社會環境污染主要來源包含運輸部門的環境污染，其中公路運輸的污染物排放比例為運輸部 門中最多，而人們日常生活通勤的運具是影響公路運輸污染排放的重要因素。但究竟運具的改 變會帶來多少的綠影響，本文採用兩階段預算效用分析方法，從成本、所得、大眾運輸涵蓋率 及運輸設施服務水準四個面向探討人們對於通勤運具選擇的偏好，並假設綠影響函數，用其代 表交通消費的污染防治，分析人們通勤運具選擇對環境污染的影響。本論文的研究結果發現， 大眾運輸使用成本的降低、私人運具使用成本的增加、大眾運輸涵蓋範圍的擴大與其服務水準 的提升，及降低私人運具的服務水準與方便性，將有效提高人們對大眾運輸作為日常生活運具 的偏好，並產生正向的交通消費綠影響。所得雖然會提升人們對於大眾運輸的消費，但卻與交 通消費的綠影響無關。根據以上的分析結果，本文認為在政策方面，提高停車價格、減少停車 場的設置及增加捷運或輕軌行駛路線將有效降低運輸部門的污染排放。本文最後以位於台灣雙 北的臺北捷運代表大眾運輸系統為例，使用 Mathematica 進行數值模擬驗證發現，若旅行距離 越短，大眾運輸服務品質需要更高程度的提升，才能對運輸消費產生有效的綠影響。

The main causes of environmental pollution in society include the pollution from
transportation departments. One of the important factors that affect pollution emissions from road transportation is the mode of transportation that people choose for their daily commute. However, how much will the changes in the transportation mode affect the green effect? This study adopts a two-stage budget utility analysis to analyze the preference of people’s commuting transportation choices from four aspects: cost, income, public transportation coverage and the service level of the transportation. Moreover, this study assumed the green effect function to present the prevention of transportation pollution from transport consumption to explore the impact of people’s transportation choices on transportation pollution.

This study found that reducing the usage cost of public transportation, raising the usage cost of a private vehicle, expanding the coverage of public transportation, improving the service level of public transportation and lowering the service level and the convenience of private vehicles, could increase people’s preference to choose public transportation as their daily transportation tool and have positive impact on green effect. Although the rise in the income level will increase public transportation consumption, it is independent of the green effect. Based on these results, this study considered that enhancing the parking price, reducing parking facilities, and expanding the operating route of the metro or tram are the policies that could decrease pollutant emissions in the transportation sector efficiently.

Finally, this study takes the Taipei Metro which operates a route across Taipei City and New Taipei City for example, and executing numerical simulation validation by Mathematica found that the shorter travel distance requires a larger improvement of the public transportation service to have an efficient positive green effect on transport consumption.

第一章 緒論	1
第一節 研究動機	1
第二節 研究方法	2
第三節 研究架構	3
第四節 章節分布	5
第二章 文獻回顧	6
第一節 影響交通選擇的因素	6
第二節 交通選擇的影響	10
第三節 政府政策對於交通選擇的影響	13
第四節 過去文獻缺點與本研究的貢獻	14
第三章 理論模型	16
第一節 基本模型設定	16
第二節 兩階段預算效用分析	18
第三節 交通運輸消費的綠影響	21
第四節 大眾運輸涵蓋率的影響	24
第五節 數值驗證	27
第四章 結論與未來展望	29
第一節 結論	29
第二節 未來展望	31
參考文獻	32
附錄	36

圖目錄
圖1:研究架構圖	4
圖2:命題六示意圖	27

一、中文部分
李家儂(2006)。交通運輸與土地使用整合規劃之演變~ 大眾運輸導向發展的都市發展模式。土地問題研究季刊，5(3)，70-83。
陳佑昕(2018)。民眾日常通勤經驗與整體主觀幸福感之關聯研究，淡江大學，新北市。內容取自:https://www.airitilibrary.com/
謝寶煖(1993)。漫談研究設計。書府，15，26-29。
林宗弘, 許耿銘, & 李俊穎.(2021)。移動的階級不平等: 臺灣民眾的交通弱勢與交通事故風險初探✽.調查研究-方法與應用，(47)，113-166.
邱裕鈞, 溫傑華, 陳韋穎, 王穆衡, 傅強, 曾幸敏, & 林育瑄.(2014)。旅運者運具選擇行為異質性之研析:混合羅吉特模式之應用.運輸計劃季刊，43(2)， 143-171
曹美慧, 余志達, 范芷瑄, 陳昱亨, 劉怡君, 林聖鋅, 王俊傑、陳慧真、林尚廷、 曾佩如、朱珮芸、李佳玲、楊智凱、陳冠旭(2021年8月)。運輸部門溫氣體減量第二階段策略精進研究。臺北市:交通部運輸研究所.內容取自:https://www.iot.gov.tw/cp-78-206325-ec528-1.html
蘇源昌, 蔡志賢, 洪珮喻, 蘇淳太, 黃晟哲, 林映均, 陳冠男、林昱勳、楊士寬、曾佩如、朱珮芸、楊智凱、黃士騰(2021年8月)。應用交通管理策略減少都會區交通空氣污染之研析(1/3)一研究地區分類及初期調查。臺北市:交通部運輸研究所。內容取自:https://www.iot.gov.tw/cp-78-206714-96df0-1.html
行政院環保署(2023年8月)。2023年中華民國國家溫室氣體排放清冊報告。內容取自:https://unfccc.saveoursky.org.tw/nir/tw_nir_2023.php


