臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

隨著永續發展的潮流興起，永續一詞陸陸續續在各個領域都受到重視，在運輸領域即產生永續運輸之議題。然而，過去討論永續運輸常被侷限在環境保育議題，而經濟效率面的探討較被忽略。城際運輸除了具有運距長的特性外，運具依賴性強以及受國土整體規劃影響等其他特性，在永續發展的探討上值得予以重視。本研究之目的即根據城際運輸永續發展經濟效率面意義之探討，建立相關之衡量指標，並進行指標整合。
本研究所擬之城際運輸永續發展經濟效率面評估指標，為根據城際運輸永續發展經濟效率面意義之探討產生運輸能源、運輸營運、運輸投資以及環境外部性等之四個構面，並依『投入-產出-結果-環境永續性』之指標產生架構而產生。繼而以分析階層程序法求取權重值，最後以模糊綜合評判模式進行指標整合，並以隸屬函數的調整進行敏感度分析。
本研究以台灣本島之公路大眾運輸與鐵路運輸為對象，評估民國76年到85年間每一年度城際運輸發展經濟效率之永續性。研究結果顯示，在公路大眾運輸方面，歷年來表現比較不好的有運輸客運效果指標、運輸貨運效果指標以及環境外部性指標，整合結果顯示歷年來呈現較不永續的趨勢。在鐵路運輸方面，歷年來表現比較不好的有運輸投資效率指標以及能源效率指標，整合結果顯示除了最近兩年表現略為下滑之外，長期而言呈現較永續的趨勢。

With the trend of sustainable development, sustainability is discussed in many fields, and extending that in transportation forms the concept of sustainable transportation. The current issues of sustainable transportation often discussed are about environmental conservation. However, economic efficiency is also an important issue, about which many people concern. Besides long haul, the features of intercity transportation include strong mode dependence and influences of comprehensive territory planning; thus, it is worth focusing on sustainability of intercity transportation. The purpose of this study is to establish and integrate the related evaluation indicators based on the discussion of meanings of sustainable intercity transportation in the economic efficiency aspect.
The indicators in this study were explored from four dimensions: transportation energy, transportation operation, transportation investment and environmental externality, and generated by the ”input-ouput-outcome-envirometal sustainability” structure. The weights of indicators were investigated by AHP method, and the indicators were integrated by “Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Method”. The sensitivity analysis was made by adjustment of membership functions.
The case study annually evaluates the sustainability of public highway transportation and railway transportation in Taiwan Island in the economic efficiency aspect from 1987 to 1996. The results indicate that in public highway transportation, the passenger transportation effectiveness, freight transportation effectiveness and environment externality are steadily worse, and the integrated result shows a unsustainable trend. In railway transportation, although the investment efficiency and energy efficiency are getting worse, the integrated result shows a sustainable trend.

中文摘要 I
英文摘要 II
誌 謝 III
目 錄 IV
圖 目 錄 VII
表 目 錄 VIII
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.2 研究目的 2
1.3 研究範疇 3
1.4 研究流程與內容 4
1.5 研究方法 6
第二章 文獻回顧 7
2.1 永續運輸 7
2.2 永續發展指標架構 12
2.3 運輸系統評估指標 16
2.4 本章小結 29
第三章 研究課題分析與理論架構之建立 31
3.1 研究課題分析 31
3.2 理論架構之建立 32
3.3 整合模式 34
3.4 本章小結 41
第四章 經濟效率面意義之探討與指標之建立 42
4.1 永續發展之起源 42
4.2 永續發展之意義 44
4.3 永續運輸之意義 45
4.4 永續運輸經濟效率面之意義 48
4.5 城際永續運輸經濟效率面指標之建立 53
4.5.1 探討之構面 53
4.5.2 指標形成之概念 54
4.5.3 公路大眾運輸初始指標產生 55
4.5.4 公路私人運輸初始指標產生 58
4.5.5 鐵路運輸初始指標產生 61
4.5.6 航空運輸初始指標產生 63
4.5.7 城際永續運輸經濟效率面指標整理 66
4.6 本章小結 69
第五章 實例分析 70
5.1 實例運用之城際永續運輸經濟效率面指標 70
5.2 資料分析 71
5.3 指標權重計算 83
5.4 指標整合 84
5.4.1 年度績效值之計算 84
5.4.2 年度績效值之評等 85
5.5 敏感度分析 86
5.6 結果分析 88
5.7 本章小結 91
第六章 結論與建議 93
6.1 結論 93
6.2 建議 94
參考文獻 96
附 錄 一 101
附 錄 二 110
附 錄 三 111
附 錄 四 114

英文部分
1. Atkinson, G., R. Dubourg, K. Hamilton, M. Munasinghe, D. Pearce, C. Young, Measuring sustainable development, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, 1997.
