政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/131158
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文笔数/总笔数 : 113318/144297 (79%)
造访人次 : 51073819      在线人数 : 933
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜寻范围 查询小技巧：
  • 您可在西文检索词汇前后加上"双引号"，以获取较精准的检索结果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜寻，建议至进阶搜寻限定作者字段，可获得较完整数据
    •  进阶搜寻


    请使用永久网址来引用或连结此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/131158


    题名: 影響接受基地所有權人申請古蹟土地容積移轉意願分析－以臺北市為例
    An Analysis on the Willingness of Land Owners’ Application for the Transfer of Land Capacity of Historic Sites – Taipei City as An Example
    作者: 莊雯惠
    Chuang, Wen-Hui
    贡献者: 林左裕
    莊雯惠
    Chuang, Wen-Hui
    关键词: 古蹟土地
    容積移轉
    發展權
    AHP層級程序分析法
    historic sites
    capacity transfer
    development rights
    hierarchy process analysis (AHP)
    日期: 2020
    上传时间: 2020-08-03 18:07:12 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 古蹟保存的意義在於延續歷史人類所生活的足跡，透過修復再利用及永續管理維護，可充實國民精神生活及發揚多元文化。古蹟就土地權屬來看可分為公有及私有古蹟，其中公有古蹟受政府監督，容易被保存，私有古蹟在保存過程中，雖有稅賦減免及申請政府單位不定期的修繕補助，仍需自籌5-10％的修復經費，後續的管理維護如無足夠的財力與熱忱根本無法永續維護。觀目前在私有古蹟補償機制上有三種機制，分別為徵收、協議價格及容積移轉等三項，前二項在政府預算有限情況下，仍以容積移轉於自由市場上買賣為主要補償機制。
    1998年我國實施古蹟土地容積移轉辦法，至今逾20年期間辦理古蹟土地容積移出個案約13處，其中10處位於臺北市，核給之古蹟土地容積移轉許可證明達101件，顯示臺北市運用古蹟土地容積移轉制度已趨成熟，但相較於都市計畫類容積移轉及大稻埕容積移轉市場較小，尚有都市更新獎勵及危老獎勵等替代性較高的容積工具，因此在古蹟土地權屬整合困難、程序複雜及轉換公式較差的困境下，古蹟土地容積移轉市場是接受基地所有權人在基地開發時容積移入的最後選項。本研究欲探究的是如何提高接受基地所有權人(包含建設公司、開發商等使用者)申請古蹟土地容積移轉之意願？檢視有關古蹟土地容積移轉相關文獻，發現多著墨於法令及制度層面，由於案例稀少無法進一步探討實務困境，因此本研究檢視各類型容積移轉在法令申請限制及買賣條件下，古蹟土地容積移轉最佳使用方式為何？再透過歷年臺北市政府核發古蹟土地容積移轉案例分析，何以致接受基地所有權人願意申請古蹟土地容積移轉？
    由於接受基地考量使用容積移轉前，受各項規劃工具影響，依據開發方式、開發基地本身條件不同，進而影響使用容積獎勵及容積移轉類型，其考量因素甚多，故本研究透過國內外文獻、現行法令限制、買賣條件及歷年古蹟土地容積移轉許可案例分析，交叉分析及歸納整理出接受基地所有權人在面對容積移轉時考量因素及可能使用古蹟土地容積移轉之因素，包含財務誘因、法令限制、交易制度及教育宣導等四大面向及十六項因素，運用AHP層級程序分析法針對影響因素進行問卷調查，最後計算因素權重值順序分析，確認接受基地申請古蹟土地容積移轉之意願，依實證結果提供政府擬定相關法令及容積移轉兩造基地所有權人市場建議與參考依據，進而強化古蹟土地容積移轉可行性，提高古蹟所有權人修復及管理維護經費自籌率，引導古蹟所有權人永續保存文化資產。
    Historic site preservation extends humanity`s historical footprint to our everyday lives through reuse, restoration, and sustainable management. It enriches the mind and spirit of the nation`s public with flourishing multiculturalism. From the perspective of property rights, historic sites can be further divided into publicly owned and privately owned sites. The publicly-owned sites receive government supervision and can be more easily conserved. As for privately owned sites, while the owner could receive tax exemptions and can be legible to apply for government subventions for conservation purposes, owners still need to raise 5-10% of the budget for conservational work. The managing and conserving privately owned historic sites would not maintain sustainability without adequate financial support and enthusiasm. Currently, there are three subvention mechanisms for privately owned historic sites, including acquisition, negotiated pricing, and capacity transfer. The first two mechanisms are capped by a restrictive government budget, which leaves capacity transfer is the primary subvention mechanism in free market transactions.
    Since the promulgation of the land capacity transfer ordinances for historic sites in 1998, 13 sites have registered for land capacity transfer applications in the past two decades, among which ten sites are located in Taipei City. A total of 101 land capacity transfer permits for historic sites have been issued, indicating the maturity of Taipei City`s protocol for handling historic site land capacity transfer. Yet, historic sites have a much smaller market compared with urban planning-related capacity transfers. It is also lower than the land capacity transfer market for properties in the Dadaocheng region. The reason is that these cases tend to benefit from land capacity transfer benefits, such as urban renewal bonuses and subventions for dilapidated buildings. Hence, property owners of historic sites face challenges in property rights consolidation, procedural hurdles, and disadvantaged conversion formulae. In other words, the capacity transfer market for historic sites is the last option left for property recipients when dealing with in-transfer capacity in land development projects. This study aims to explore possible avenues to increase the willingness among property recipients (including facilitators such as construction companies and land developers) to