臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

台灣四面環海，經濟發展幾乎仰賴國際貿易，更有99﹪對外貿易貨物是透過海運完成，可見港埠經營的良窳攸關台灣經濟的發展，而我國近年來卻面臨高雄港被釜山港及上海港超越、基隆港明顯衰退，及大陸沿海新興港埠如深圳港及青島港的快速成長，提醒著我國不可忽視鄰近港埠競爭威脅。藉由效率評估可以衡量港埠表現之優劣，並有助於了解本身的優勢與劣勢，體認競爭環境中可能存在的危機或轉機，以採取適當之因應措施，故一套公正客觀的效率評估工具實屬必要。本研究運用CCR模式、BCC模式及簡單交叉效率模式、D&G模式、A&P模式等DEA修正模式，針對亞太地區十個港埠進行經營效率的評估，以從各模式獲得多樣且互補之資訊，並採用1998-2001年的跨期資料來探討亞太地區港埠歷年效率變動及其原因。進一步便藉效率分析來判斷港埠營運無效率之原因；發現無效率來源後，以差額變數分析無效率港埠改善方向及幅度大小；再進一步運用規模報酬分析探討港埠的無效率營運可能是源自於不同規模報酬的營運，並以BCC模式之ΣU值判斷各受評港埠之規模報酬為遞增、遞減或固定。最後進行敏感度分析以探討哪些項目對效率提高的成效及影響較大。研究結果顯示，高雄港於各模式之營運效率表現每年皆不佳，在港埠資源利用率不足下，資源無有效運用，造成高雄港經營效率逐年下滑。而基隆港各模式衡量下，每年皆皆有不錯的效率表現，但基隆港之裝卸機具老舊、港域水深不足、港區後線腹地狹小的自然地理條件以及港區聯外道路交通延滯等港埠投入資源受限，致使貨源逐漸流失，而效率值呈現逐年下滑之趨勢。

Surrounded by seas, all of Taiwanese economic development nearly relies on international trade that even 99% of external trading goods are shipped by way of sea so that we can see how important harbor operation influences the economic development of Taiwan. However recently, as Kaohsiung harbor’s position is replaced by Pusan and Shanghai; plus with Keelung harbor’s trade volume is recessing obviously, new harbors along the coast of Mainland China such as Shenzhen and Qingdao are emerging to rapid growth, it reminds us of a threat that could not be neglected from our neighboring harbors. In order to assist the major harbors of our country to understand their own advantages and disadvantages and understand the potentially existent dangers and opportunities in a competitive environment so that they could adopt proper responsive measures for their own resources, applying a set of impartial and objective evaluative measures to conduct evaluation of efficiency is indeed quite necessary.
In this study we have adopted the corrected DEA model that has been improved by recent scholars such as simple cross efficiency, D & G and A & P to enlarge the application of DEA and acquire multiple and complementary information about harbors. By the way, we have adopted a panel data ranging from 1998 to 2001 to evaluate harbor efficiency of the Asia-Pacific Area that we could not only perform a more accurate evaluation of harbor efficiency by way of data of more terms, but we could also discuss the changes of harbor efficiency for these years and the reasons why. When the holistic efficiency value of a harbor is less than 1, we have judged the reasons for the inefficiency of harbor operation based on the pure technical efficiency and scale efficiency. After locating the sources for inefficiency, he suggested to use slack variable analysis for the directions and sizes of the improvements for inefficient harbors. Then by use of return to scale analysis, explore the inefficient operation of the harbor may be originated from operations of returns to different scales. And based on the ΣU of BCC model, judge the return to scale for each evaluated harbor is increasing, decreasing or constant. Finally conduct a sensitivity analysis to discuss which items that manager should take care to influence and work more on the increase of efficiency.

目 錄
中文摘要i
Abstractii
誌謝iii
圖目錄vi
表目錄vii
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研究範圍與對象2
1.4研究架構與流程3
第二章 文獻回顧5
2.1港埠效率評估之研究5
2.1.1港埠效率評估方法之探討5
2.1.2港埠效率評估之產出與投入變數探討7
2.2資料包絡分法之探討9
2.2.1資料包絡分析法概述9
2.2.2資料包絡分析法之基本模式11
2.2.3資料包絡分析法之修正模式16
2.2.4 DEA相關分析工具19
2.2.5運用DEA評估港埠效率之相關研究21
第三章 研究流程與設計25
3.1研究設計流程25
3.2投入產出項之選取25
第四章 研究結果與分析30
4.1各DEA模式之效率值分析………………………………………………..30
4.1.1 CCR模式30
4.1.2 BCC模式32
4.1.3 A&P模式35
4.1.4簡單交叉效率模式36
4.1.5 D&G模式39
4.1.6小結41
4.2 DEA之相關分析方法48
4.2.1效率分析與差額變數分析49
4.2.2規模報酬分析53
4.2.3敏感度分析54
4.3加入大陸港埠後之各港營運效率分析56
第五章 結論與建議…………………………………………………………………59
參考文獻……………………………………………………………………………..62

