Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/152064
|
| Title: | 地方選舉對房市的影響 基於斷點迴歸的分析
The Impact of Local Elections on the Housing Market - An Analysis Based on Regression Discontinuity |
| Authors: | 何書涵
Ho, Shu-Han |
| Contributors: | 陳明吉
Chen, Ming-Chi
何書涵
Ho, Shu-Han |
| Keywords: | 地方選舉
房市
斷點迴歸
景氣循環
不確定性
Mayoral Election
Housing Market
Regression Discontinuity Design
Business Cycle
Uncertainty |
| Date: | 2024 |
| Issue Date: | 2024-07-01 12:39:12 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 本研究透過斷點設計迴歸(RDD)分析法，探討了2022年台灣地方縣市首長選舉對房地產價格的影響。研究聚焦於投機性政治景氣循環理論和選舉不確定性對房價的影響，在投機性政治景氣循環理論的作用下，選舉不確定性較低的地區(如新北市、台中市及高雄市)將會在選舉後呈現房價下降趨勢；相對地，選舉不確定性較高的地區(如台北市、桃園市及台南市)則可能因不確定資訊假說的影響下，顯示出房價的上升趨勢。實證分析結果顯示，選舉不確定性較低的地區在選舉後確實出現房價下降，尤其是高雄市的數據在統計上具有顯著性，表明選舉前的擴張性財政及房市利多政策可能在選後被緊縮政策取代，導致房價下降。而在選舉不確定性較高的地區，房價的上升趨勢與市場對選舉結果的反應一致，顯示不確定性的消散可能活絡了市場活動，進而推動房價上漲。本研究的發現不僅深刻了我們對政治經濟影響房地產市場的了解，也為政策制定者提供了關於選舉影響經濟行為的實證證據。
This study employs Regression Discontinuity Design (RDD) to examine the impact of the 2022 local mayoral elections in Taiwan on real estate prices. The research focuses on the effects of speculative political business cycle theories and election uncertainty on housing prices. It predicts that in areas with low election uncertainty (such as New Taipei City, Taichung City, and Kaohsiung City), housing prices are expected to decline post-election under the influence of speculative political business cycles; conversely, in areas with high election uncertainty (such as Taipei City, Taoyuan City, and Tainan City), housing prices may show an upward trend or an insignificant decline due to the dual impact of political business cycles and the uncertainty information hypothesis. Empirical analysis shows that in areas with low election uncertainty, there is indeed a decline in housing prices post-election, especially in Kaohsiung City, where the data is statistically significant. This suggests that pre-election expansionary fiscal and favorable housing policies may be replaced by contractionary policies post-election, leading to a decrease in housing prices. In areas with high election uncertainty, the rising trend in housing prices aligns with market reactions to the election results, indicating that the dissipation of uncertainty may have stimulated market activities, thereby driving up housing prices. The findings of this study not only deepen our understanding of the political-economic impact on the real estate market but also provide empirical evidence for policymakers about the economic behavior influenced by elections. |
| Reference: | 英文參考文獻
Abdulai, R. T., & Owusu-Ansah, A. (2011). House price determinants in Liverpool, United Kingdom. Current Politics and Economics of Europe, 22(1), 1-26.
Agarwal, S., Chen, Y., Li, J., & Tan, Y. J. (2021). Hedonic price of housing space. Real Estate Economics, 49(2), 574-609.
Alt, J. E., & Lowry, R. C. (1994). Divided government, fiscal institutions, and budget deficits: Evidence from the states. American Political Science Review, 88(4), 811-828.
Boone, A. L., & White, J. T. (2015). The effect of institutional ownership on firm transparency and information production. Journal of financial economics, 117(3), 508-533.
Brown, K. C., Harlow, W. V., & Tinic, S. M. (1988). Risk aversion, uncertain information, and market efficiency. Journal of financial economics, 22(2), 355-385.
Butler, M. R., & McNertney, E. M. (1991). Election returns as a signal of changing regulatory climate. Energy economics, 13(1), 48-54.
Canes-Wrone, B., & Park, J.-K. (2014). Elections, uncertainty and irreversible investment. British Journal of Political Science, 44(1), 83-106.
Case, A. (1994). Taxes and the electoral cycle: How sensitive are governors to coming elections. Business review(Mar), 17-26.
Cattaneo, M. D., Idrobo, N., & Titiunik, R. (2019). A practical introduction to regression discontinuity designs: Foundations. Cambridge University Press.
Cellini, S. R., Ferreira, F., & Rothstein, J. (2010). The value of school facility investments: Evidence from a dynamic regression discontinuity design. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(1), 215-261.
Chen, W. Y., & JIM, C. Y. (2010). Amenities and disamenities: A hedonic analysis of the heterogeneous urban landscape in Shenzhen (China). Geographical Journal, 176(3), 227-240.
Chen, Y., Shi, S., & Tang, Y. (2019). Valuing the urban hukou in China: Evidence from a regression discontinuity design for housing prices. Journal of Development Economics, 141, 102381.
Choi, C.-Y. (2023). State political uncertainty and local housing markets-Evidence from US mid-term gubernatorial elections. Applied Economics, 55(57), 6717-6738.
Crane, A. D., Michenaud, S., & Weston, J. P. (2016). The effect of institutional ownership on payout policy: Evidence from index thresholds. The Review of Financial Studies, 29(6), 1377-1408.
Cusack, T. R. (1997). Partisan politics and public finance: Changes in public spending in the industrialized democracies, 1955–1989. Public Choice, 91(3), 375-395.
De Blasio, G., De Mitri, S., D'Ignazio, A., Russo, P. F., & Stoppani, L. (2018). Public guarantees to SME borrowing. A RDD evaluation. Journal of Banking & Finance, 96, 73-86.