2. Black W. R.,” Sustainable transportation: a US perspective,” Joural of Transport Geopraphy, Vol. 4, No.3, pp. 151-159, 1996.
3. Bonsall, P.,” Legislating for modal shift: background to the UK’s new transport act,” Transport Policy, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 179-184, 2000.
4. Blowers, A., Planning for Sustainable Environment: A report by the Town and Country Planning Association, Earthscan Publications, London, 1993.
5. Brindle, R.,” Sustainable transport- cause or effect of a sustainable future? ,“ Road &Transport Research, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 66-75, 1998.
6. Bell, S. and S. Morse, Sustainability Indicators: measuring the immeasurable? , Earth scan Publications Ltd., London, England, 1999.
7. Cornelissen A.M.G., J. van den Berg, W.J. Koops, M. Grossman, H.M.J Udo," Assessment of the contribution of sustainability indicators to sustainable development: a novel approach using fuzzy set theory," Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, Vol. 86, pp. 173-185, 2001.
8. Day, A.,” Meeting the needs of the community: social issues in road and transport planning,” Road &Transport Research, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 64-74, 1998.
9. Davis, A. L.,” Promoting sustainable transport in English: principles and practice,” Joural of Transport Geopraphy, Vol. 4, NO. 1, pp. 67-70, 1996.
10. Dunvan, B., J. Hartman,” Sustainable urban transportation initiatives in Canada”, presented in the APEC Forum on Urban Transportation, Seoul, Korea, 1996.
11. ECMT, Sustainable Transport in Central and Eastern European Cities, Proceedings of the workshop on transport and environment in Central and Eastern European cities, Bucharest, Romania, 1995.
12. Faucheux, S. and M. O’Connor, ed., Valuation for sustainable development, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, 1998.
13. Hughes, p., Personal transport and the Greenhouse Effect, Earthscan Publications, London, 1993.
14. Joachim Spangenberg, Wuppertal Institute, 1997.
15. John, W., Transport for a sustainable future: the cost for Europe, Belhaven Press., New York, USA, 1995.
16. Jones, P. and K. Lucas,“ Integrating transport into ‘jointed-up’ policy appraisal,” Transport Policy, Vol 7, pp. 185-193, 2000.
17. James Gustava Spath, The Environment: The Greening of Technology, 1989.
18. Merbek Resource Consultants,” Performance indicators for environmently sustainable transportatiom ,” Submitted to Tansport Canada, 1996.
19. Maclaren, V. W.,” Urban sustainability reporting,” Journal of the American Planning Assosciation, Vol 62, NO. 2, pp. 184-202,1996.
20. Moldon, B., S. Billharz, R. Matravers, Sustainability indicators: a report on the project on indicators of sustainable development, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, West Sussex, England, 1997.
21. Nijkamp, P. and J. Vleugel, In search of sustainable transport systems, European Transport and Communications Networks: Policy Evolution and Change, Edited by D. Banister, pp. 287-299, 1995.
22. National Round Table on the Environment & the Economy, Ottawa Ontario Canada, State of the debate on the environment and the economy:The road to sustainable transportation in Canada,TRB-TRIS,1997.
23. Olsson, L.,” Steps towards an environmentally sustainable transport system,” The Science of Total Environment 235, pp. 407-409, 1999.
