Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/141231
|
Title: | 文化資產保存法下的建物保存決策 The decision of building preservation under the Cultural Heritage Preservation Act |
Authors: | 譚雅晴 Tan, Ya-Ching |
Contributors: | 林子欽 Lin, Tzu-Chin 譚雅晴 Tan, Ya-Ching |
Keywords: | 文化資產保存 財產權保障 古蹟 歷史建築 Cultural heritage preservation Historic buildings Property rights Monuments |
Date: | 2022 |
Issue Date: | 2022-08-01 18:23:43 (UTC+8) |
Abstract: | 文化資產保存於國際間逐漸受到認同,從過去單點凍結式保存走向區域活化式保存。有形文化資產被認為可以提供都市開放空間、凝聚社區意識、發展美學歷史文化場景,對都市房價有正面效果。然而,文化資產帶來的外部效益無法內部化回饋予文化資產與其坐落土地所有權人,現有獎勵與補助措施無法與都市開發壓力抗衡,所有權人不願其建物被公告為文資的情況時有所聞。2021年底,司法院釋字813號解釋亦判定現有文資法對人民財產權之限制形成個人特別犧牲,文資法應修法以符合憲法15條保障人民財產之意旨。 為釐清現行文資法對私有文資所有權人財產權之影響程度,本研究蒐集自民國101年8月至民國111年3月總計98件私有文化資產作為樣本。以最適保存年期之觀點建立模型,分析文資法有關「建物不得拆除」管制與獎勵補助規定對地主收益能力之影響。個案分析結果發現,在具備獨立開發條件案件中,文資使用收益僅達重開發收益之14至52%,且現行房屋稅、地價稅減免未能有效增加地主保存誘因。另一方面,本研究認為再利用計畫規劃產業進駐,除了活化空間利用外,其經濟效益值得肯定,效果更勝稅賦減免。未來在文化資產保存政策上,除了容積移轉手段,發展完整之文化創意產業鏈,以市場機制推動文化資產保存工作將更有助於建物保存。 The importance of cultural heritage preservation has been recognized internationally. Cultural heritage can provide urban open spaces, cumulate community consciousness, and develop scenes of aesthetics and history. Also, numerous pieces of research found that conservation brings a positive effect on urban housing price. However, the external benefit from cultural heritage cannot be internalized by private cultural buildings and their landowners. The subsidies and incentives often fall short of expected gains from urban redevelopment. Therefore, the owners tend to refuse their properties to be designated as monuments or historic buildings. At the end of 2021, the Constitutional Court of R.O.C issued Interpretation no.813. The court interpreted that part of the regulations in the Cultural Heritage Preservation Act place improper limits on citizens’ property. The government should amend the law to be permissible under the Constitution. This research aims to clarify the principles, cost, and benefits of the Cultural Heritage Preservation Act in the hope to establish valid strategies for government to compensate the private heritage owners. This is undertaken following a methodology that collects data of 98 private heritages listed from August 2012 to March 2022 and systematically looks into five cases of them from an economic perspective. In terms of an optimal duration of heritage conservation, this research takes regulations, incentives, and subsidies into account, and builds a model to measure how “regulatory taking” influence private heritage owners. The study finds that the compensation provided by the government to conservation cultural heritage only accounts for 14-52% of potential if rental income the building is redeveloped. The deduction of house tax and land value tax can hardly increase incentives of private owners to conserve heritage. In contrast, the operation reuse of monuments not only can make a better use of unoccupied spaces but also bring additional revenue. The effect of reusing buildings may be even higher than tax deduction. |
Reference: | 文化部,「全國公有與私有古蹟、歷史建築及無形文化資產之維護管理與保存執行情況與困境」專題報告,2018年10月31日。 內政部建築研究所,「我國古蹟暨歷史建築保存活化再利用策略之研究」,2009年12月。 Roulac, S. E.,彭建文譯述,1997,「不動產市場景氣循環、轉變力量與結構變遷」,『住宅學報』,(6):71-88。 王宏文,2010,「台北市地價稅公平性之研究」,『行政暨政策學報』,(51):47-76。 何東波,1986,「台灣地區公共設施提供長程策略探討」,『都市與計畫』,13:61-78。 李汾陽,2008,「臺灣文化資產保存的發展與特質1984-2007」,『通識研究集刊』,13:57-75。 李惠圓,2003,「台灣文化資產保存的法律分析-以私有文化建築保存為核心」,成功大學法律學系學位論文:台南。 林一宏,2011,「臺灣文化資產保存歷程概要」,『國立臺灣博物館學刊』,64(1):75-106。 林子欽、張正,2004,「地主和承租人如何面對土地徵收的風險?」,『臺灣土地研究』,7(1):1-18。 林子欽,2014,「土地產權複雜度對於土地整合與土地開發的影響」,行政院國家科學委員會。 林左裕,2018,『不動產投資管理』六版,台北:智勝文化。 林崇熙,2005,「產業文化資產的消逝、形成、與尷尬」,『科技博物』,9(1):65-91。 林英彥,2010,『不動產估價實務問題解答』三版,台北市:文笙書局。 林曉薇,2008,「文化景觀保存與城鄉發展之研究-以英國世界文化遺產巴那文工業地景為例」,『都市與計劃』,35(3):205-225。 洪進東,2014,「歷史街區活化之研究-以大稻埕迪化街為例」,臺北科技大學建築與都市設計研究所學位論文:台北。 郭立偉,2018,「搶救暫定古蹟相關問題之研究-從法規與制度反省出發」,『台北海洋科技大學學報』,9(2):70-88。 郭淳瑜,2021,「從系統觀點探討文資保存的政策與策略」,國立暨南大學資訊管理學系碩士論文:南投。 夏鑄九,1998,「臺灣的古蹟保存:一個批判性回顧」,『國立台灣大學建築與城鄉研究學報』,9:1-9。 梁仁旭,1998,「地價稅率變動對土地開發影響之理論與實證分析」,『土地經濟年刊』,10:47-61。 