生态住宅的经济研究

【作者】 张文军；

【导师】 戴星翼；

【作者基本信息】 复旦大学 ， 人口、资源与环境经济学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 目前我国正处在房地产高速发展的过程中,总体上计算,我国建筑总能耗约占社会终端能耗的20.7%,因此发展节能节水节材环保的生态住宅是当务之急。但在现实中,生态住宅的推广不尽人意,据2005年的统计,我国单位建筑面积能耗是发达国家的2至3倍以上。造成这一原因,与目前生态住宅存在着重技术轻收益、重收益轻成本的现象有关。生态住宅的研究,大多集中在如何运用新技术、新方法来实现住宅的节能节水节材等指标方面,往往忽略了对实现这些指标所花费的成本收益的分析,也就是缺乏经济学层面上的分析和探索。另外对生态住宅的概念也没有统一的定义,尤其是在经济学意义上的内涵阐述。甚至有人认为只要增加绿化面积、降低能耗就是生态住宅。基于现况,本文对生态住宅的概念从经济学角度进行了界定,指出文章所研究的生态住宅为在现有市场条件下不能自发形成的一类整体社会收益比较大的住宅,生态住宅的生态特性就是经济学上的正外部性,强调了定义的相对性、动态性特点。并通过该定义分析了市场上所谓的生态住宅,剔除了一些“伪生态住宅”。在现实中生态住宅的普及动力不足,文章指出生态住宅从经济学上来讲,存在市场失灵现象。对这一现象,作者从定量分析和理论分析两个角度进行了详细的阐述。首先通过几组样本数据,文章研究了生态住宅全生命周期成本、收益,通过计算生态住宅初始投资成本增额与使用过程中的收益增额之间的差额净现值以及初始投资增额的回收期,来分析比较生态住宅的经济效益。在数据计算中,我们发现了生态住宅的经济收益与外部性、市场规模、资本折算率(贴现率)有密切关系。在理论分析方面,先从微观经济学视野分析生态住宅市场失灵的原因,一是生态住宅的正外部性造成生态住宅的市场数量少于社会最优数量;二是由于生态住宅存在规模经济而使生态住宅市场有过高的进入壁垒;三是房地产市场过高的私人贴现率大于社会贴现率;四是使用阶段存在过高的成本费用等因素从而导致生态住宅在市场中不能实现价值。紧接着,作者又对生态住宅市场三个主要应用主体:开发商、消费者、政府之间的经济行为进行了分析,通过构建博弈模型我们了解了各个主体的选择是其他主体选择的函数,政府的补贴或者征税等政策会改变市场的均衡。在解决生态住宅市场失灵方面,文章从两个方面进行了探讨:一是市场的重构,二是制度创新。市场的重构就是尽量通过市场机制实现生态住宅,依据产权思路内化生态住宅的外部性;制度创新就是改革市场规则,通过补贴税收等措施改变市场均衡状态。文章指出生态住宅市场发展的不同阶段需要采用不同的经济政策,而不同的经济政策有着不同的经济效果。文章重点分析了政府给予生态住宅补贴和对非生态住宅征税两种政策工具效应,通过比较,我们知道补贴相对于征税,社会总成本比较低,而且由于房地产市场的过虑效应还可以更能提升住宅品质,更有利于生态住宅的发展。同时阐述了我国在生态住宅推进方面所采取的一系列措施及其评价,包括认证标准、政策法规等。更多还原

【Abstract】 Currently our country is in the fast developing stage of real estate. The overall construction energy consumption occupies 20.7 percentage of the social terminal energy consumption. So the promotion of energy, water and materials-saving ecological residence becomes emergent. But today’s development for ecological residence is unsatisfying. According to the statistics of 2005, the energy consumption for unit construction area in our country is more than 2 or 3 times of that in developed country.The reason for that is due to the phenomena lying in developing ecological residence, which either pay more attention on technique than benefit or pay more attention on benefit than cost. Currently, the studies of ecological residence mainly focus on the aspect that using new techniques or methods can realize the energy, water or materials’ saving in residence, but that always ignores the analysis of cost-benefit to fulfill those savings. Those studies lack the analysis and discovery from the aspect of economics. They don’t have the unified definition for ecological residence, especially for the meaning description from economics. Ecological residence was even wrongly considered as to only increase the green area and reduces the energy consumption.Based on the realities, this paper describes the definition of ecological residence from the field of economics. Ecological residence studied in this paper refers those residences having major entire social benefit, which can’t be self-formed in current market environment. The ecological features of ecological residence are the positive externalities in economics. Some ecological residences in current market were considered as pseudo- ecological residence according to the analysis from this paper.Like the obstacles in the development of ecological residence, there is also market failure phenomenon for ecological residence in economics. We made detailed description for this phenomenon both from the quantities analysis and theoretical analysis. First, this paper studied the life cycle cost and benefit of ecological residence from some sample data. We calculated the difference net present value (NPV) between the first cost increment and economic income during usage of ecological residence. We also calculated the payout period for the first cost increment. Based on those calculations, we analyzed and compared the economical benefit of ecological residence. From those calculated data, we discovered that the economical benefit of ecological residence is closely related to external feature, market scale and capital discount rate.We then made the analysis of the market failure of ecological residence from microeconomics. First, positive externalities of ecological residence will cause market quantity of ecological residence lesser than social optimum quantity of ecological residence. Second, ecological residence has extortionate Barrier to Entry because of its economics of scale. Third, private discount rate is much higher than social discount rate. Fourth, extortionate cost in using stage causes that ecological residence doesn’t have valuation in current market environment. Neatly, the paper made an analysis of the three main economic activities: developers, consumers, government. By constructing the game model, we understand that the choice of each market players is the function of the choice of other market players. The acts of government side, such as subsidies or tax policies will change the market equilibrium.We also make some discussions for market failure of ecological residence from two facts, i.e. market reconstruction and Institutional innovation. For market reconstruction, we should realize ecological residence through market mechanism and internalize the externality of ecological residence by the way of property right. For Institutional innovation, we need the innovation in market regulation and change in market equilibrium through tax allowance. The paper pointed out that ecological residence market needs different economic policies at different stages of development, and different economic policies have different economic effects.To realize ecological residence, there are two political tools from government introduced in this paper: allowance for ecological residence and taxation for non- ecological residence. Compared with taxation for non-ecological residence, allowance for ecological residence has lower gross social cost and can improve the quality of residence due to the filtering effect of real estate market. So allowance should be more effective for the development of ecological residence. At the same time the paper set out a series of measures and evaluation which has adopted by China government, including certification standards, policies and regulations.更多还原