24. OECD, Towards sustainable transportation, Conference highlights and overview of issues, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, 1997.
25. OECD,Towards Sustainable Development-Environment indicators, OECD publications, 1998.
26. Ramanathan, R., J. K. Parikh,” Transport sector in India: an analysis in the context of sustainable development,” Transport Policy, Vol. 6, pp. 35-45, 1999.
27. Saaty, T.L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980.
28. Feng , S. and D. Li, “Decision support for fuzzy comprehensive evaluation of urban development”, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 105, pp. 1-12, 1999.
29. The World Bank, Sustainable transport-priorities for policy reform, The world Bank, Washington, D.C., USA, 1996.
30. Tibbs, H.” Global change and the future of transport,” Road &Transport Research, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 70-83, 1998.
31. The Ninth Session of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development,Sustanable Transportation: The Canadian Context , 2001
32. UNCHS, “Using indicators in policy, Indicators Newsletter3:1-8. United Nations Centre for Human Settlement(Habitat)”, 1995.
33. UNDP（Ed.）, Human Development Report 1996, 1996.
34. UK,Indicators of Sustainable Development for the United Kingdom, HMSO United Kingdom London, 1996.
35. UK, A Better Quality of Life: a Strategy for Sustainable Development for the United Kingdom, HMSO United Kingdom London, 1999.
36. Van Ranst E., H. Tang, R Groenemans, S. Sinthurahat,"Application of fuzzy logic to land sustainability for rubber production in peninsular Thailand," Geoderma, Vol. 70, pp. 1-19, 1996.
37. WRI, Information Please Environment Almanac, 1994.
38. Yannis A., Phillis and Luc A. Andriantiatsaholiniaina,”Sustainablity: an ill-defined concept and its assessment using fuzzy logic,” Ecological Economics, Vol. 37, pp. 435-456, 2001.
中文部分
1. 交通部運輸研究所、淡江大學運輸科學研究所，永續運輸之量化指標研究，民國90年。
2. 李永展，道路規劃與城鄉永續發展：二個案例的省思，中華民國道路協會年會學數研討會，民國87年。
3. 李金準，中國可持續發展核算體系，社會科學文獻出版社，90年。
4. 吳孟勳，生態街道與城市永續發展之探討，成功大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文，民國90年。
5. 馮正民，城鄉永續發展─永續交通運輸，國家永續發展論壇，第1-19頁，民國86年。
6. 馮正民，邁向永續運輸，看守台灣，第1卷，第2期，第16-23頁，民國88年。
7. 馮正民，呂秀玉，模糊方法在質化評估準則之運用-交通建設土地徵收難易度為例-，都市與計畫，第二十四卷，第二期，第1-21頁，民國86年。
8. 張有恆，都市公共運輸，華泰書局，民國88年。
9. 張芳旭、朱珮芸，永續策略的規劃與策略的研擬，環境與能源研討會，民國87年。
10. 能源政策白皮書，經濟部能原委員會，民國87年。
11. 黃書禮，翁瑞豪，陳子淳，台北市永續發展指標系統之建立與評估，都市與計畫，第二十四卷，第一期，第23- 42頁，民國86年。
12. 黃書禮、許伶蕙，永續發展之生態經濟觀，永續發展的意義討論會，中央研究院經濟研究所，民國82年。
13. 孫志鴻、余政達、林祥偉，建立永續發展指標系統的指導原則，民國90年。
14. 鼎漢國際工程顧問股份有限公司譯，永續運輸：論政策改革之優先課題，民國88年。
15. 盧誌明、黃啟峰，全球永續發展的緣起與發展，民國84年。
16. 劉欽瑜，永續目標下都會區最適運具比例研究，台灣大學土木研究所碩士論文，民國90年。
17. 國立中興大學都市計劃研究所，台北市都市永續發展指標與策略研擬之研究，台北市政府都市發展局委託辦理，民國85年。
18. 於幼華、張益誠，永續發展指標，環境教育季刊37期，PP.53-74，民國88年。