梁仁旭,2001,「以地價稅調節土地開發利用之比較研究」,『臺灣土地研究』,(3):19-36。 莊雯惠,2020,「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」,國立政治大學地政學系碩士在職專班論文:台北。 許育典、李惠圓,2006,「多元文化國下建築文化資產保存的建構」,『臺灣土地研究』,9(2):75-96。 許肇源、連哲民、黃柏璋,2008,「從新莊樂生療養院事件看台灣都市文化資產保存機制之缺失」,『都市與計畫』,35(3):269-289。 張永健,2020,『土地徵收與管制之補償:理論與實務』一版,台北,元照出版公司。 彭建文、吳森田、吳祥華,2006,「不動產有效稅率對房價影響分析—以台北市大同區與內湖區為例」,『台灣土地研究』,10(2):49-66。 郭瑞坤、徐家楓,2008,「社區文化資產保存之影響因素研究:從社會資本觀點探討」,『都市與計畫』,35(3):253-268。 陳奉瑤,2003,「可更新土地開發價值之研究」,『臺灣土地研究』,6(1):1-16。 陳建元,2010,「變遷的公共財理論與都市治理結構從新古典到新制度經濟學之引介」,『地理學報』,(58):65-88。 陳明燦,2017,『土地法導論』二版,新北市,陳明燦。 黃宗成、李謀監、朱容慧,2002,「國人對文化資產保存法的條文認知與罰責態度之研究」,『觀光研究學報』,8(1):15-38。 廖世璋、錢學陶,2002,「古蹟保存的文化認同之探討-以台北市為例」,『都市與計畫』,29(3):471-489。 榮芳杰、傅朝卿,2008,「古蹟委外經營制度對文化遺產管理功能之影響: 以 ROT 與 OT 模式爲例」,『建築學報』,(66):167-188。 邊泰明,2018,『土地使用規劃與財產權:理論與實務』第二版,台北市:邊泰明出版 Ahlfeldt, G. M., and Maennig, W.., 2010, “Substitutability and complementarity of urban amenities: External effects of built heritage in Berlin”, Real Estate Economics, 38(2), 285-323. Been, V., Ellen, I. G., Gedal, M., Glaeser, E., and McCabe, B. J., 2016, “Preserving history or restricting development? The heterogeneous effects of historic districts on local housing markets in New York City”, Journal of Urban Economics, 92, 16-30. Byrne, J. P., 2014, “Precipice Regulations and Perverse Incentives: Comparing Historic Preservation Designation and Endangered Species Listing”, Georgetown International Environmental Law Review, 27, 343-392. Colwell, P. F., & Sirmans, C. F. , 1978, Area, time, centrality and the value of urban land. Land economics, 54(4), 514-519. Colwell, P. F., & Sirmans, C. F. (1980). Nonlinear urban land prices. Urban Geography, 1(2), 141-152. Coulson, N. E., & Lahr, M. L. , 2005, “Gracing the land of Elvis and Beale Street: historic designation and property values in Memphis”, Real Estate Economics, 33(3), 487-507. Coulson, N. E., & Leichenko, R. M., 2004, “Historic preservation and neighbourhood change”, Urban Studies, 41(8), 1587-1600. Eckart, W. , 1985,“On the Land Assembly Problem", Journal of Urban Economics, 18: 364-78. Evans,A. W.,(2005). Economics, Real Estate and the Supply of Land. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Glaeser, E., 2010, “Preservation follies: excessive landmarking threatens to make Manhattan a refuge for the rich”, City Journal, 20(2). Guzmán, P. C., Roders, A. R. P., and Colenbrander, B. J. F., 2017, “Measuring links between cultural heritage management and sustainable urban development: An overview of global monitoring tools”, City, 60, 192-201. Navrud, S., and Ready, R. C., 2002, “Why Value Cultural Heritage?” Valuing cultural heritage: Applying environmental valuation techniques to historic buildings, monuments and artifacts, edited by Edward Elgar, UK. Neutze, M., 1987, “The supply of land for a particular use”, Urban Studies, 24(5), 379-388. Noonan, D. S., 2007, “Finding an impact of preservation policies: price effects of historic landmarks on attached homes in Chicago, 1990-1999”, Economic development quarterly, 21(1), 17-33. Rizzo, I., & Throsby, D., 2006, “Cultural heritage: economic analysis and public policy”, Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, 1, 983-1016. Rose, C.,1981, “Wilhelm Dilthey`s philosophy of historical understanding. A neglected heritage of contemporary humanistic geography”, Geography, ideology and social concern, 99-133. Shoup, D. C., 1970, “The optimal timing of urban land development”, Papers in Regional Science, 25(1), 33-44. Tweed, C., and Sutherland, M., 2007, “Built cultural heritage and sustainable urban development”, Landscape and Urban Planning, 83(1), 62-69. Waights, S., 2019, “The preservation of historic districts—is it worth it?”, Journal of Economic Geography, 19(2), 433-464. |
Description: | 碩士 國立政治大學 地政學系 109257018 |
Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109257018 |
Data Type: | thesis |
DOI: | 10.6814/NCCU202200967 |
Appears in Collections: | [地政學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
701801.pdf | | 5832Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|