跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(18.97.14.86) 您好!臺灣時間:2025/02/08 02:42
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

: 
twitterline
研究生:施佳儀
研究生(外文):Shih, Chia-Yi
論文名稱:機場降落費雷姆西定價法研究
論文名稱(外文):Airport Ramsey Pricing
指導教授:顏進儒顏進儒引用關係
指導教授(外文):Yen, Jin-Ru
口試委員:邱裕鈞張玉君
口試委員(外文):Chiou, Yu-chiunChang, Yu-Chun
口試日期:2015-07-27
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣海洋大學
系所名稱:航運管理學系
學門:運輸服務學門
學類:運輸管理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2016
畢業學年度:104
語文別:英文
論文頁數:53
中文關鍵詞:降落費雷姆西定價法機場定價排序性普羅比模式
外文關鍵詞:Landing FeeRamsey PricingAirport PricingOrdered Probit Model
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:247
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:13
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
機場營運總收入分為航空相關和非航空相關兩部分。其中,降落費是機場的主要航空收入來源。藉由制定合適的降落費收費標準,以提高機場營運管理收入是一個非常重要的課題。目前,世界多數機場之降落費定價皆採用最大起飛重量或最大降落重量而臺灣的機場降落費亦根據飛機重量計價。然而,這些以飛機重量計價的定價方法較少理論之依據。

學理上,許多學者已發展出不同的定價方法,如平均成本定價法,邊際成本定價法和雷姆西定價法等。其中,雷姆西定價法適用於計算離峰營運時段及非擁擠機場之降落費,而擁擠之機場則適用邊際成本定價法。由於臺灣桃園國際機場近年在尖峰營運時段易產生機場擁擠。因此,機場管理者目前致力於,在尖/離峰營運時段採用不同之降落收費機制,以改善整體營運效率。本研究目的為,運用雷姆西定價模型估計臺灣桃園國際機場與台北松山機場之離峰時段降落費。在雷姆西定價法中,航空公司對於機型降落至機場之需求彈性較難直接估計。因此,透過經濟學產出效果理論,將此變數以不同機型旅客對於班機服務需求的價格彈性來取代。此票價彈性之估計採用離散選擇模式中的排序性普羅比模型進行校估,分析航空旅客之選擇行為,並建立不同機型之航空旅客需求函數。

本研究實證結果顯示,隨著機型越大及飛航距離越遠,機場以雷姆西定價法收取之降落費將越高。此外,兩座機場降落費之目前費率皆比雷姆西定價法之結果低。

The total revenue of airport authority is divided into aeronautical and non-aeronautical. The landing fee is the main source of aeronautical revenue. Therefore, it is essential to formulate a suitable charging mechanism for landing fees. Traditionally, pricing methods for airport landing fees are based on the maximum takeoff weight or maximum landing weight, which has little theoretical rationale. Airports landing fees charged in Taiwan are also based on the aircraft weight.

There are various pricing methods in academic such as average-cost pricing, marginal-cost pricing and Ramsey pricing. Ramsey pricing is suitable for uncongested airports or any airports in its off-peak periods, while marginal-cost pricing is appropriate for congested periods. Due to the increase in traffic volume and its hub operation, Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport (TPE) suffers from congestion in peak periods. Thus, TPE is thinking to differentiate its landing fees in different periods. This research aims at developing a charging mechanism that applies the Ramsey pricing model. The pricing mechanism is then validated at TPE and Taipei Songshan Airport (TSA). Although price elasticity is essential to Ramsey pricing, it is difficult to directly calculate this elasticity of airline demand in landing. The ordered probit model is used to find the price elasticity from different passenger groups, and then the estimation results are put in the Ramsey pricing model in order to substitute the price elasticity of airline’s landings.

In empirical research, the results indicate that in most of the case, as the aircraft is larger and the distance is longer, the landing fees are higher. Additionally, calculation results reveal that in every case the current charge at TPE and TSA is less than the landing fees based on the Ramsey pricing mechanism.

