全球化促成社會、經濟結構調整與國家權力下放，城市於是崛起成為國家競爭力的支撐力量。近年來台灣亦致力於地方自治的落實，縣市政府為了求取更好的發展而進行競爭，以增進縣市競爭力。然而至今有關城市競爭力之研究大多偏重於確立城市競爭力指標，並無研究探討各城市競爭力指標之相對績效評估，故本研究將建立一以理論與數量科技並容之績效評估模型，以期可提供政府及社會大眾更精確提升城市競爭力。
本研究應用由模糊語意偏好關係法(Fuzzy LinPreRa)進行主觀的初步資料處理，再運用客觀的資料包絡分析法(DEA)做各城市競爭力指標之相對績效評估，最後結合ANOVA、T檢定與Tobit迴歸法找出關鍵指標。資料來源則是引用天下雜誌2009年所做的城市競爭力調查做為依據。
本研究發現使用考慮投入/產出之DEA來評比可獲得較傳統分析更客觀之結果，此外本研究亦將23縣市依其效率值分為四群及兩群，再輔以三種效率別之差異性分析，進一步得知對於城市競爭力之績效表現有顯著影響之關鍵性指標，提供總效率值未達1之城市能更有效率達到與標竿城市相同之相對有效率績效的參考意見。

Globalization has led to social, economic restructuring and decentralization of state power, the city was emerging as the pillars of national competitiveness. In recent years, Taiwan is also committed to the implementation of local self-government, county and city governments to strike a better development of competition in order to enhance the competitiveness of cities and counties. But so far the Study of Urban Competitiveness most emphasis on the establishment of city competitiveness indicators, there is no study of various indicators of urban competitiveness relative performance evaluation, this study will establish a number of theory and technology, and content of the performance evaluation model to The Government and the community can provide a more accurate way to raise competitiveness.
In this study, the Fuzzy Linguistic Preference Relations Act (Fuzzy LinPreRa) subjective preliminary data processing, re-use of objective Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) doing the urban competitiveness indicators of relative performance evaluation, last, ANOVA, T tests and the Tobit regression to identify key indicators. Source is the reference made by Commonwealth Magazine in 2009 as the basis for urban competitiveness survey.
The study found that use to consider the input / output of the DEA to obtain appraisal more objective than the traditional analysis of the results, in addition to 23 counties and cities in this study will be divided into four groups according to their value and efficiency of the two groups, supplemented by another of the three types of efficiency difference analysis, and further that the competitiveness of the city have a significant effect on the performance of the key indicators, provide an overall efficiency value of less than one of the city can achieve more efficient and means that a city the same relative efficiency performance of reference.

中文摘要 ------------------------------------------------------ i
英文摘要 ------------------------------------------------------ ii
致謝 ------------------------------------------------------ iii
目錄 ------------------------------------------------------- iv

表目錄 ------------------------------------------------------- v
圖目錄 ------------------------------------------------------- vi
第一章 緒論--------------------------------------------------- 1
第一節 研究背景--------------------------------------------- 1
第二節 研究動機---------------------------------------------- 3
第三節 研究目的---------------------------------------------- 4
第四節 研究範圍與對象---------------------------------------- 5
第五節 研究流程---------------------------------------------- 6
第二章 文獻探討------------------------------------------------ 8
第一節 　城市競爭力之概述--------------------------------------- 8
第二節 　城市競爭力指標----------------------------------------- 18
第三節 　層級程序分析法與模糊語意偏好關係法----------------------- 30
第四節 　資料包絡分析法----------------------------------------- 35
第五節 　托畢迴歸分析(Tobit Regression)------------------------- 43
第三章 研究方法------------------------------------------------ 44
第一節 研究架構------------------------------------------------ 44
第二節 問卷設計------------------------------------------------ 46
第三節 模糊集合理論--------------------------------------------- 48
第四節 模糊偏好關係法------------------------------------------ 55
第五節 一致性模糊語意偏好關係法---------------------------------- 60
第六節 模糊語意偏好關係法權重計算之步驟--------------------------- 62
第七節 資料包絡分析法基本模式------------------------------------ 64
第八節 城市競爭力指標分類--------------------------------------- 72
第四章 實證分析------------------------------------------------ 73
第一節 相關變數分析-------------------------------------------- 73
第二節 模糊語意偏好關係分析(Fuzzy LinPreRa)--------------------- 74
第三節 資料包絡分析法之實證研究---------------------------------- 74
第五章 結論--------------------------------------------------- 83
第一節 結論與建議---------------------------------------------- 83
第二節 研究貢獻----------------------------------------------- 87
第三節 研究限制------------------------------------------------ 87
第四節 未來研究建議-------------------------------------------- 87

