臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本文主要參考D’Asprement and Jacquemin（1988）、Chiou and Hu（2001）與葉金標（2004）建立一環境政策模型。稅收以補貼方式鼓勵廠商從事環境污染防治改良，將補貼方式分為產量補貼與污染防治補貼兩種，因此可得此兩種不同補貼方式下的最適產出、防治污染改良量、社會福利等，進一步比較何種補貼政策最佳。（1）廠商的污染防治改良量、產出與社會福利和稅率成反比，但與產量補貼率及污染防治投資抵減率成正比。（2）政府若以環境改良污染防治為主要導向，應讓污染防治的投資抵減率較高，此時污染防治改良效果較大。（3）政府執行環保政策的目標不論為社會幅利最大或以管制污染總量，若稅後投資抵減率較產量補貼優惠，污染防治投資抵減政策相對產量補貼有效（4）污染防治投資抵減下的單位污染量相對產量補貼的污染量低。（5）政府不論採取何種環境政策，提高污染稅率將使污染量減少。

This paper which base on Chiou and Hu (2001) framework encourage firm improve pollution-prevention-cure through subsidy of Tax. Besides, from Chin-Piao Yeh Tax policy model, it quotes quantity subsidy and pollution-prevention-cure subsidy. Therefore, the subsidies can yield respectively optimum quantity, quantity of improve pollution-prevention-cure, and social welfare. Furthermore, the better subsidy is found. This paper’s model follows a multi-stage game. In first stage, government decides the tax policy to maximum social welfare. In second stage, firm decides their respectively pollution through tax policy. In third stage, firms go into the quantity competition on product market.

Major findings of the model are (1) Quantity, social welfare, and quantity of pollution-prevention-cure are inverse proportion to tax rate, but subsidy rate of quantity and subsidy rate of pollution-prevention-cure are direct proportion to tax rate. (2) Government should increase Tax-credit rate for higher pollution-prevention-cure, when the improvement is the main environment policy. (3) Tax-credit is more operative than subsidy policy, when the pas-tax-credit rate is more preferential than subsidy rate. (4) Quantity of pollution is lower under tax-credit of pollution-prevention-cure than ubsidy of quantity. (5) Pollution is always decreased by a rise tax rate.under s

一、前言
二、文獻回顧
三、研究方法
四、模型設立
五、模型分析
六、結論

參考文獻：
1.朱巡(2012)，「環境政策與內生成長」，國立政治大學經濟學系博士論文。
2.邱俊榮、林佳蕙（2002），「開放經濟體系下最適貿易及環境政策」，人文及社會科學集刊，14:2，211-232。
3.林宛榆(2012)，「環境資源、租稅政策與內生成長」，輔仁大學經濟學研究所碩士論文。
4.周思華(2016)，「企業社會責任與最適環境稅」，大同大學事業經營學所碩士論文。
5.林彥慶(2014)，「綠色刺激政策之總體經濟效果分析」，東吳大學經濟學系碩士論文。
6.章秀秀(2010)，「最適能源稅率、稅收用途及其3E效果的關聯分析」，國立政治大學財政研究所博士論文。
7.張巧怡(2012)，「綠色租稅改革與經濟成長」，東吳大學經濟學系碩士論文。
8.張晨葦(2011)，「環境保護的經濟手段之研究-以環境稅為例」，嶺東科技大學國際企業研究所碩士論文。
9.許義忠、徐偉初（2005），「外溢效果下以污染稅融通之環境政策」，農業經濟半年刊，78，151-183。
10.郭虹瑩、黃鴻、麥朝成（2001），「污染排放限量規定下環境政策的選擇」，人文及社會科學集刊，13:2，195-229。
11.郭瑞基、王泰昌（2004），「環保投資補貼與汙染清除稽核政策之分析」，人文及社會科學集刊，16:4，505-531。
12.陳智華、謝智源（2008），「汙染管制與經濟成長：ㄧ個不完全競爭的總體模型」，經濟論文叢刊，36:3，357-392。
13.陳淼勝、陳中獎（1999），「廠商與廠商間破壞效果存在下污染控制的執行研究」，淡江人文社會學刊，4，157-17。
14葉金標（2004），「財政政策與企業研發支出」，國立台北大學經濟學系未出版博士論文。
15.蔡宗麟(1999)，「排放稅與產品從量稅下之非點源污染管制」，淡江大學產業經濟學系碩士論文。
16.賴冠翰(2014)，「污染稅與經濟成長：累進稅或累退稅？」，淡江大學經濟學系碩士論文。
17.謝惠婷、陳智華、謝智源（2008），「環境政策和經濟成長：事前管理或事後管制？」，農業經濟半年刊，81，165-196。
18.Buchanan, J. M. and G. Tullock（1975）, “Polluters’ Profits and Political Response: Direct Control Versus Taxes,” American Economic review, 65, 139-147.
19.Burrows, P.（1979）, “Pigovian Taxes, Polluter Subsidies, Regulation and the Size of a Polluting Industry,” Canadian Journal of Economics, 12, 494-51.
20.Chiou, J. R. and J. L. Hu（2001）, “Environmental Research Joint Ventures under Emission Taxes,” Environmental and Resource Economics, 20:2, 129-146.
21.Conrad, K. and J. Wang（1993）, “The Effect of Emission Taxes and Abatement Subsidies on Market Structure”, International Journal of Industrical Organization, 11, 499-518.
22.D’Aspremont, C. and A. Jacquemin (1988), “Cooperative and Noncooperative R＆D in Duopoly with Spillovers,” American Economic Review, 78, 1133-7.
23.Dewees, D. N.（1983）, “Instrument Choice in Environmental Policy,” Economic Inquiry, 21, 53-71.
24.Hoerner, J. A. and B. Bosquet（2001）, “Environmental Tax Reform: The European Experience,” Center for a Sustainable Economy.
25.Ferrara, I., P. Missios, and H. M. Yildiz (2009), “Trading Rules and The Environment: Does Equal Treatment Lead to a Cleaner World? ” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 58, 206-225.
26.Lai, Y. B. and C. H. Hu (2008), “Trade Agreements, Domestic Environmental Regulation, and TransboundaryPollution,” Resource and Energy Economics, 30, 209-228.
27.Lapan, H. E. and S. Sikdar (2011), “Strategic Environmental Policy under Free Trade with Transboundary Pollution,” Review of Development Economics, 15, pp.1-18.
28.Laplante, B.（1990）, “Porducer Surplus and Subsidization of Pollution Control Deive: A Non-Monotonic Relationship,” The Journal of Industrial Economics, 39:1,15-23.
29.Nordlander, A.（1999）, “Energy and Environmental Taxes in the European Community and in OECD Countries”. The Market and the Environment: The Effectiveness of Market-Based Policy Instruments for Environmental Reform. T. Sterner. Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc: 204-232.
30.Tietenberg, T. H.（1973）, “Specific Taxes and Pollution Control: A General Equilibrium Analysis,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87:4, 503-522.
31.Tietenberg, T. H.（1974a）, “On Taxation and the Control of Externalities: Comment. American Economic Review, 64:3, 462-466.
32.Tietenberg, T. H.（1974b）, “The Design of Property Rights for Air Pollution Control,” Public Policy, 22:3, 275-292.
33.Wier, M., B. P. Katja, K. J. Henrik, and K. Jacob（2005）, “Are CO2 Tax Regressive? Evidence from the Danish Experience,”Ecological Economics, 52, 239-251.