臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

近年來，全球港埠產業已經逐漸走向國際化與專業化，台灣為了因應國際之趨勢於2012年3月成立台灣港務公司(Taiwan International Ports Corporation, TIPC)。為了提升港務公司之競爭力，港務公司勢必要推動國際化，但當港務公司要進行國際化與國外直接投資(Foreign Direct Investment, FDI)時，將會面臨到國際化進入模式的選擇，每種進入模式有其優點與缺點，必須考量許多因素才能找出最適合的進入模式，而本研究藉由文獻整理的方式建構出台灣港務公司國際化進入模式考量構面與評估準則，並利用層級分析法(Analytic Hierarchy Process , AHP)來評估適合台灣港務公司的進入模式，且比較不同背景下的受訪者是否對於台灣港務公司進入模式的考量有不同的見解，研究結果發現受訪者對於國際化進入模式的評估準則，優先考量台灣港務公司的國際經驗與競爭優勢，但不同背景的受訪者對於優先評估準則有不同的看法，方案評選方面，受訪者都是建議以各種形式之收購的方式作為國際化進入之模式。

In recent years, global terminal operation gradually has the section of internationalized and specialized. The Taiwan government has incorporated its port authorities and established the Taiwan International Ports Corporation in order to respond to internationalization. Taiwan International Ports Corporation had to promote internationalization for strengthens competitiveness. In the beginning of Taiwan International Ports Corporation will face many problems when conduct foreign direct investment, and the choice of international entry mode is one of the importance issue. Each entry mode has both advantage and disadvantage sides, and there are many factors must be considered in order to identify the most suitable entry mode. This study constructed Taiwan International Ports Corporation’s international entry mode considerations dimensions and assessment criteria by literature review, and applied Analytic Hierarchy Process to evaluate the entry mode suitable for Taiwan Ports Corporation, and compared with the respondents of different backgrounds whether they have different views in consideration of Taiwan International Ports Corporation entry mode. The results showed that international entry mode assessment criteria prioritizes Ports Corporation of Taiwan in international experience and competitive advantage. However, the respondents of different backgrounds have different views for the assessment criteria. Finally, in the alternative, regardless of any respondents of different backgrounds are recommended to acquire or stake in existing companies as enter mode for internationalization.

謝辭 i
摘要 ii
Abstract iii
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景 1
1.2 研究動機 5
1.3 研究目的 6
1.4 研究流程 7
1.5 論文結構 8
第二章 文獻回顧 9
2.1 港埠國際化營運 9
2.1.1 全球碼頭營運商 9
2.1.2 港口營運相關研究 11
2.2 國際化進入模式 13
2.2.1 國際化進入模式之選擇 13
2.2.2 國際化進入模式之相關研究 15
2.3 AHP相關研究 16
第三章 研究設計與方法 18
3.1 研究設計 18
3.1.1 構面與評估準則之建構 18
3.1.2 準則之說明 25
3.1.3 問卷設計 26
3.2 研究方法 28
3.2.1 AHP應用範圍 28
3.2.1 層級分析法的基本假設 28
3.2.2 層級分析法之步驟 29
3.3 問卷發放與回收 34
第四章 資料分析 35
4.1 問卷填答者結構分析 35
4.2 整體受訪者決策權重分析 36
4.2.1 整體受訪者決策考量構面分析 36
4.2.2 整體受訪者決策評估準則分析 37
4.2.3 整體受訪者決策評估方案分析 41
4.3 不同背景業者決策權重之差異比較分析 43
4.3.1 不同背景業者決策評估準則之差異比較分析 43
4.3.2 不同背景業者決策評估方案之差異比較分析 44
第五章 結論與建議 46
5.1 研究結論 46
5.2 研究建議 47
參考文獻 49

中文文獻

1.粘淑惠(1997)，「模糊AHP法應用在交通運輸計畫評估之研究」，高雄工學院管理科學研究所碩士論文。
2.鄧振源、曾國雄(1989a)，層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與應用(下)，中國統計學報，第二十七卷，第七期，頁13767-13870。
3.鄧振源、曾國雄(1989b)，層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與應用(上)，中國統計學報，第二十七卷，第六期，頁13707-13724。