中文部份：
[1]天下雜誌 (2009)。2009年縣市競爭力調查。天下雜誌，台北市。
[2]王天津、陳盈秀(2005)。模糊偏好關係與AHP在實施先進製造技術(AMT)預測上之比較研究。中華管理學報，3，頁61-72。
[3]王天津、梁佳玲、李裕勇（2007）。消費者對行動加值服務之偏好分析。八十三週年校慶基礎學術研討會，頁88-93。
[4]台灣經濟研究院 (2002)。地方競爭力評比研究。行政院經濟建設委員會，台北市。
[5]江啟臣、黃富娟（2006）。全球化下城市競爭力指標之探討。研考雙月刊，頁27-41。
[6]吳彥輝(1999)。運用模糊層級分析法與管理才能評鑑模式之研究。國
立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，高雄市。
[7]江勁毅、曾國雄 (2000)。新的DEA分析效率衡量方式：以模糊多目標規劃建立之效率達程度，管理學報，第十七卷第二期，頁369-388。
[8]洪于佩（2003）。我國縣市地方競爭力評比之研究。國立政治大學地政研究所碩士論文，台北市。
[9]韋瑞、鄧弼文、謝邦昌(2002)。台灣地區地方競爭力評估指標建構之初探。財團法人國家政策研究基金會。
[10]倪鵬飛(2005~2006)。全球城市競爭力報告。社會科學文獻出版社，北京。
[11]高強、黃旭男、Toshiyuki Sueyoshi (2003)。管理績效評估－資料包絡分析法，華泰文化事業股份有限公司，初版，台北市。
[12]袁建中、王建彬、邱華凱、曾國雄(2004)。「利用模糊集群分析建
構台灣機械產業永續發展之最佳策略組合」，管理研究學報。
[13]陳榮方、梁樑、趙定濤，(2006)。以資料包絡分析法探討中國大陸
大學之經營效率。高雄應用科技大學學報，第三十五期，頁239-252。
[14]陳冠位（2002）。城市競爭優勢評量系統之研究。國立成功大學都市計劃研究所博士論文，台南市。
[15]張喬峰（2004）。都市競爭力指標之建構-以台北市及上海市為例。逢甲大學建築及都市計畫研究所碩士論文，未出版，台中市。
[16]黃曣寬（2005）。東亞都市競爭力之比較研究。國立台北大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文，台北縣。
[17]楊岳霖（2007）。我國3C通路商經營效率之研究─以資料包絡法分析。國立雲林科技大學碩士論文，雲林縣。
[18]楊武祥（2006），建構台灣縣市經濟競爭力評比指標，國立台灣大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
[19]鄧弼文(2001)。台灣地區競爭力評估指標建構之研究，私立輔仁大學應用統計研究所碩士論文。
[20]薄喬萍 (2007)。績效評估之資料包絡法。五南圖書出版股份有限公
司，初版二刷，台北市。
[21]劉順仁、趙蒼頡、徐瑩杰、林怡芬、王俊杰（2006）。建立台灣地
區縣市競爭力指標之理論模式研究。行政院國家科學委員會。
[22]蘇新仁（2005）。以決策樹建構資料包絡法之績效評估模式。國立雲林科技大學碩士論文，雲林縣。

