容積移轉在國際規劃領域主要作為介於管制與市場之間的土地開發工具，隨著制度演變並引入國內市場，隨著制度演變並引入國內市場，也逐漸發展為一種結合民間資本運作，透過移轉機制協助處理歷史文化保存限制、公共設施保留地需求與開發推動所衍生之決策考量的新興規劃工具，高度依賴私部門的參與，近年來國內容積移轉與都市更新機制的結合即為一例。在當前的市場機制運作下，容積移轉已非單純回應管制的工具，其採用不僅反映環境條件與區位門檻，也反映制度設計下實施者的開發策略考量如何被轉譯為空間選擇行為。
本研究以2015至2024年間臺北市已核定之民辦都市更新案件為研究對象，並依《臺北市都市計畫容積移轉審查許可自治條例》之容積接受基地規範進行篩選，取得322件可移入之研究母體。研究架構上，先以探索性空間資料分析(全域Moran’s I與LISA)檢視採用與否在全市與局部尺度的空間結構，再以二元羅吉斯迴歸模型估計空間與市場條件及制度與策略擇定因素等面向對採用機率的影響，並透過交互項分析以及模型預測結果，進一步回應制度門檻與空間落點。
實證結果顯示，全域Moran’s I未達顯著，代表容積移轉採用行為在全市尺度上未形成一致的空間擴散或連鎖採用，然而LISA指認出局部聚集結構，顯示制度效果是被特定優勢節點吸收而形成局部集中，且在相近條件的區位中仍同時存在採用與未採用案件交錯並存的現象，揭示容積移轉門檻機制與審查條件所造成的選擇性啟動；在二元羅吉斯迴歸結果中，影響容積移轉採用機率最顯著的因素，主要來自大眾運輸供給與更新案件的增值性。基地越接近捷運站，採用容積移轉的機率越高，顯示自治條例將大眾運輸指標納入接受基地條件，確實留下可辨識的制度效果。另一方面，更新前後價值比與每單位更新後價值呈正向影響，則說明容積移轉在都市更新中的實務角色更接近一種增值策略，讓制度的使用偏向依賴既有價格結構，而政策效果因此具有向高價區集中的傾向。相較之下，同為接受基地門檻的其他變數上，公共設施條件並未呈現同等辨識力，而道路寬度與公園綠地供給變數未能形成穩健的顯著訊號。
綜合而言，容積移轉在民辦都市更新中的採用邏輯呈現大眾運輸與增值條件導向的雙重篩選，採用行為在空間上因此出現核心區聚集與熱區內分化並存之結果。容積移轉制度雖能界定可移入範圍並在大眾運輸條件上產生效果。但容積移轉在都市更新中作為實施者增加開發量的途徑，制度之公共設施容受力規範原本應作為支撐強度正當化與配套要求的核心依據，實證上卻未能轉譯為同等可辨識的採用條件。同時，制度在更新案個別審議裁量與容積取得途徑組合的影響下，亦難在全市尺度形成一致且可預期的強度引導路徑，導致可移入與實際採用之間出現空間落差。後續政策執行現象評估的重點，容積接收基地條件應從單一門檻式的規範，增進區位、強度與環境容受力的可管理性，使容積移轉真正成為都市更新治理架構中可被運用的策略，而非僅在市場最有利的區位被動啟動的增值選項。

Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) is widely treated as a market enabled planning instrument positioned between regulation and the market. Its core policy function is to reallocates development capacity to mitigate constraints imposed by preservation, public facility reservation, or other non developable obligations, while maintaining development feasibility through tradable rights. In Taipei, TDR has increasingly been embedded in private urban renewal projects, where it becomes an additional floor area acquisition channel under a shared regulatory framework. This coupling raises a long standing governance concern prior to this study: whether the receiving site criteria, often justified by transit accessibility and public facility carrying capacity, can actually produce citywide consistent spatial guidance and credible capacity based justification, rather than amplifying market driven concentration.