英文文獻

1.Agbola, F. W. (2013), “Does human capital constrain the impact of foreign direct investment and remittances on economic growth in Ghana?, “Applied Economics, Vol.45, No.19, p.2853-2862
2.Brouthers, K. D. and Brouthers, L. E. (2000), “Acquisition or greenfield start-up? Institutional, cultural and transaction cost influence,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol.21, No.1, pp.89-98
3.Bichou, K. and BELL, M.(2007), “Internationalisation and consolidation of the container port industry: assessment of channel structure and relationships,” Maritime Economics and Logistics, Vol.9, pp.35-51
4.Cass (1998), ” World Port Privatization: Finance, Funding and Ownership, ” – A Cargo System Report. IIR Publications: London.
5.Celik, M.(2009), “A hybrid design methodology for structuring an Integrated Environmental Management System (IEMS) for shipping business,” Journal of Environmental Management, Vol.90, No.3, pp.1469-1475
6.Chang, S. J. and Rosenzweig, M. (2001), “The choice of entry mode in sequential foreign direct investment,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol.22, No.8, pp.747-776
7.Chao, S. L. and Lin, Y. J. (2011), “Evaluating advanced quay cranes in container terminals, “Transportation Research. Part E, Logistics &; Transportation Review, Vol.47, No.4, pp.432-445
8.Choi, K. Y. (2000), An examination of factors determining the inland integration of global shipping lines, Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, Cardiff University.
9.Demirbag, M. and Tatoglu, E. and Glaister, K. W. (2008), ”Factors affecting perceptions of the choice between acquisition and greenfield entry: The case of western FDI in an emerging market,” Management International Review, Vol.48, No.1, pp.5-38
10.Drewey (2012), Annual Review of Global Container Terminal Operators, Drewry Shipping Consultants
11.Ekeledo, I. and Sivakumar, K. (2004), ”International market entry mode strategies of manufacturing firms and service firms: A resource-based perspective,” International Marketing Review, Vol.21, No.1, pp.68-101
12.Carpenter , M. A. and Fredrickson, J. W. (2001), ”Top Management Teams, Global Strategic Posture, and the Moderating Role of Uncertainty,” Academy of ManagementJ Journal, Vol.44, No.3, pp.533-545
13.Gomes-Casseres, B. (1989), “Ownership structures of foreign subsidiaries: theory and evidence,” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, Vol.11, No.1, pp.1-26
14.Gorener, A. (2012), ”Comparing AHP and ANP: An Application of Strategic Decisions Making in a Manufacturing Company,” International Journal of Business and Social Science, Vol.3, No.11, pp.194-208
15.Harzing, A. W. K. (2000), ”An empirical analysis and extension of the Bartlett and Ghoshal typology of multinational companies,” Journal of International Business Studies, Vol.31, No.1, pp.101-120
16.Hennart, J. F. (1991), ”The transaction costs theory of joint ventures: an empirical study of Japanese subsidiaries in the United Sates,” Management Science, Vol.37, No.4, pp.483-497
17.Hennart, J. F. and Park, Y. R. (1993), “Greenfield vs. acquisition: the strategy of Japanese investors in the United States,” Management Science, Vol.39, No.9, pp.1054-1070
18.Hsu, W. K. K. (2012), “Ports' service attributes for ship navigation safety,” Safety Science, Vol.50 No.2, pp.244-252
19.Junior, G. A. D. S. and Beresford, A. K. C. and Pettit, J. S. (2003),”Liner Shipping Companies and Terminal Operators: Internationalisation or Globalisation?,” Maritime Economics &; Logistics, Vol.5, No.4, pp.393-412
20.Kosko, B. (1993), Fuzzy Thinking: the New Science of Fuzzy Logic, New York: Hyperion.
21.Kannan, V. and Bose, S. K. and Kannan, N. G. (2011), ”An evaluation of ocean container carrier selection criteria: an Indian shipper's perspective,” Management Research Review, Vol.34, No.7, pp.754-772
22.Kedia, B. and Gaffney, N. and Clampit, J. (2012), ”EMNEs and Knowledge-seeking FDI,” Management International Review, Vol.52, pp.155-173