apply for historic site land capacity transfer. Relevant literature on historic site land capacity transfers mainly concern ordinances and regulatory aspects, with little case studies that hinder discussions on practicalities. Therefore, this research surveyed different types of capacity transfers and focused on how to best utilize historic site land capacity transfer under the current legal application restraints and conditions of the transaction. This study also carried out an analysis of past cases in which the Taipei City government-issued permitted for capacity transfer and asked how property recipients became willing applicants for land capacity transfer in cases concerning historic sites.
    It is recognized that the received property would have been subject to various property development planning instruments before entering into capacity transfer protocols. Also, the method of development and the conditions of the developing property would certainly vary case-by-case, leading to differences in approaches to utilize capacity bonuses, and the type of capacity transfer applicable. Therefore, this research surveys a range of documents and sources, including the domestic and international literature, current regulations and limitations, conditions of transaction, and past land capacity transfer permits for historic sites for cross-analysis, collation, and data cleansing. The aim is to identify the factors taken into consideration by property recipients assessing capacity transfer situations and factors that may impact the use of capacity transfers for historic sites, including financial incentives, legal restrictions, transaction protocols, and educational promotions. Data sorted based on four dimensions and 16 factors are then subjected to analytic hierarchy process (AHP) analysis to identify impact factors for further questionnaire survey work. Lastly, factor-weighted sequence analysis provides calculations that confirm the property recipients` intent to apply for historic site land capacity transfer. This research`s empirical results are provided to government agencies involved in setting ordinances and regulations and recommended to property owners and property transfer recipients the property market. Hopefully, the results can contribute to improved feasibility of land capacity transfers for historic sites and increased private fundraising capacity for owners of historic sites to cover conservational and maintenance fees and guide owners of historic sites to engage in sustainable cultural asset preservation.
    參考文獻: 參考文獻
    壹、中文參考文獻
    Douglass Cecil North，2017，『制度、制度變遷與經濟成就』(劉瑞華，譯)，新北：聯經出版公司。
    文化部，2019，「文化資產保存容積移轉運用機制檢討及研究」，文化部文化資產局委託研究計畫報告。
    王澤鑑，2010，『民法物權』，新北：王慕華。
    王留鑫、何爰平、何煉成，2016，「馬克思經濟學和西方經濟學的產權理論比較研究-兼論我國農地產權改革」，『渭南師範學院學報：綜合版』，31(12)：71-76。
    王世安，2016，「台灣有形歷史保存法制發展史(1895-2015)：從國家目標與權利保障之互動談起」，國立臺灣大學法律學院法律學系碩士論文：臺北。
    李世榮、陳俐君，2010，「最適獨佔管制收購、補貼與不平預政策之比較」，『經濟論文叢刊』，38(3)：413-434。
    李永銘、李易霖，2017，「以賽局理論探討公用運算之稽核機制與服務提供策略」，『資訊管理學報』，14(s)：239-260。
    周子健，2016，「國內馬克思主義產權理論研究論述」，『人力資源管理』，1：203-204。
    林元興、陳貞君，1999，「容積移轉與古蹟保存」，『中國土地科學』，13(5)：14-18。
    林左裕，2017，『不動產投資管理』，臺北：智勝文化事業有限公司。
    林婉玄，2015，「祭祀公業土地財產權之損失補償」，國立臺灣大學法律學院法律學研究所碩士論文：臺北。
    林崇傑，2008，「台灣運用容積移轉於歷史保存之政策與實踐之檢討」，『文資學報』，4：27-92。
    林華苑，2002，「古蹟保存政策與再利用策略之研究」，國立政治大學地政學系碩士班碩士論文：臺北。
    胡海豐，2015，「都市更新、建築容積移轉與獎勵的經濟效率性」，『建築學報』，93：105-124。
    張金定，2012，「違章建築占用戶影響都市更新進行防治之研究」，國立臺灣海洋大學河海工程學系碩士學位論文：基隆。
    張雅惠，2015，「從小地主大佃農政策論承租農地對農地利用之影響」，『土地經濟年刊』，26：111-137。
    張瑞雲，2007，「我國容積移轉法制之研究-兼與日本容積移轉制度之比較」，國立政治大學地政學系及私立中國地政研究所碩士論文：臺北。
    張綱維、林森田，2008，「以容積移轉進行保存之制度與執行-財產權觀點分析」，『建築學報』，66：97-118。
    常瑜、劉彤瑤，2016，「產權理論研究綜述」，『商場現代化』，18：236-237。
    曹永棟、陸躍祥，2010，「西方激勵性規制理論研究綜述」，『中國流通經濟』，1：33-36。
    彭耀華，1998，「發展權移轉機制何故不能取代道路之徵收」，『空間雜誌』，108：50-52。
    榮泰生，2016，『Expert Choice在分析層級程序法(AHP)之應用』，臺北：五南圖書。
    臺北市政府，2008，「容積移轉制度-容積銀行操作機制可行性研究」，臺北市政府都市發展局委託研究計畫報告。
    臺北市政府，2016，「臺北市空間資料及決策支援平臺建置案-容積移轉審查管理系統」，臺北市政府都市發展局委託研究計畫報告。
    褚志鵬，2009，『Analytic Hierarchy Process Theory 層級分析法(AHP)理論與實作』，花蓮：褚志鵬。
    劉厚連，2004，「我國實施古蹟容積移轉制度之問題檢討」，『土地問題研究季刊』，3(2)：65-74。
    鄧振源、曾國雄，1989，層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與運用(上)，『中國統計學報』，27(6)：13707-13724。
    鄧振源、曾國雄，1989，層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與運用(下)，『中國統計學報』，27(7)：13767-13786。
    賴宗裕，2018，『成長管理』，政治大學地政系碩士班課堂講義：賴宗裕。
    邊泰明，2018，『土地使規劃與財產權』二版，臺北：邊泰明。

