淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


下載電子全文限經由淡江IP使用) 
系統識別號 U0002-0107201323003400
中文論文名稱 分析以所得分配為基礎的信任指數:以台北市及高雄市為例
英文論文名稱 An Analysis of Trust Based on Income Inequality: The Case of Taipei and Kaoshiung City
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 產業經濟學系碩士班
系所名稱(英) Department of Industrial Economics
學年度 101
學期 2
出版年 102
研究生中文姓名 黃琦雯
研究生英文姓名 Chi-Wen Huang
學號 600540115
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
口試日期 2013-06-23
論文頁數 46頁
口試委員 指導教授-池秉聰
委員-葉佳炫
委員-戴中擎
中文關鍵字 信任  信任賽局  所得分配  所得分配不均 
英文關鍵字 Trust  Trust Index  Trust Game  Income Distribution  Income Inequality 
學科別分類
中文摘要 本篇論文利用台北市及高雄市所得分配五等分及經濟理論推算出兩地區的信任程度,並探討影響兩地區信任程度差異之來源。先針對台北市及高雄市以時間序列(Time Series)個別討論,再以追蹤資料(Panel Data)分析對信任影響的因素及兩地區的差異。
本研究針對都市指標、社會指標及治安指標個別探討對信任的影響,實證結果顯示:(1)在都市指標中,政府的教育支出越多,使教育的環境更好,有助於提升國民的素養,其對兩地區的信任程度有顯著的影響力;此外,交通支出的增加對高雄市信任程度有正向的影響,但卻不利台北市之信任的建立,顯示交通建設帶來的好處可能是有極限的;(2)社會指標中,所得差距越大的地區其信任程度越不好,且影響不論是台北市或是高雄市都是顯著的;(3)良好的治安環境有助於信任的建立。
英文摘要 In this paper, we focused on exploring possible factors affecting trust index of Taipei and Kaohsiung city in Taiwan. First, the income distribution data of the two cities were employed to calculate the trust indexes of the two districts. Second, the calculated indexes were analyzed and discussed respectively from the time series basis. Finally, the analysis on the factors affecting the trust index and the differences between the two cities were discussed via the panel data regression technology.
This research was divided into three parts, the Urbanization Indicator, Social Indicator, and Social Security Indicator. The relationship between each indicator and respective trust index was explored. The empirical findings are as follows:
(1)In terms of the Urbanization Indicator, the trust index could be improved when the two city governments increase their educational spending. In addition, the increasing of traffic expenditure could have a positive impact on trust index in Kaohsiung city, but have no significantly influence in Taipei city. This result showed that the benefits of traffic construction might be limited.
(2)In terms of the Social Indicator, no matter in Taipei or Kaohsiung city, the greater the income inequality, the worse the level of trust.
(3)The research indicated that a better Social Security environment would be contributed to the establishment of trust.
論文目次 目錄
第一章 緒論...........................................1
1.1研究動機與目的......................................1
1.2 本文架構..........................................3
第二章 文獻回顧........................................4
2.1什麼是信任?........................................4
2.2信任如何影響經濟表現?...............................5
2.3信任怎麼產生的?....................................6
2.4如何衡量信任.......................................8
第三章 數據及資料說明................................10
3.1被解釋變數-信任..................................10
3.2解釋變數........................................14
第四章 模型介紹.....................................20
4.1變數之檢定及分類.................................20
4.2時間序列(time series)...........................21
4.3追蹤資料(panel data)............................25
第五章 計量結果與分析................................29
5.1台北市及高雄市計量結果與分析.......................29
5.2台北市及高雄市跨區域結果分析.......................36
第六章 結論........................................40
參考文獻...........................................43
附錄 信任程度調查結果................................46
圖表目錄
圖3.1、以所得分配為基礎的信任程度-初始稟賦均等(EQ).......13
圖3.2、以所得分配為基礎的信任程度-初始稟賦不均等(IEQ)....13
圖5.1、詐欺案件破案率...............................34
表1.1、台北市敘述統計表.............................18
表1.2、高雄市敘述統計表.............................19
表4.1、變數名稱對照表...............................28
表5.1、台北市都市化指標計量結果.......................30
表5.2、高雄市都市化指標計量結果.......................31
表5.3、台北市社會指標計量結果.........................33
表5.4、高雄市社會指標計量結果.........................33
表5.5、台北市社會治安計量結果.........................35
表5.6、高雄市社會治安計量結果.........................35
表5.7、都市化指標計量結果............................37
表5.8、社會指標計量結果..............................38
表5.9、社會治安計量結果..............................39


參考文獻 1. 陳欽春、王中天(2008),社會信任指標及其調查機制之建構,行政院研究發展考核委員會
2. 張維迎(2002),法律制度的信譽基礎 3,經濟研究
3. 張維迎、柯榮住(2002),信任及其解釋:來自中國的跨省調查分析,經濟研究
4. 渠東(譯) (2002),社會分工論,台北:左岸文化。
5. 葉偉文(譯) (2007),隱藏的邏輯,天下文化。
6. Alesina, A. & La Ferrara, E. (2002). Who Trusts Others?. Journal of Public Economics, 85(2), 207-234.
7. Arrow, K. J. (1972). Gifts and Exchanges. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 1(4), 343-362.
8. Berg, J., Dickhaut, J. & McCabe, K. (1995). Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History. Games and Economic Behavior, 10(1), 122-142.
9. Bouchaud, J. P. & Mezard, M. (2000). Wealth condensation in a simple model of economy. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 282(3), 536-545.
10. Buchanan, M. (2008). The social atom: Why the rich get richer, cheaters get caught, and your neighbor usually looks like you. Bloomsbury Publishing USA.
11. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. American Journal of Sociology, S95-S120.
12. Dearmon, J. & Grier, K. (2009). Trust and Development. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 71(2), 210-220.
13. Durkheim, E. (1893). The division of labor in society. Presses universitaires de France.
14. Freyd, J. J., Pamela J. & Birrell (2013). Blind to Betrayal: Why We Fool Ourselves We aren't Being Fooled. Wiley, Somerset NJ.
15. Fudenberg, D. & J. Tirole. 1991. Game Theory. Cambridge (MA) and London, England: MIT Press.
16. Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity, 457-457. New York: Free Press.
17. Greiner, B., Ockenfels, A. & Werner, P. (2007). The Dynamic Interplay of Inequality and Trust-An Experimental Study. The Journal of Economics Behavior & Organization.
18. Knack, S. & Keefer, P. (1997). Does Social Capital have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country Investigation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(4), 1251-1288.
19. Newton, K. (2001). Trust, Social Capital, Civil Society, and Democracy. International Political Science Review, 22(2), 201-214.
20. Porta, R. L., Lopez-De-Silane, F., Shleifer , A. & Vishny, R. W. (1996). Trust in Large Organizations (No. w5864). National Bureau of Economic Research.
21. Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America's declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65-78.
22. Putnam, R. D. (2001). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Simon & Schuster.
23. Putnam, R. D. & Leonardi, R. (1993). Making Democracy work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton University Press.
24. Simmel, Georg (1950). The Sociology of Gerog Simmel. NY: Free Press.
25. Steunenberg, B. & van Vught, F. (1997). Political Institutions and Public Policy: Perspectives on European Decision making. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
26. Whiteley, P. F. (2000). Economic Growth and Social Capital. Political Studies,48(3), 443-466.
27. Zak, P. J., & Knack, S. (2001). Trust and Growth. The Economic Journal,111(470), 295-321
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2013-07-23公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2013-07-23起公開。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2281 或 來信