謝辭 I
摘要 II
Abstract III
Content IV
Lists of Tables VI
Lists of Figure VII
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1.1 Research motivation 1
1.2 Aims and objectives of the research 1
1.3 Research procedure 2
Chapter 2 Literature Review 4
2.1 Principles of landing charges 4
2.2 Current landing fees in Taiwan 4
2.3 Research related to landing charge 6
Chapter 3 Methodology 9
3.1 Ramsey pricing model 9
3.2 Ordered probit model 14
3.3 Aggregate demand function and elasticity 15
3.4 Survey design 16
Chapter 4 Empirical study 18
4.1 Price elasticity of passenger demand 18
4.1.1 Survey implementation 18
4.1.2 Collected data 20
4.1.3 Ordered probit model specification 25
4.1.4 Estimated results of ordered probit models 26
4.1.5 Price elasticity of aggregate passenger air travel demand 36
4.2 Total operating cost of the flight 42
4.3 Marginal cost for airport authority 43
4.4 Parameter k 43
4.5 Estimated results of Ramsey pricing 44
Chapter 5 Conclusion and Suggestion 46
5.1 Conclusion 46
5.2 Suggestion 47
Reference 48
Appendix 50

English

1. Baumol, W. J., and D. F. Bradford (1970), “Optimal departures from marginal cost pricing”, American Economic Review 60, pp. 265-283.
2. Carlin, A. and Park, R. E. (1970), “Marginal cost pricing of airport runway capacity,” The American Economic Review, Vol. 60, No. 3, pp. 310-319
3. Chang, I.-F., and Yen, J.-R. (2014), “Airport average-cost pricing”, Department of Shipping and Transportation Management, National Taiwan Ocean University.
4. Civil Aeronautics Administration (1953), Civil Aviation Act, Taipei, TW: Civil Aeronautics Administration (CAA).
5. Civil Aeronautics Administration (1983), Fee-charging Standards for the Use of State-operated Airports, Navigation Aids and Related Facilities, TW: Civil Aeronautics Administration (CAA).
6. Daganzo C (1979) Multinomial Probit: The Theory and Its Application to Demand Forecasting. New York: Academic Press.
7. Hakimov, R., and Muelle, J. (2014) “Marginal costs estimation and market power of German airports”, Research in Transportation Economics, Vol. 45, pp. 42-48.
8. Hakimov, R., and Muelle, J. (2014) “Charges of uncongested German airports: Do they follow Ramsey pricing scheme?”, Research in Transportation Economics, Vol. 45, pp. 57-65.
9. International Civil Aviation Organization (2012), ICAO’s Policies on Charges for Airports and Air Navigation Services, Montreal, CA: International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).
10. International Civil Aviation Organization (2013), Airport Economics Manual, Montreal, CA: International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).
11. Layard, P. R. G., and A. A. Walters (1978), Microeconomic theory, McGraw-Hill.
12. Mankiw, N. G. (2008), “Principles of economics”, South-Western Cengage Learning, Mason (5th ed).
13. Martín-Cejas, R.R. (1997), “Airport pricing systems in Europe and an application of Ramsey pricing to Spanish airports”, Transportation Research E, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 321-327.
14. Martín-Cejas, R. R. (2010), “Ramsey pricing including CO2 emission cost: An application to Spanish airports,” Journal of Air Transport Management, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 45-47.
15. Ministry of Transportation and Communications, R. O. C. (1995), The Study of Airport Landing Charge.
16. Morrison, S. A. (1979), “Optimal Pricing and Investment Policies for Airport Landing Areas”, Working Paper No. SL-7907. Department of Economics, University of California, Berkeley.
17. Morrison, S. A. (1982), “The structure of landing fees at uncongested airports”, Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 151-159.
18. Morrison, S. A. (1987), “The equity and efficiency of runway pricing,” Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 45-60.
19. Richard D. Mckelvey, and William Zavoina (1975), “A statistical model for the analysis of ordinal level dependent variables”, Journal of Mathematical Sociology, Vol. 4, pp. 103-120.
20. Yen, J-R (1999) Modeling the employee’s telecommuting adoption: a behavioral analysis approach. Journal of the Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering 11(2): 387-397
21. Yen, J.-R. (2000), “Interpreting employee telecommuting adoption: an economics perspective”, Transportation, vol. 27, pp. 149-164.

Chinese

1. 涂保民(1994),「空運中心降落費與擁擠定價之研究」,國立臺灣大學土木工程學研究所碩士論文。
2. 張邱驊(2002),「民航機降落費架構之研究」,國立臺灣大學土木工程學研究所碩士論文。

Website

1. Bureau of Transportation Statistics (2014), “Air Carrier Financial”, http://www.transtats.bts.gov/Oneway.asp?Display_Flag=0&Percent_Flag=0 (2015. 06. 03)
2. Skyscanner (2015), http://www.skyscanner.com.tw/ (2015. 04. 10)


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