二、英文部分
Barisa, A., & Rosa, M. (2018). A system dynamics model for CO2 emission mitigation policy design in road transport sector. Energy Procedia, 147, 419-427.
Calthorpe, P. (1993). The next American metropolis: Ecology, community, and the American dream. Princeton architectural press.
Chang, Y. H., Li, C. Y., Lu, T. H., Artanti, K. D., & Hou, W. H. (2020). Risk of injury and mortality among driver victims involved in single-vehicle crashes in Taiwan: comparisons between vehicle types. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(13), 4687.
Chiu Chuen, O., Karim, M. R., & Yusoff, S. (2014). Mode choice between private and public transport in Klang Valley, Malaysia. The Scientific World Journal,2014
De Oña, J., Estévez, E., & de Oña, R. (2020). Perception of public transport quality of service among regular private vehicle users in Madrid, Spain. Transportation Research Record,2674(2), 213-224.
de Dios Ortúzar, J., & Willumsen, L. G. (2011). Modelling Transport. John wiley & sons.
Goldman, S. M., & Uzawa, H. (1964). A note on separability in demand analysis. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 32(3), 387-398.
Hasibuan, H. S., & Mulyani, M. (2022). Transit-oriented development: towards achieving sustainable transport and urban development in jakarta metropolitan, Indonesia. Sustainability, 14(9), 5244.
Hensher, D. A., & Reyes, A. J. (2000). Trip chaining as a barrier to the propensity to use public transport. Transportation, 27, 341-361.
Heath, Y., & Gifford, R. (2002). Extending the theory of planned behavior: Predicting the use of public transportation 1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(10), 2154-2189.
Ibrahim, A. N. H., Borhan, M. N., Md. Yusoff, N. I., Ismail, A., Mat Yazid, M. R., Mhd Yunin, N. A., & Yukawa, S. (2021). Gender and age do matter: Exploring the effect of passengers’ gender and age on the perception of light rail transit service quality in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Sustainability, 13(2), 990.
Ingvardson, J. B., & Nielsen, O. A. (2019). The relationship between norms, satisfaction and public transport use: A comparison across six European cities using structural equation modelling. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 126, 37-57.
Kitamura, R. (1984). Incorporating trip chaining into analysis of destination choice. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 18(1), 67-81.
Kwan, S. C., Tainio, M., Woodcock, J., Sutan, R., & Hashim, J. H. (2017). The carbon savings and health co-benefits from the introduction of mass rapid transit system in Greater Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Journal of Transport & Health, 6, 187-200
Lucas, K. (2012). Transport and social exclusion: Where are we now?.Transport policy, 20, 105-113
Legrain, A., Eluru, N., & El-Geneidy, A. M. (2015). Am stressed, must travel: The relationship between mode choice and commuting stress. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 34, 141-151.
Levitas, R., Pantazis, C., Fahmy, E., Gordon, D., Lloyd-Reichling, E., & Patsios, D. (2007). The multi-dimensional analysis of social exclusion. University of Bristol
Mohiuddin, H. (2021). Planning for the first and last mile: A review of practices at selected transit agencies in the United States.Sustainability, 13(4), 2222.
Pierce, G., Willson, H., & Shoup, D. (2015). Optimizing the use of public garages: Pricing parking by demand. Transport Policy, 44, 89-95.
Strotz, R. H. (1957). The empirical implications of a utility tree. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 269-280
Thøgersen, J. (2018). Transport-related lifestyle and environmentally-friendly travel mode choices: A multi-level approach. Transportation Research Part A:Policy and Practice, 107, 166-186.
Van der Waerden, P., Timmermans, H., & Berenos, M. (2008). Trip characteristics and travelers’ willingness to change transport mode in favor of public transport. Colloquium Transport Planning Research November 20 and 21 2008. Santpoort.
Zefreh, M. M., Hussain, B., & Sipos, T. (2020). In-depth analysis and model development of passenger satisfaction with public transportation. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 24(10), 3064-3073.