Using 322 approved private urban renewal projects in Taipei City from 2015–2024 (76 adopted TDR), this study combines exploratory spatial data analysis (Global Moran’s I; LISA) and binary logistic regression with interaction terms to identify both spatial patterns and conditional adoption mechanisms. Results show no significant global spatial autocorrelation (Moran’s I = 0.0068; p = 0.246), but clear local clustering: 66 projects (20.6%) exhibit significant local spatial association, with High–High clusters concentrated in core districts such as Da’an and Xinyi District. Econometrically, TDR adoption is most robustly associated with transit accessibility and value-related incentives, and the interaction analysis further indicates that market valuation signals and MRT proximity reinforce each other in activating TDR.

Anselin, L. (1988) Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-7799-1
Anselin, L. (1995). Local indicators of spatial association—LISA. Geographical Analysis, 27(2), 93–115.
Anselin, L. (1996). The Moran scatterplot as an ESDA tool. In Spatial Analytical Perspectives on GIS.
Adams, D., & Watkins, C. (2002). Greenfield, Brownfield Housing Development European Urban and Regional Research Center. Hoboken: Blackwall Publishing.
Alasmari, F., & Alarabi, S. (2024). Uncovering barriers and drivers: private developer participation in the urban regeneration of Riyadh’s residential inner-city neighborhoods. Urban, Planning and Transport Research, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/21650020.2024.2410894
Barrows, R. L., & Prenguber, B. A. (1976). Transfer of Development Rights: An Analysis of a New Land Use Policy Tool: Reply. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 58(4), 763–766. https://doi.org/10.2307/1238824
Baerwald, T. J. (1981). THE SITE SELECTION PROCESS OF SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL BUILDERS. Urban Geography, 2(4), 339–357. https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.2.4.339
Brueckner, J. K. (2000). Urban Sprawl: Diagnosis and Remedies. International Regional Science Review, 23(2), 160-171. https://doi.org/10.1177/016001700761012710
Bivand R, Pebesma E, Gomez-Rubio V (2013). Applied spatial data analysis with R, Second edition. Springer, NY.
Brinkley, M. & Machemer, Patricia. (2013). Using Transfer of Development Rights as a Market Based Approach in Land Use Management. Financing Economic Development In the 21st Century. 106-123.
BenDor, T. K., Branham, J., Whittemore, A., Linkous, E., & Timmerman, D. (2021). A national inventory and analysis of US transfer of development rights programs. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 65(12), 2276–2296. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2021.1971068
Bai, Y., Wu, S., & Zhang, Y. (2023). Exploring the Key Factors Influencing Sustainable Urban Renewal from the Perspective of Multiple Stakeholders. Sustainability, 15(13), 10596. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310596
Cliff, A.D. and Ord, J.K. (1981) Spatial processes: Models and applications. Pion Limited, London.
Chen, H. (2009). Partnership on urban regeneration : case study in Taipei, Taiwan.
Clinch, J. P., & O’Neill, E. (2010). Assessing the Relative Merits of Development Charges and Transferable Development Rights in an Uncertain World. Urban Studies, 47(4), 891-911. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098009352365
Chen, Y., Han, Q., Liu, G., Wu, Y., Li, K. and Hong, J. (2022), “Determining critical success factors ofurban renewal projects: multiple integrated approach”,Journal of Urban Planning andDevelopment, Vol. 148, 04021058, doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000775.
Chou, Jui-Sheng & Chang, Yu-Hsiu & Molla, Asmare & Chong, Wai. (2023). Determining critical success factors for residential reconstruction in the urban city from the perspective of developers. Sustainable Cities and Society. 10.1016/j.scs.2023.104977.
Ewing, R., & Hamidi, S. (2015). Compactness versus Sprawl: A Review of Recent Evidence from the United States: A Review of Recent Evidence from the United States. Journal of Planning Literature, 30(4), 413-432. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412215595439
Fujita, Masahisa & Ogawa, Hideaki, 1982. "Multiple equilibria and structural transition of non-monocentric urban configurations," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), 161-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-0462(82)90031-X
Guy, S., & Henneberry, J. (2000). Understanding Urban Development Processes: Integrating the Economic and the Social in Property Research. Urban Studies, 37(13), 2399-2416. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980020005398
Gao, X., & Asami, Y. (2007). Influence of lot size and shape on redevelopment projects. Land Use Policy, 24(1), 212–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2005.06.001
Geltner, David. (2014)Real Estate Price Indices and Price Dynamics: An Overview from an Investments Perspective. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2540742
Hosmer, D. W., Lemeshow, S., & Sturdivant, R. (2013). Applied Logistic Regression (3e).
