應用地價變遷分析地價基準地空間分布－－以臺南市安南區為例

Applying Land Prices Change to Analyze Land Value Benchmark Spatial Allocation - Case Study for Annan District of Tainan City

為改進臺灣地價制度，內政部自2004年起召集地方政府試辦地價基準地地價制度，至2012年9月1日正式施行「土地市價徵收補償」制度，已可看出公部門宣告地價制度有意由目前的「區段估價」逐漸調整為「宗地估價」的決心。在此過渡時期，公部門辦理地價查估作業之程序仍須先劃分地價區段後，再於地價區段內選取「地價基準地」作為宗地估價的價格調整依據。而劃分地價區段之目的實為掌握地區的特性，即為把握地價同質區的概念。通常地區特性隱含各項區域及個別影響因素之空間資訊，故難以定義或量化其區段地價。本研究應用地價變遷分析地價基準地空間分布將有用於解決地政問題。本研究以區域化變數理論為基礎，應用克利金法結合地理資訊系統的空間分析功能。經研究實證結果顯示，克利金法已可掌握大部分區位價值的空間效果同質性，直接以現行地價區段為「近價區段」範圍劃分之基礎具有合理性及可行性。另經比對同年期公告土地現值之後，可發現地價基準地確實能代表地價變異趨勢及位置，進而提供地價人員新增地價基準地區位決策之參考。

The Ministry of Interior has convened some local governments to achieve the pilot scheme of land value benchmark system to improve Taiwan's land value system since 2004. In September 1 2012, the 'Land acquisition compensation price' system was formally implemented. Then the public sector declared intentionally to determine the land value system adjustment from the current 'district land value' to 'single land value' gradually. However, during the transitional period, the land administration department needed to define 'land value district' firstly, and select 'land value benchmark' secondly for estimating the land value process. According the process, the 'single land value' will be adjusted basically. The main purpose of defining land value district is to capture its local characteristics. Therefore, a homogeneous area can also be defined similarly. Usually, the local characteristics of the region and the implicit spatial information of individual factors are difficulty to define or quantify the district land value. A study of applying land prices change to analyze land value benchmark spatial allocation will be usefully to solve the land administration problems. In this research, we apply Kriging Estimation Model and GIS to define homogeneous area based on Theory of Regionalized Variables. The empirical results showed that Kriging Model can already grasp the value of most areas of digital spatial which effect homogeneity directly to the existing range of land value district. It is almost equal to the 'closing land value district' segment with rationality and feasibility. It has been proved that our outcomes can actually represent the land values variation trend and location with comparing to the Declared Current Land Value. Finally, the results will provide a decisions reference to the new additional land value benchmark areas.