No description available.

身為大量消費的現代人，不得不關切垃圾何去何從。以往垃圾問題源自於焚化或掩埋兩法皆會損耗大量的環境成本及引起利益團體抗爭，造成社會無謂的損失，受世界環保潮流影響，我國政府決定從降低垃圾量著手。 垃圾減量從垃圾分類做起，方便後續的資源回收。我國自民國94年1月1日起，強制台灣10個縣市的民眾進行垃圾分類，成為我國少數未全國同步施行的中央政策。本研究引進多用於公共衛生、醫療等自然實驗的計量方法—差異中的差異(Difference-in-Difference，簡稱DID)來探討屬於社會科學領域的政府政策，檢驗該政策是否達到其制訂之目標。 本研究將台灣第一階段便實施強制政策的10個縣市當作實驗組，4個第二階段才全面實施的縣市作為控制組，在控制了各縣市的平均每月家戶所得、高等教育程度、清運人員、垃圾車數量等變數後，分別去分析政策對每人每日垃圾清運量、每人每日資源回收量、每人每日資源回收量相對於垃圾清運量比例三者的影響，觀察政策對於降低垃圾清運量、提高資源回收量的政策目的是否有效。 結果發現，我國隨時間經過，垃圾清運量降低、資源回收量提高，但由於主要探討的政策係數並不顯著，所以我國垃圾清運、資源回收情形的改善，是否起因於強制垃圾分類政策造成，沒有明確證據。 / Modern-day life consumes far greater resources than ever and, thus must be concerned about the “problems of trash.” Traditionally, government officials have adopted landfill and incineration policies to dispose of this municipal waste. Yet these two measures come with large social and environmental costs. In keeping with international trends toward environmental protection, the Environmental Protection Administration of the Republic of China has decided to solve the problems by fundamentally reducing the volume of municipal waste. In order to decrease the volume of waste and increase the recycled, the first phase of the “Compulsory Trash-Sorting Policy” was implemented in 10 localities on Jan. 1, 2005, with additional counties brought on board in later phases. This policy is one of the few policies that are not implemented island-wide in Taiwan. This study adopts the “Difference-in-Difference” approach—a popular research method in the field of public health, medical caring and natural sciences—to evaluate the effectiveness of this policy. The 10 counties where the first phase of the policy was successful is the “treatment group.” Another 4 counties where the second phase of policy was successful is the “control group.” This study takes into account monthly per family income, average level of higher education, number of street-sweepers and trash-haulers, and the trash trucks as the exogenous variables. This study calculates the changes in per capita daily volume of municipal waste and per capital daily volume of recycled materials to determine the success of the policy. This study concludes that the volume of the municipal waste and increases the recycled materials decreases by time; however the actual effect is still vague because the coefficient of policy in this study remains insignificant. Therefore, it is only certain that the campaign for “trash-sorting” works better with time. No evident linkage exists between recycling and the “Compulsory Trash-Sorting Policy.”