23.Khamkanya, T. and Heaney, G. and McGreal, G. (2012), “Introduction of AHP Satisfaction Index for workplace environments,” Journal of Corporate Real Estate, Vol.14, No.2, pp.80-93
24.Musso, F. and Francioni, B. (2012), “Foreign Markets Entry Mode Decision for Italian Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises,” International Journal of Business and Management, Vol.7, No.2, pp.3-16
25.Menat, H. and Farid, M. E. (2013), ”A Qualitative Exploration of the Factors Affecting Foreign Direct Investment Inflows in Egypt,” The Business Review, Cambridge, Vol.21, No.1, pp.316-328
26.Nooramion, A. S. and Sayareh, J. and Moghadam, M. K. and Alizmini, H. R. (2012), “TOPSIS and AHP techniques for selecting the most efficient marine container yard gantry crane,” Opsearch, Vol.49, No.2, pp.116-132
27.Nandi, S. and Paul, S. and Phadtare, M. (2011), “An AHP-based construction project selection method,” Decision, Vol.38, No.1, pp.91-118
28.Nazari, A. and Salarirad, M. M. and Bazzazi, A. A. (2011), ” Landfill site selection by decision-making tools based on fuzzy multi-attribute decision-making method,” Environmental Earth Sciences. Vol.65, No.6, pp.1631-1642
29.Notteboom, T. E. (2010), “Concentration and the formation of multi-port gateway regions in the European container port system: an update,” Journal of Transport Geography , Vol.18, No.4, pp.567-583
30.Notteboom, T. E. (2011), “An application of multi-criteria analysis to the location of a container hub port in South Africa,” Maritime Policy &; Management, Vol.38, No.1 pp.51-79
31.Notteboom, T. E. and Winkelmans, W. (2001), ” Structural changes in logistics: how will port authorities face the challenge?,” Maritime Policy &; Management, Vol.28, No.1, p.71-89
32.Pallis, A. A. and Noteeboom, T. E. and Langen, P. W. (2008), “Concession Agreements and Market Entry in the Container Terminal Industry,” Maritime Economics &; Logistics, Vol. 10, No.3, pp.209-228
33.Parola, F. and Musso, E. (2007), “Market structures and competitive strategies: the carrier-stevedore arm-wrestling in northern European ports,” Maritime Policy and Management, Vol.34, No.3, pp.259-278
34.Pawlik, T. and Stemmler, L. and Alfred, A. J. and Helch, M. (2011), “The value of container terminal investment to ocean carrier strategy,” Maritime Economics &; Logistics, Vol. 13, No.3, pp.319-341
35.Qiu, L. D. and Wang, S (2011),” FDI Policy, Greenfield Investment and Cross-border Mergers,” Review of International Economics, Vol. 19, No.5, pp.836-851
36.Rodriguex, A. R. (2002), “Determining factors in entry choice for international expansion The case of the Spanish hotel industry,” Tourism Management, Vol.23, No.6, pp.597-607
37.Rodrigue, J. P. and. Notteboom, T. E. and Pallis, A. A. (2011), “The financialization of the port and terminal industry: revisiting risk and embeddedness,” Maritime Policy &; Management, Vol.38, No.2, pp.191-213
38.Root, F. R. (1994), Entry strategies for international markets, New York Toronto: Lexington Books ;
39.Roth, K. (1995), “Managing International Interdependence: CEO Characteristics in a Resource-Based Framework,” The Academy of Management Journal, Vol.38, No. 1, pp.200-231
40.Saaty, T. L. (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process, New York： McGraw-Hill.
41.Thorby, C. (2001), ” Value-added carriers, ”Containerisation International, pp.52-57
42.UNCATD (2012), “Review of Maritime Transport.”
43.Wilmsmeier, G. and Notteboom, T. E (2009), ” Determinants of liner shippping network configuration: a two-region comparison,” GeoJournal, Vol.76, No.3, pp.213-228
44.Woo, S. H. and Pettit, S. and Beresford, A. K. C (2011), “Port evolution and performance in changing logistics environments,” Maritime Economics &; Logistics, Vol. 13, No.3, pp.250-277


網路部分
1.MarineLink.com，網址
http://www.marinelink.com/news/article/maersk-sealand-to-move-hub-to-malaysia/319788.aspx