外文部份：
[1]Appa, Gautam H. and Paul Williams. (2006). A new framework for the solution of DEA models. European Journal of Operational Research, 172, 604-615.
[2]Asmild, Mette, Paradi, Joseph C., Reese, David N. and Tam, Fai. (2007). Measuring overall efficiency and effectiveness using DEA. European Journal of Operational Research, 178, 305-321.
[3]Andersen, P. and Petersen, N.C. (1993). A procedure for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis. Management Science 39 (10), 1261-1264.
[4]Banker R.D., Charnes A. and Cooper W.W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis, Management Science, 30, 1078-1092.
[5]Begg, I. (1988). Cities and Competitiveness, Urban Studies, 36(5-6), 791-793.
[6]Belton, V. and Gear, A. E. (1985). The Legitimacy of Rank Reversal—A
Comment, Omega, Vol.13 (3), 227-230.
[7]Buckley, J.J. (1985). Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems,17, 233-247.
[8]Camanho, A.S. and Dyson, R.G. (2005).Cost efficiency measurement with price uncertainty: A DEA application to bank aranch assessments. European Journal of Operational Research, 161, 432-446.
[9]Chang, D.Y. (1996). Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 95, 649-655.
[10]Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W. and Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429-444.
[11]Chiou, Yu-Chiun and Chen Yen-Heng. (2006). Route-based performance evaluation of Taiwanese domestic airlines using data envelopment analysis. Transportation Research Part E, 42, 116-127.
[12]Chen, S.J. and Hwang, C.L. (1992). Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making-Method and Application, Springer-Verlag, New York.
[13]Dennis A. Rondinelli, James H. Johnson and John D. Kasarda. (1998).The Changing Forces of Urban Economic Development : Globalization and City Competitiveness in the 21 Century, A Journal of Policy Development and Research,3(3).
[14]Deas, I. and Giordano, B. (2001). Conceptualising and Measuring Urban Competitivess in Major English Cities: An Exploratory Approach, Environment and Planning, Vol.33, 1411-1429.
[15]Dubois, D. and Prade, H. (1978). Operations on fuzzy numbers. International Joural of System Science, 9(1), 613-626.
[16]Dubois, D. and Prade, H. (1980) Fuzzy sets and systems: Theory and applications. New York, Academic.
[17]Donthu, Naveen, Hershberger, Edmund K., Osmonbekov and Talai. (2005). Benchmarking marketing productivity using data envelopment analysis. Joural of Business Research, 58, 1474-1782.
[18]Doyle, J. and R. Green .(1994). Efficiency and cross-efficiency in DEA: derivations, meanings and uses. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 45, 567-578.
[19]Farrell, M. J. (1957). The measurement of productive efficiency, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 120, 253-281.
[20]Herrera-Viedma, E., Herrera, F., Chiclana, F. and Luque, M. (2004). Some Issues on Consistency of Fuzzy Preference Relations. European Journal of Operational Research, 154(1), 98-109.
[21]Jahanshahloo, G.R., Pourkarimi, L. and Zarepisheh, M. (2006). Modified MAJ model for ranking decision making units in envelopment analysis. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 174, 1054-1059.
[22]Jeffrey, D. and Hubbard, N. J. (1994). A Model of Hotel Occupancy Performance for Monitoring and Marketing in The Hotel Industry, International Journal Hospitality Management, Vol.13, No.1, 57-71.
[23]Kahraman, D., Ruan I. and Dog˘an. (2003). Fuzzy group decision-making for facility location selection, Information Sciences, 157, 135-153.
[24]Kaufmann, A. and Gupta, M. M. (1991). Introduction to fuzzy arithmetic：Theory and application., Van Nostrand Reinhold, N.Y.
[25]Kittelson, S. and F. Forsund. (1992). Efficiency Analysis of Norwegian District Courts, Journal of Productivity Analysis, 3, 277-306.
[26]Kresl, P. K., and Singh, B. (1999). Competitiveness and the Urban Economy:
Twenty-four Large US Metropolitan Areas, Urban Studies, 36(5-6), 791-793.
[27]Krugman P. (1996). Making Sense of the Competitiveness Debate.Oxford Review Of Economic Policy 12, 17-25.
[28]Laarhoven, V., P.J.M. and Pedrycz, W. (1983). A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 11, 229-241.
[29]Lever,W. F. (1999). Competitive Cities in Europe. Urban Studies, 36, 1029-1044.