De Genaro, A., Salvador, P. I. C. A., & Fernandes, I. F. (2021). Market power and banking regulations: Evidence from RDD application to the Brazilian banking market. Economics Letters, 202, 109821.
Fürstenau, E., Gohl, N., Haan, P., & Weinhardt, F. (2023). Working life and human capital investment: Causal evidence from a pension reform. Labour Economics, 84, 102426.
Gao, G., Li, X., Liu, X., & Dong, J. (2021). Does air pollution impact fiscal sustainability? Evidence from Chinese cities. Energies, 14(21), 7247.
Goodell, J. W., & Vähämaa, S. (2013). US presidential elections and implied volatility: The role of political uncertainty. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(3), 1108-1117.
Goodman, A. C., & Thibodeau, T. G. (1997). Dwelling-age-related heteroskedasticity in hedonic house price equations: An extension. Journal of Housing Research, 299-317.
Higgins, D., & Reddy, W. (2010). The impact of political risk on Australian house prices. Australia and New Zealand Property Journal, 2(7), 413.
Julio, B., & Yook, Y. (2012). Political uncertainty and corporate investment cycles. The journal of Finance, 67(1), 45-83.
Kapur, D., & Vaishnav, M. (2013). Quid pro quo: Builders, politicians, and election finance in India. Center for Global Development Working Paper(276).
Khan, M., Srinivasan, S., & Tan, L. (2017). Institutional ownership and corporate tax avoidance: New evidence. The Accounting Review, 92(2), 101-122.
Kiel, K. A., & Zabel, J. E. (1996). House price differentials in US cities: Household and neighborhood racial effects. Journal of Housing Economics, 5(2), 143-165.
Kong, D., Cheng, Y., & Liu, S. (2021). Unexpected housing wealth appreciation and stock market participation. Journal of Housing Economics, 52, 101768.
Li, J., & Born, J. A. (2006). Presidential election uncertainty and common stock returns in the United States. Journal of Financial Research, 29(4), 609-622.
Liu, L. C.-H. (2021). The housing business cycle of local public finance: empirical evidence from Taiwan. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 14(3), 375-390.
Mattozzi, A. (2008). Can we insure against political uncertainty? Evidence from the US stock market. Public Choice, 137, 43-55.
Miles, W. (2014). The housing bubble: how much blame does the fed really deserve? Journal of Real Estate Research, 36(1), 41-58.
Nordhaus, W. D. (1975). The political business cycle. The review of economic studies, 42(2), 169-190.
Poterba, J. M. (1994). State responses to fiscal crises: The effects of budgetary institutions and politics. Journal of political Economy, 102(4), 799-821.
Reid, B. G. (1998). Endogenous elections, electoral budget cycles and Canadian provincial governments. Public Choice, 97, 35-48.
Selim, S. (2008). Determinants of house prices in Turkey: A hedonic regression model. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 9(1), 65-76.
Shang, H., Fan, J., Fan, B., & Su, F. (2022). Economic effects of ecological compensation policy in Shiyang River Basin: Empirical research based on DID and RDD models. Sustainability, 14(5), 2999.
Shang, H., Kou, Y., Su, F., Song, N., & Mao, S. (2021). The Policy Effect, Spatial Heterogeneity, and Spillover Effect of Land System Pilots. Sustainability, 13(21), 11818.
Sirmans, S., Macpherson, D., & Zietz, E. (2005). The composition of hedonic pricing models. Journal of real estate literature, 13(1), 1-44.
Sun, W., Zheng, S., Geltner, D. M., & Wang, R. (2017). The housing market effects of local home purchase restrictions: Evidence from Beijing. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 55, 288-312.
Thistlethwaite, D. L., & Campbell, D. T. (1960). Regression-discontinuity analysis: An alternative to the ex post facto experiment. Journal of Educational psychology, 51(6), 309.
Wilhelmsson, M. (2008). House price depreciation rates and level of maintenance. Journal of Housing Economics, 17(1), 88-101.
Yinger, J. (1977). Prejudice and Discrimination in the Urban Housing Market. Discussion Paper D77-9.
中文參考文獻
俞振華. (2012). 探討總統施政評價如何影響地方選舉─ 以 2009 年縣市長選舉為例. 選舉研究, 19(1), 69-95.
胡志平. (2005). 新竹科學園區設置之環境風險認知分析與價值評估. 建築與規劃學報, 6(1), 63-80.
張慈佳. (2001). 政治景氣循環現象對房地產價格影響之研究. 台北: 國立政治大學地政研究所碩士論文.
郭振雄, 何怡澄, & 林咸劭. (2020). 斷點迴歸方法論之法人持股與企業租稅規避. 經濟論文, 48(1), 105-149.
陳怡諠, 卓翠月, & 白詩婷. (2017). 總統選舉事件對股市之影響. 選舉研究, 24(1), 33-60.
傅彥凱. (2006). 地方政府預算制定之政治經濟分析: 政治預算循環的觀點. 選舉研究, 13(1), 119-162.
彭建文, 張金鶚, & 林恩從. (1998). 房地產景氣對生產時間落差之影響. In: 經濟論文叢刊.
黃紀, 林長志, & 王宏忠. (2013). 三合一選舉中之一致與分裂投票: 以 2010 年高雄市選舉為例. 選舉研究, 20(1), 1-45.
黃智聰, & 程小綾. (2005). 經濟投票與政黨輪替-以台灣縣市長選舉為例. 選舉研究, 12(2), 45-78.
蔡昕俞. (2013). 台灣總統大選與經濟成長的政治景氣循環—1996-2012. 臺灣民主季刊, 10(1), 36-69. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
財務管理學系
111357009 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111357009 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [財務管理學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 700901.pdf | | 1771Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
