendation of social discount rate revealed in “Manual on Economic and Financial Evaluation for Public Construction Projects” which is enacted by Council for Economic Planning and Development, Executive Yuan is equivocal. As a result, the purposes of this study are to review the theorems and empirical approaches of social discount rate and to estimate the social discount rate for Taiwan.
Because so much criticism on the social opportunity cost rate approach in aspects of its theorem and empirical approach, this study suggests that social time preference rate approach is more appropriate. The pure time preference rate, the growth rate of real consumption per capita, the elasticity of marginal utility of consumption for Taiwan are the three essential parameters to be substituted into Ramsey formula and Ramsey formula with precautionary effect to estimate social discount rate for Taiwan. This study estimates that the pure time preference rate for Taiwan is 0.0121 by using time series data such as death probability, life expectancy, population of all ages and both genders, also estimates that the growth rate of real consumption per capita for Taiwan is 0.0194 by using time series data such as real national consumption and population, and estimates that the elasticity of marginal utility of consumption for Taiwan is 0.0524 by using time series data such as real national consumption, real food and non-alcoholic consumption, population, consumer price index of food and nonfood with models such as constant elasticity model, almost ideal demand system, quadratic almost ideal demand system. Because issues of long term intergenerational social discount rate are not fully discussed, this study recommends that the estimated figures of social discount rate for Taiwan be used on the CBA of public policies and investment projects which terms are less than 50 years in Taiwan. The results of this study show that social discount rates for Taiwan without and with precautionary effect are 0.0223 and 0.0222 respectively. However, this study suggests setting zero to the pure time preference rate which means giving equal weights toward the social welfare of all generations in the time stream. Then the social discount rates for Taiwan without and with precautionary effect are 0.0102 and 0.0101 respectively. Therefore, this study advises to use the figure 0.0101 as the social discount rate for Taiwan to evaluate public investment projects and public policies which terms are less than 50 years in Taiwan.

中文摘要 I
ABSTRACT II
目次 IV
目次 IV
表目錄 VI
圖目錄 VII

第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景 1
第二節 研究動機與目的 2
第三節 研究流程與架構 2

第二章 文獻回顧 5
第一節 完美市場之折現率 6
第二節 社會折現率之理論與實證方法 11
第三節 社會折現率之選擇 28

第三章 台灣社會折現率之理論與實證方法 32
第一節 理論模型 32
第二節 實證計量方法 43

第四章 台灣社會折現率之實證分析 53
第一節 資料來源與變數定義 54
第二節 資料分析 57
第三節 參數實證分析 66
第四節 實證結果與討論 80

第五章 結論與建議 87
第一節 結論 87
第二節 建議 89

參考文獻 91

附錄一 固定彈性模型(CEM)1981年至2016年邊際效用之消費彈性 96
附錄二 近似理想需求體系(AIDS) 1981年至2016年邊際效用之消費彈性 98
附錄三 二次近似理想需求體系(QUAIDS) 1981年至2016年邊際效用之消費彈性 100
附錄四 各國社會折現率之實證結果 102