[30]Li, X. B. and Reeves, G. R. (1999). A multiple criteria approach to data envelopment analysis, European Journal of Operational Research, 115, 507-517.
[31]Linna, Miika, Hakkinen and Unto, Magnussen, Jon. (2006).Comparing hospital cost efficiency between Norway and Finland, Health policy, 77, 268-278.
[32]Mikhailov, L. (2003). Deriving priorities from fuzzy pairwise comparison judgments. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 134, 365-385.
[33]Millet, I. and P. T. Harker. (1990). Globally Effective Questioning In the Analytic Hierarchy Process, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol.48, 88-97.
[34]Pareto, V.(1927). Manuel Economic Politique, 2nd ed., Girard, Paris.
[35]Porter, M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations, New York. Free Press.
[36]Porter, M.E. (1996). Competitive advantage agglomeration economies and regional policy, International Regional Science Review, 19, 85-90.
[37]Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
[38]Stefan Staevski. (2002). Alternative Methods to Examine Hospital Efficiency – Data Envelopment Analysis and Stochastic Frontier Analysis.
[39]Sueyoshi, T. (1999). DEA-discriminant analysis in the view of goal programming. European Journal of Operational Research, 115, 564-582.
[40]Shephard, R. W. (1970). Theory of cost and production functions. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
[41]
Teng, J. Y. and Tzeng, G. H. (1993).Transportation investment project selection with fuzzy multi-objective. Transportation Planning and Technology, 17, 91-112.
[42]Tobit, J. (1958). Estimation of relation of relationships for limited dependent variables, Econometrica, 26, 24-36.
[43]Wang, T.C. and Chen, Y.H. (2005). A new method on decision-making using fuzzy linguistic assessment variables and fuzzy preference relations. in: The Proceedings of the 9th World Multi-Conference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, Orlando, 360-363.
[44]Wang, T.C. and Chang, T.H. (2007). Forecasting the probability of successful knowledge management by consistent fuzzy preference relations, Expert Systems with Applications 32 (3), 801-813.

[45]Wang, T.C. and Chen, Y.H. (2008). Applying fuzzy linguistic preference relations to the improvement of consistency of fuzzy AHP. Information Sciences, 178, 3755-3765.
[46]Wong, C. (2002). Developing Indicators to Inform Local Economic Development in England, Urban Studies , 39(10), 1833-1863.
[47]Xu, R. (2000). Fuzzy least-squares priority method in the analytic hierarchy process. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 11, 2359-404.
[48]Zadeh, L.A. (1965).Information and control, Fuzzy Sets, 8, 338-353.
[49]Zadeh, L.A. (1975). The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning I, II, III, Information Sciences, 8, 199-251, 301-357; 9, 43-80.
網頁部份：
[1]天下雜誌網站首頁
www. cw.com.tw/book/
[2]瑞士桑洛國際管理學院網站(IMD)之全球競爭力研究中心
www.imd.ch/research/centers/wcc/index.cfm
[3]世界經濟論壇網站首頁(WEF)
www.weforum.org/en/index.htm
[4]英國產業貿易部網站首頁
www.dti.gov.ph/splash.html
[5]溫哥華經濟發展委員會網站
www.boardoftrade.com