參考文獻
1Andeasen, P., Petersen, N.C., 1993. “A procedure for ranking efficient unites in data envelopment analysis.” Management Science 39, 1261-1264.
2Banker, R.D., Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., 1984. “Some modles for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis.” Management Science 30, 1078-1092.
3Baños, J., Coto, P., ＆ Rodríguez, A., 1999. “Allocative efficiency and over-capitalisation: an application.” International Journal of Transport Economics 26（2）, 181-199.
4Baird, A., 1995. “Privatisation of trust ports in the United Kingdom: Review and analysis of the first sales.” Transport Policy 2（2）,135-143.
5Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Rhodes, E., 1978. measuring the efficiency of decision making unit. European Journal of Operational Reasearch 2, 429-444.
6Coto, P., Baños, J., ＆ Rodríguez, A., 2000. “Economics efficiency in Spanish ports: some empirical evidence.” Maritime Policy and Management 27（2）, 169-174.
7Cullinane, K., ＆ Khanna, M., 1999. “Economics of scale in large container ship.” Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 33（2）, 185-208.
8Cullinane, K., Song, D.-W., ＆ Gray, R., 2002. “A stochastic frontier model of the efficiency of major container terminals in Asia: assessing the influence of administrative and ownership structures.” Transportation Research 36A, 743-762.
9Doyle, J. Green, R., 1994. “Efficiency and cross-efficiency in DEA: derivations, meanings and uses.” Journal of the Operational Research Society 45, 567-578.
10Estache, A., González, M., ＆ Trujillo, L., 2002. “Efficiency Gains from Port Reform and the Potential for Yardstick Competition: Lessons from Mexico. “World Development 30（4）, 545-560.
11Farrell, M.J., 1957. “The measurement of productive efficiency.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A, General 120, 253-281.
12Fernández, J. E., De Cea, J., ＆ Fernández, J. M., 1999.” Port privatization in developing countries: the case of container terminals.” International Journal of Transport Economics 26（2）, 293-314.
13Heaver, T., 1995. “The implications of increased competition among ports for port policy and management.” Maritime Policy and Management 22（2）, 125-133.
14Lewin, A.Y., Minton, J.W., 1986. “Determining organization effectiveness:Another Look and an Agenda for Research.” Management Science 2（5）, 514-538.
15Liu, Z., 1995. “The comparative performance of public and private enterprises: the case of British port.” Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 29（3）, 263-274.
16Martínez, E., Díaz, R., Navarro, M., ＆ Ravelo, T. 1999. “A study of the efficiency of Spanish Port Authorities using Data Envelopment Analysis.” International Journal of Transport Economics 26（2）, 237-253.
17Parker, D., 1994. “Nationalisation, privatization, and agency status within government: testing for the importance of ownership.” In: Jackson, P., Price, C., (Eds.), Privatisation and Regulation: A Review of the Issues. Longman, Essex, pp.149-169.
18Roll, Y., ＆ Hayuth, Y., 1993. “Port performance comparison applying data envelopment analysis（DEA）.” Maritime Policy and Management 20（2）, 153-161.
19Rousseau, J.J., Semple, J.H., 1995. “Radii of classification preservation in data envelopment analysis: a case study of “program follow-through“. “Journal of the Operational Research Society 46, 943-957.
20Sarkis, J., 2000. “An analysis of operational efficiency of major airports in the United States.” Journal of Operations Management 18, 335-351.
21Talley, W., 1994. Performance indicators and port performance evaluation. Logistic and Transportation Review 30（4）, 339-352.
22Tongzon, J., 1995. “Systematizing international benchmarking for ports.” Maritime Policy and Management 22（2）, 171-177.
23Tongzon, J., 1995. “Determinants of port performance and efficiency.” Transportation Research 29A（3）, 245-252.
24Tongzon, J., 2001. “Efficiency measurement of selected Australian and other international ports using Data Envelopment Analysis.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 35（2）, 113-128.
25Vickers, J., Yarrow, G., 1991. “Economic perspectives on privatization.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 5（2）, 111-132.
26Yarrow, G., 1986. “Privatisation in theory and practice.” Economic Policy, 323-377.
27交通部運輸研究所及財團法人中華顧問工程司，1999，亞太地區國際港埠競爭力分析與趨勢研判。
28黃旭男，1993，資料包絡分析法使用程序之研究及其在非營利組織效率評估上之應用，交通大學管理科學研究所博士論文。
29郭建男，2002，應用資料包絡分析法評估亞太地區港埠貨櫃作業效率之研究，交通大學交通運輸研究所碩士論文。
30藍武王、李怡容、高傳凱，1997，”基隆港貨櫃基地生產效率之資料包絡分析”，運輸學刊，第十卷，第二期，頁1-34。
31蔡文化，1994，台灣地區國際港埠作業效率比較評估：資料包絡分析法之應用，中山大學企管研究所碩士論文。
32張佩芬，2003，高港擴建 有助轉運貨櫃成長，摘自工商時報，http://www.ecivil.com.tw/news/display.asp?no=2708。