一、中文文獻：
楊奕農（2017）「時間序列分析：經濟與財務上之應用」，第三版，台北市：雙葉書廊。
顏如玉 (2014)「公共建設成本效益分析之社會折現率探討」，財稅研究 43-1，頁149-162。
二、英文文獻：
Banks, J., Blundell, R., &Lewbel, A. (1997). Quadratic Engel curves and consumer demand. Review of Economics and Statistics, 79(4), 527–539.
Baumol, W. J. (1968). On the social rate of discount. The American Economic Review, 58(4), 788–802.
Boardman, A. E., Greenberg, D. H., Vining, A. R., &Weimer, D. L. (2011). Cost-benefit analysis: concepts and practice (4th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Bradford, D. F. (1975). Constraints on government investment opportunities and the choice of discount rate. The American Economic Review, 65(5), 887–899.
Burgess, D. F., &Zerbe, R. O. (2011). Appropriate discounting for benefit-cost analysis. Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, 2(2), 1–20.
Burgess, D. F., &Zerbe, R. O. (2013). The most appropriate discount rate. Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, 4(3), 391–400.
Canada, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. (2007). Benefit-Cost Analysis Guide. Ottawa.
Carroll, C. D., &Samwick, A. A. (1997). The nature of precautionary wealth. Journal of Monetary Economics, 40(1), 41–71.
Deaton, A., &Muellbauer, J. (1980). An almost ideal demand system. The American Economic Review, 70(3), 312–326.
Enders, W. (2010). Applied Econometric Time Series (3rd ed.). New York: John Willey& Sons, Inc.
European Commission, DG Regional Policy. (2008). Guide to Cost Benefit Analysis of Investment Projects. Brussels.
Evans, D. (2004a). A social discount rate for France. Applied Economics Letters, 11(13), 803–808.
Evans, D. (2004b). The elevated status of the elasticity of marginal utility of consumption. Applied Economics Letters, 11(7), 443–447.
Evans, D. (2005). The elasticity of marginal utility of consumption: estimates for 20 OECD countries. Fiscal Studies, 26(2), 197–224.
Evans, D., Kula, E., &Sezer, H. (2005). Regional welfare weights for the UK: England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Regional Studies, 39(7), 923–937.
Evans, D., &Sezer, H. (2002). A time preference measure of the social discount rate for the UK. Applied Economics, 34(15), 1925–1934.
Evans, D., &Sezer, H. (2004). Social discount rates for six major countries. Applied Economics Letters, 11(9), 557–560.
Evans, D., &Sezer, H. (2005). Social discount rates for member countries of the European Union. Journal of Economic Studies, 32(1), 47–59.
Feldstein, M. S. (1964a). Opportunity cost calculations in cost-benefit analysis. Public Finance, 19(2), 117–139.
Feldstein, M. S. (1964b). The social time preference discount rate in cost benefit analysis. The Economic Journal, 74(294), 360–379.
Feldstein, M. S. (1965). The derivation of social time preference rates. Kyklos, 18(2), 277–287.
Feldstein, M. S. (1972). The inadequacy of weighted discount rates. In R.Layard (Ed.), Cost-benefit analysis (pp. 311–332). Harmondsworth: UK: Penguin.
Fellner, W. (1967). Operational utility: the theoretical background and a measurement. Ten Economic Studies in the Tradition of Irving Fisher, 39, 74.
Fisher, I. (1927). A statistical method for measuring marginal utility. The Economic Essays Contributed in Honour of J. Bates, 157–193.
Frederick, S., Loewenstein, G., &O’donoghue, T. (2002). Time discounting and time preference: A critical review. Journal of Economic Literature, 40(2), 351–401.
Frisch, R. (1932). New methods of measuring marginal utility (Vol. 3). Mohr.
Frisch, R. (1959). A complete scheme for computing all direct and cross demand elasticities in a model with many sectors. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 177–196.
Gollier, C. (2002). Discounting an uncertain future. Journal of Public Economics, 85(2), 149–166.
Gollier, C. (2013). Pricing the planet’s future: the economics of discounting in an uncertain world. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Gourinchas, P., &Parker, J. A. (2002). Consumption over the life cycle. Econometrica, 70(1), 47–89.
Halicioglu, F., &Karatas, C. (2013). A social discount rate for Turkey. Quality & Quantity, 1–7.
Harberger, A. C. (1972). The opportunity costs of public investment financed by borrowing. Cost-Benefit Analysis (Penguin, Harmondsworth, UK), 303–310.
HM Treasury. (2003). The Green Book: Appraisal and evaluation in Central Government. London.
Jenkins, G., Kuo, C.-Y., &Harberger, A. C. (2011). Cost-Benefit Analysis for Investment Decisions. (2011 Manuscript).
Jones, G. T. (1993). The social discount rate for land‐use projects in India: comment. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 44(1), 160–165.
Kazlauskiene, V., &Stundziene, A. (2016). Estimation of social discount rate for Lithuania. Trendy Ekonomiky a Managementu, 10(26), 39.
Kula, E. (1984). Derivation of social time preference rates for the United States and Canada. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 99(4), 873–882.
Kula, E. (1985). An empirical investigation on the social time-preference rate for the United Kingdom. Environment and Planning A, 17(2), 199–212.
Kula, E. (1987). Social interest rate for public sector appraisal in the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada. Project Appraisal, 2(3), 169–174.
Kula, E. (2004). Estimation of a social rate of interest for India. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 55(1), 91–99.
Lind, R. C. (1999). Analysis for intergenerational decisionmaking. Discounting and Intergenerational Equity, Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, 173–180.
Lopez, H. (2008). The social discount rate: Estimates for nine Latin American countries.
Lyon, R. M. (1990). Federal discount rate policy, the shadow price of capital, and challenges for reforms. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 18(2), S29–S50.
Marglin, S. (1963a). The opportunity costs of public investment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 274–289.
Marglin, S. (1963b). The social rate of discount and the optimal rate of investment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 95–111.
Marglin, S., Sen, A., &Dasgupta, P. (1972). Guidelines for project evaluation. United Nations, Vienna.
Moore, M. A., Boardman, A. E., &Vining, A. R. (2013a). More appropriate discounting: the rate of social time preference and the value of the social discount rate. Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, 4(1), 1–16.
Moore, M. A., Boardman, A. E., &Vining, A. R. (2013b). The choice of the social discount rate and the opportunity cost of public funds. Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, 4(3), 401–409.
Moore, M. A., Boardman, A. E., Vining, A. R., Weimer, D. L., &Greenberg, D. H. (2004). “Just give me a number!” Practical values for the social discount rate. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 23(4), 789–812.
Newell, R. G., &Pizer, W. A. (2003). Discounting the distant future: how much do uncertain rates increase valuations? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 46(1), 52–71.
Nordhaus, W. D. (2007). A review of the Stern review on the economics of climate change. Journal of Economic Literature, 45(3), 686–702.
Percoco, M. (2008). A social discount rate for Italy. Applied Economics Letters, 15(1), 73–77.
Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., &Smith, R. J. (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 16(3), 289–326.
Ramsey, F. P. (1928). A mathematical theory of saving. The Economic Journal, 38(152), 543–559.
Sandmo, A., &Dreze, J. H. (1971). Discount rates for public investment in closed and open economies. Economica, 395–412.
Sharma, R. A., McGregor, M. J., &Blyth, J. F. (1991). The social discount rate for land‐use projects in India. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 42(1), 86–92.
Solow, R. M. (1974). The economics of resources or the resources of economics. The American Economic Review, 64(2), 1–14.
Stern, N. H., Peters, S., Bakhshi, V., Bowen, A., Cameron, C., Catovsky, S., …Edmonson, N. (2006). Stern Review: The economics of climate change (Vol. 30). Cambridge University Press Cambridge.
United States, Environmental Protection Agency. (2010). Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses. December 2010. Washington, D.C.
United States, Office of Management and Budget. (2016). Circular A-4. December 12, 2016. Washington, D.C.
Zerbe Jr, R. O. (2004). Should moral sentiments be incorporated into benefit-cost analysis? An example of long-term discounting. Policy Sciences, 37(3–4), 305–318.
Zhuang, J., Liang, Z., Lin, T., &DeGuzman, F. (2007). Theory and practice in the choice of social discount rate for cost-benefit analysis: a survey. Metro Manila: Asian Development Bank.