Kaplowitz M, Machemer P, Pruetz R (2008) Planners’ experiences in managing growth using transferable development rights (TDR) in the United States. Land Use Policy 25(3): 378–387.
Kwan, M. P. (2012). The Uncertain Geographic Context Problem. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 102(5), 958–968. https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2012.687349
Long, J. S., & Freese, J. (2014). Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata (3e).
LeSage, J. P. (2014). What regional scientists need to know about spatial econometrics. The Review of Regional Studies, 44(1), 13–32.
Linkous, E. R. (2017). Transfer of development rights and urban land markets. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 49(5), 1122-1145. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X16686794
Lin, Sheng-Hau & Huang, Xianjin. (2021). Evaluating the sustainability of urban renewal projects based on a model of hybrid multiple-attribute decision-making. Land Use Policy. 108. 105570. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105570.
Lin, S. M., Lee, H. Y., Hu, H. L., & Chien, K. H. (2022). To join the rebuild or not? An exploration of the factors influencing the public's intention to participate in urban renewal. Science progress, 105(4), 368504221140273. https://doi.org/10.1177/00368504221140273
McFadden, D. (1974) Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior. Frontiers in Econometrics, 105-142.
Micelli, E. (2002). Development Rights Markets to Manage Urban Plans in Italy. Urban Studies, 39(1), 141–154. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43196751
Nelson, Arthur & Juergensmeyer, Julian. (2012). The TDR Handbook: Designing and Implementing Transfer of Development Rights Programs.
Pruetz, R., & Standridge, N. (2008). What Makes Transfer of Development Rights Work?: Success Factors From Research and Practice. Journal of the American Planning Association, 75(1), 78–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360802565627
Shih, Mi, and Hsiutzu Betty Chang. “Transfer of Development Rights and Public Facility Planning in Taiwan: An Examination of Local Adaptation and Spatial Impact.” Urban Studies, vol. 53, no. 6, 2016, pp. 1244–60. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26151106. Accessed 17 Nov. 2025.
Shih, Mi & Chiang, Ying-Hui & Chang, Hsiutzu Betty, 2019. "Where does floating TDR land? An analysis of location attributes in real estate development in Taiwan," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 832-840.
Sho, Kojiro & Zhu, Jiarui. (2025). Are Urban Renewal Projects in Taipei City Transit Oriented?. Japan Architectural Review. 8. 10.1002/2475-8876.70016.
