跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.238.135.174) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/08/05 05:09
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:蕭仲宏
研究生(外文):Chung-Hung Hsiao
論文名稱:運用資料包絡分析法探討電力事業之經營效率-以台灣地區主要民營火力發電廠之比較為例
論文名稱(外文):Applying Data Envelopment Analysis to Evaluate Efficiency for the Power Companies -A Case Study of the Comparison Among the Major thermal Independent Power Producers in Taiwan
指導教授:張淑昭張淑昭引用關係
指導教授(外文):Su-Chau Chang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立成功大學
系所名稱:企業管理學系碩博士班
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:企業管理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2008
畢業學年度:96
語文別:中文
論文頁數:78
中文關鍵詞:資料包絡分析法經營效率組織績效
外文關鍵詞:operation efficiencyorganization performancedata envelopment analysis
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:4
  • 點閱點閱:156
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:2
近年來國際油價高漲,而對於電力事業而言,燃料費用占營業成本高達80%,因此石油價格上漲對於電力事業產生巨大的衝擊。如何提高營運效率,運用有限資源創造更大的產出,將成為日益重要的課題。此外,在減碳議題之下,新設火力電廠將面臨嚴格的環評。在新設電廠困難的環境下,提高現有電廠的營運效率,將成為增加電力供應的主要對策。
過去對台灣電力事業之經營績效研究,皆侷限於台電內部各營運單位之分析,而缺乏與電力業者間之比較;或將比較單位定義為發電機組,未融入足夠的企業營運及財務面的評估。有鑑於此,本研究搜集了台灣主要民營電廠(IPP)的資料,以個別公司為決策單位,採用資料包絡分析法來衡量民營電廠的經營效率,其中選用的投入項目有「裝置容量」、「運轉費用」、「燃料費用」、「薪資費用」;產出項目為「發電量」。希望能在公司格局之下,具體客觀的提供民營電廠在資源使用上的建議。
In recent years, the price of oil has increased dramatically. This has impacted electronic providers seriously since the cost of fuel amounts 80% of their total operation costs. Therefore, the task to increase the operation efficiency and produce the most power with limited resources has become more and more important. On the other hand, the issue of global environment has made it harder to build new power facilities nowadays. Therefore, to improve the present operation efficiency has become the main means to increase the power supply.
Many past researches were focused on internal analysis among Taiwan Power Company’s departments, but few efforts about the comparison among power providers have been made. And many other researches only focused on engineering area. To provide a wilder view when evaluating power providers’ operation efficiency, and to provide concrete operation recommendations, this research applied Data Envelopment Analysis to compare the efficiency among six major IPPs in Taiwan. In this research, “Installed nameplate capacity”, “Operation cost”, “Fuel cost”, and “Salary cost” are chosen as input items; while “Energy generation” is chosen as the output item.
摘要........................................................... I
ABSTRACT....................................................... II
致謝詞......................................................... III
目錄........................................................... IV
圖目錄......................................................... VI
表目錄......................................................... VIII
第一章 緒論................................................... 1
第一節 研究背景與動機..................................... 1
第二節 研究目的........................................... 3
第三節 研究對象與範圍..................................... 4
第四節 研究流程........................................... 7
第二章 文獻探討............................................... 8
第一節 台灣地區電力供需概況............................... 8
第二節 電業自由化與民營化.................................16
第三節 組織績效...........................................26
第四節 資料包絡分析法.....................................30
第三章 研究方法...............................................33
第一節 研究設計...........................................33
第二節 操作型定義.........................................34

第四節 研究方法...........................................37
第四章 實證結果與分析.........................................45
第一節 投入產出項目分析...................................45
第二節 經營效率分析.......................................49
第三節 Malmquist Index分析................................57
第四節 差額變數分析.......................................65
第五章 結論與建議.............................................69
第一節 結論...............................................69
第二節 建議...............................................72
第三節 研究限制...........................................73
第四節 未來研究建議.......................................74
參考文獻.......................................................75
一、中文部分