    貳、外文參考文獻
    Kaplowitz, Michael D., Machemer, Patricia, Pruetz, Rick, 2008, “Planners’ Experiences in Managing Growth Using Transferable Development Rights (TDR) In The United States”, Land Use Policy, 25:378-387.
    Hou, Jun & Chan, Edwin H.W., 2017, “Policy Approaches for Sustainable Conservation of Built Heritage Using Transfer of Development Rights: International Comparison”, Sustainable Development, 528-545.
    Chan, Edwin H.W. & Hou, Jun, 2015, “Developing a Framework to Appraise the Critical Success Factors of Transfer Development Rights (TDRs) For Built Heritage Conservation”, Habitat International, 46:35-43.
    Colavitti, Anna Maria & Serra, Sergio, 2018, “The Transfer of Development Rights as a Tool For The Urban Growth Containment: A Comparison Between The United States and Italy”, Papers in Regional Science, 97(4):1247-1266.
    Pruetz, Rick & Standridge, Noah, 2008, “What Makes Transfer of Development Rights Work?: Success Factors From Research and Practice”, Journal of the American Planning Association, 75(1):78-87.
    Harman, Ben P., Pruetz, Rick & Houston, Peter, 2015, “Tradeable Development Rights to Protect Peri- urban Areas: Lessons From the United States and Observations on Australian Practice”, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 58(2):357-381.

    參、網頁參考文獻
    文化部文化資產局國家文化資產網，「文化資產查詢」，https://nchdb.boch.gov.tw/，取用日期2019年8月5日。
    臺北市政府都市發展局網站，「容積移轉公告」，https://www.udd.gov.taipei-/exhibits/measure_list.aspx?Node=35&Index=3，取用日期2019年8月25日。
    臺北市政府都市發展局網站，「都市計畫容積移轉流程圖」，https://www.udd.gov.taipei/FileUpload/386-1305/Documents/%E9%83%BD%E5%B8%82%E8%A8%88%E7%95%AB%E5%AE%B9%E7%A9%8D%E7%A7%BB%E8%BD%89%E6%B5%81%E7%A8%8B%E5%9C%96(1080724%E4%BF%AE%E8%A8%82).pdf，取用日期2019年8月25日。
    J., Jane, & J.D, Voget, 1999. “Making Transfer Of Development Rights Work for Downtown Preservation and Redevelopment”, American Planning Association, http://data.quaytest.net/apaproceedings/PRCDS99/VOGET/VOGET.HTM (Date visited: February 12, 2020).取用日期2020年2月12日
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    地政學系碩士在職專班
    106923010
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106923010
    数据类型: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/NCCU202000857
    显示于类别:[地政學系] 學位論文

    文件中的档案:

    档案 描述 大小格式浏览次数
    301001.pdf5079KbAdobe PDF2376检视/开启


    在政大典藏中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回馈