Train, K. E. (2009). Discrete choice methods with simulation (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Wang, Y., Fan, Y., & Yang, Z. (2022). Challenges, Experience, and Prospects of Urban Renewal in High-Density Cities: A Review for Hong Kong. Land, 11(12), 2248. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11122248
Wang, Wen-Kai & Tsai, I-Chun. (2025). Discussing the role of urban renewal incentive policies based on housing price effects. Economic Analysis and Policy. Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 275-291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2024.12.005
Wong, D. (2009) The Modifiable Areal Unit Problem. In: Fotheringham, A.S. and Rogerson, P.A., Eds., The SAGE Handbook of Spatial Analysis, SAGE Publications, London, 105-124.https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-008044910-4.00475-2
李鴻毅(1997)，《不動產經營與管理》，中國地政研究所
陳順宇(2009)，《迴歸分析》，台北市，華泰書局
內政部國土管理署(2022)，都市更新發展計畫(112-115年)
王薇凱(2008)，台中市公共設施保留地容積移轉機制檢討之研究，逢甲大學都市計畫所碩士論文
李俊豪(2009)，都市治理與社會空間階層化－高雄市都市空間發展之討論，公共政策與地方治理─地方自治論文集，2009(2010/06)，105-118
李得全、謝一鋒、羅煊(2021)。都市更新容積獎勵制度之謬誤與導正－以臺北市為例。都市與計劃，48(3)，283-309。https://doi.org/10.6128/CP.202109_48(3).0003
余清祥、梁穎誼、郭柔芸(2022)，地理加權迴歸在視覺化分析之探討，Journal of the Chinese Statistical Association，60，208–232
李建佑(2016)。居民參與都市更新意願之影響因素探討:理論與實證證據〔碩士論文，國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201601393
林炎欣(2008)，房價特徵價格模型之空間自我相關問題分析，第十二屆（2008年）國土規劃論壇
林崇傑(2008)。台灣運用容積移轉於歷史保存之政策與實踐之檢討。文資學報，(4)，27-92。https://doi.org/10.29777/JCR.200807.0002
周兆珮(2010)，模型分析都市更新的經濟評價與成本效益，東吳大學會計學系碩士論文。https://hdl.handle.net/11296/5e29t8
林奕成(2024)，影響實施者於更新地區進行都市更新之因素分析—以台北市為例，國立政治大學財政學系碩士論文
周佩誼(2024)，未登記工廠空間自相關分析—以高雄市為例，國立高雄大學建築學系碩士論文
紀凱婷(2008)，台北市新推個案訂價之時間與空間相依性分析，國立政治大學地政學系碩士論文
柯登耀、陳奉瑤(2024)，預售屋成交價與不動產估價師估值差異之研究－以臺北市都市更新權利變換個案為例。土地經濟年刊，(35)，1-45。
范凱閎(2023)，容積移轉訊息外溢效果對房屋價格的影響，國立政治大學財政學系碩士論文
陳慈仁(2001)，台北市資訊軟體業與網際網路服務業區位分佈之研究，國立台灣大學建築與城鄉研究所碩士論文。
張剛維、林森田(2008)，尋租行為與土地使用分區管制—財產權觀點之分析，台灣土地研究，11(2)，127-153
張維修(2012)，都市更新體制的浮現與轉型，國立臺灣大學建築與城鄉研究所博士論文
莊翰華、張育端(2018)，新竹縣（市）不動產開發商跨區投資影響因素之研究，土地問題研究季刊，17(4)，79-104
國家發展委員會(2014)，檢討我國現行土地開發義務與回饋制度計畫
陳可溦、陳建元 (2021)，台灣容積移轉制度變遷，第十九屆土地研究學術研討會
麥怡安、賴宗裕(2021)，我國都市更新制度變遷與困境之探討—以臺北市為例，第十九屆土地研究學術研討會，1-21
黃舜銘(2004)，大稻埕歷史風貌特定專用區容積移轉機制之研究，國立臺灣科技大學建築系碩士論文
台北市政府都市發展局(2010)，容積移轉制度－容積銀行操作機制可行性研究
臺北市政府都市發展局(2022)，2021年臺北都市發展年報
蔡佳明、彭揚凱(2017)，無中生有的土地，到底肥了誰？──容積轉移的真相
劉芳慈(2012)，我國農地發展權移轉制度之設計，國立臺北大學自然資源與環境管理研究所
賴進貴、葉高華、王韋力(2004)。土地利用變遷與空間相依性之探討以臺北盆地聚落變遷為例。臺灣地理資訊學刊，(1)，29-40。https://doi.org/10.29790/JTGIS.200410.0003
賴韻如(2010)，大稻埕容積移轉之研究-以迪化街為例，萬能科技大學工程科技研究所碩士論文
賴世剛(2022)，規劃研究的問題：回顧與展望，科際整合月刊，7(5)，13-16
謝琦強、莊翰華(2009)，台中市都市土地使用強度「區位特性」之研究－以容積移轉制度為例，地理研究週刊，51，23-43
謝秀蓉(2014)，容積移轉對接受地外部性衝擊之研究-台中市新市政中心專用區為例，逢甲大學土地管理學系碩士論文