1.古如齡(2003),「台電經營績效綜合指標之研究」,國立交通大學經營管理研究所碩士論文

2.末吉俊幸(2006),「經營效率分析法:DEA = Data envelopment analysis」,台北市:鼎茂圖書,初版

3.台灣電力公司網站:http://www.taipower.com.tw

4.行政院研究發展考核委員會(2005),「如何加強公營企業的公司治理」,台北市;行政院研考會,初版

5.孫明德(2008),「亞太地區能源供需及區域內各國未來布局」,台灣經濟研究月刊,台灣經濟研究院,第31卷第2期

6.經濟部能源局網站:http://www.moeaec.gov.tw

7.經濟部能源局編(2007),「我國長期負載預測與電源開發規劃摘要報告」,經濟部能源局

8.經濟部能源局編(2001),「電業自由化方案」,經濟部能源局

9.經濟部能源局編(2005),「能源政策白皮書」,經濟部能源局

10.詹中原(1994),「民營化政策-公共行政理論與實務分析」,台北市:五南圖書

11.蔡見林(1992),「臺電發電績效之因果鏈條分析」,國立交通大學管理科學研究所碩士論文

12.駱豐裕(2003),「DEA方法應用在評估台電公司服務所經營效率之研究」,國立清華大學工業工程與工程管理學系博士論文


二、英文部分

1.Baer, M., and M.Frese (2003). Innovation is not enough: Climates for initiative and psychological safety, process innovations, and firm performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(1), 45-68.

2.Banker, R.D., A. Charnes, and W.W. Cooper (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale in efficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30, 1078-1092.

3.Barnekov, Timothy and Jeffrey Raffel (1990). Public management of privatization. Public Productivity and Management Review, 14(Winter), 135-152.

4.Caves, D., Christensen, L. and Diewert, W. E. (1982). The economic theory index numbers and the measurement of input, output and productivity. Econometrica, 73-86.

5.Charnes, A., W.W. Cooper and E. Rhodes (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429-444.

6.Charnes, A., W.W. Cooper, and R.M. Thrall (1986). Classifying and characterizing efficiencies and inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Operations Research Letters, 5(3), 105-110.

7.Charnes, A., and Neralic, L. (1989). Sentivity analysis in data envelopment analysis. Glasnik Mathematicki, 24(44), 211-226.

8.Charnes, A., and Neralic, L. (1989). Sentivity analysis in data envelopment analysis. Glasnik Mathematicki, 24(44), 449-463.

9.Charnes, A., W.W. Cooper, and S. Li (1989). Using data envelopment analysis to evaluate efficiency in the economic performance of Chinese cities. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 23(6), 325-344.

10.Charnes, A., W.W. Cooper, and R.M. Thrall (1991). A structure for classifying and characterizing efficiency in data envelopment analysis. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 2(3), 197-237.

11.C.W. Richter, Jr. and G.B. Sheble (1998). Genetic algorithm evolution of utility bidding strategies for the competitive marketplace. IEEE Trans. on Power Systems. 13(1), 256-261.

12.Damanpour, F., and W. M. Evan (1984). Organizational innovation and performance:The problem of organizational Lag. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 392-409.

13.Delaney, J. T., and M. A. Huselid. (1996). The impact of human resource management practices on perceptions of organizational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 949-969.

14.Dess, G. G., and Jr. R. B.Robinson. (1984). Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measure: The case of the privately-held firm and conglomerate business unit. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 265-273.

15.Drucker, R.F. (1954). The practice of management, New York: Harper.

16.Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., Norris, M. and Zhang, Z. (1994). Productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change in industrialized countries. American Economic Review, 84(1), 66-83.

17.Farrell, M. J., (1957). The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, A(120), 253-281.

18.Gopalakrishnan, S. (2000). Unraveling the links between dimensions of innovation and organizational performance. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 11(1),137-153.

19.International Energy Agency(2006), Oil market report.

20.International Energy Agency(2006), Key world energy statistics.

21.Kolderie, Ted (1986). Two different concepts of privatization. Public Administration Review, 43(4), 285-292.

22.Lewin, A. Y. and Minton, J. W.(1990). Determining organizational effectiveness: Another look, and an agenda for research. Management Science, 32(5), 514-538.

23.Mika Goto and Miki Tsutsui (1998). Comparison of productive and cost efficiencies among Japanese and US electric utilities. Management Science, 26(2), 177-194.

24.Ruekert, R.W., Walker, O.C. and Roering, K.J.(1985). The organization of marketing activities: A contingency theory of structure and performance. Journal of Marketing, 49, 13-25.

25.Robbins, S.P. (1990). Organization theory: Structure, Design, and applications, 3rd ed. Prentice-Hall international Inc.

26.Savas, Emanuel S. (1992). Privatization ”In Mary Hawkesworth and Maurie Kogan, eds, Encyclopedia of Government and Politics, 1(2), New York:Routledge.

27.Subramanian, A., and S. Nilakanta (1996). Organizational determinants of innovation, types of innovations, and measures of organizational performance. Omega, 24(6), 631-647.

28.Venkatraman, N., and V. Ramanujam (1986). Measurement of business performance in Strategy research: a comparison of approaches. Academy of Management Review, 11, 801-814.

29.Weimer and Vining (1992). Welfare economics as the foundation for public policy analysis: Incomplete and flawed but nevertheless desirable. Journal of Socio-Economics, 21(1), 25-38.
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關期刊