臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

遊憩資源活動所產生的經濟效益，分為市場性與非市場性效益，市場性效益就是可透過市場交易而產生的經濟效益，包含遊憩設備的服務收入、生產的收益及就業效果等。非市場性效益是指不經市場交易而產生的效益，如遊憩的滿足、寧適的環境及休閒使用的自然景觀，由於不具市場，無法藉由價格資料來估算。為解決此一問題遂有「非市場估價方法」的發展。所謂非市場性財貨評估法，便是將非市場性財貨的價值或效益值，轉換成貨幣價格或加以「價格化」所得到客觀的評估數值。繼而估算消費者剩餘，成為衡量遊憩效益的重要概念，進而可估計遊客之願付價格。而國家公園功能不同於一般遊憩區，藉由「非市場估價方法」估算遊客對於休閒所使用的自然景觀之願付價格了解遊客的遊憩特性。本研究以陽明山國家公園為實證分析對象，並透過對現場受訪者的問卷調查，利用假設市場評估法、旅遊成本法及兩者之組合等三種非市場評估方法，估算遊客使用陽明山國家公園所產生之經濟效益，並比較這三種評估方法之差異。經實證結果顯示，其假設市場評估法之經濟效益值為74.14、旅遊成本法之經濟效益值為72.95、組合法之經濟效益值為326.93，建議使用Cameron的組合法時，儘量採用相同的環境品質變數，以得到較合理的結果。在效用函數型態假設上應以Cobb-Douglas效用函數較為可行，這樣三種評估方式比較才有意義。

Economic Benefit resulting from recreational activities can be divided into market benefit and non-market benefit. Market benefits indicate the economic benefits that result from market transaction, such as service revenue of the recreational equipment, production revenue and employment effect, whereas non-market benefit indicate those that do not result from market transaction, such as recreational satisfaction, comfortable environment and natural landscape for recreational purpose. Because non-market befit can not be estimated by using pricing data, non-market valuation techniques is developed to solve this problem. Non-market valuation techniques which convert and price the non-marketablevalue or benefit into monetary term with objective value to estimate consumer surplus, has become an important concept to measure recreational benefit. They can estimate the price for which the visitors are willing to pay.The function of a National Park is different from an ordinary recreational area. By using the "non-market valuation techniques", the price that the visitorsare willing to pay for when using the natural landscape to understand the recreational characteristics of the visitors is estimated. This research uses the Yang-Ming-Sun National Park as a case study. Through the results of the visitors'' questionnaire designed and analyzed by using three non-market valuation methods, the economic benefits produced byang-Ming-Sun National Park are estimated (or measured). The empirical result shows: the value of economic benefit measured by Contingent Valuation Method is 74.14, while that by Travel Cost Method is 72.95 and that by combined method is 326.93. In order to beep the result reasonable, it is suggested that the variation of environmental quality should be assumed constant, as the Cameron*s combined method is applied. These three valuation methods will be more meaningful when Cobb-Douglas utility function is associated.