臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本文分析航空器製造產業的兩大巨擘:波音公司與空中巴士公司的競爭特性.首先,我們回顧兩家公司的發展歷程,其次藉由分析其產品與產業特性,進一步了解從過去到現在這個產業本身所衍生的相關問題.再者,美歐貿易補貼所引發的爭議與超廣體客機的研發等相關問題也紛紛浮上檯面成為焦點.本文發現美歐貿易爭端的導火線來自於超廣體客機的研發,而雙方對於補助金額與目的和方法都有不同的解讀.在1970年代空中巴士集團的出現,終結了波音在客機市場的寡占狀態之後,整個航空市場也因為景氣的成長速度加快而成長.在市占率節節下滑的情況下,波音選擇併購另一個負債累累卻又步步進逼的競爭對手-麥道,為其中小型客機市場進行鋪路與整合,而空中巴士選擇以機隊簡單化的策略來面對波音當時尚稱完整的產品線的夾擊.最後則是波音與空中巴士對於超廣體客機研發與商轉的爭議,在空中巴士集團宣布要發展A380計畫時造成市場震撼,期間雖然發生延誤交機等技術問題,但仍舊是市場所注目的焦點.反觀波音匆忙的推出787的研發計畫,並沒有如當初預期的引起市場的迴響.

This paper examines international competition in the commercial aircraft industry. The positional analysis for Airbus must focus on its status as the challenger to the dominant on the consortium’s peculiar organizational structure, and on the opportunities and constraints offered by multiple national governments plus the European Union. One way of looking at Airbus’s experience is as a continual series of disruptions aimed at creating openings for Airbus to enter markets dominated by well-established competitors, in particular, Boeing. For those who work on the “new” trade theory that emphasizes increasing returns, dynamics, and imperfect competition, these eco- nomic characteristics would in and of themselves make aircraft a nat- ural target for study. An additional reason for interest in the aircraft industry, however, is that the industry is the center of a policy conflict between the United States and Europe. These strategic moves have involved both market and nonmarket elements. We then use this structure to evaluate two trade disputes between the United States and European Union. And find that the A-380 could took the market share away in the long range wide-body market segment (depending upon the discounts offered on the A-380), and Boeing trying to catch up when B-787 released to the world.

1 緒論………………………………………………………..6
2 航空產業的發展歷程……………………………………..9
2.1 航空器發展階段……………………………………...9
2.2 航空器產業兩大巨擘的背景與發展歷史……..........13
2.2.1波音公司簡介……………………………….. ...13
2.2.2 空中巴士集團公司簡介…………………… …16
3 航空製造業的產業特性…………………………………..18
3.1 市占率分析..………………………………………….18
3.2 航空製造業的產業分工模式………………………...22
3.3 航空製造業所衍生的規模經濟……………………...26
3.4 波音與空中巴士的飛航安全分析…………………...28
3.5波音與空中巴士的績效分析…………………………33
3.6雙方的市場競爭策略分析……………………………36
4 政府對於航空製造業的補貼……………………………..41
4.1 1992 EU-US 民用航空器協議對於航空業貿易
補貼限制..…………………………………………...42
4.2 1992年美歐簽署的民用航空器協議引起的貿易
爭端………………………………………………...44
4.3 補貼的福利效果……………………………………47
4.4 補貼對於廣體客機與超廣體客機的製造所引發的爭議…………………………………………………….49
5 結論………………………………………………………..53
參考文獻

王鼎鈞 (2002)，航空巨人波音家族，麥田出版社。
王天賜 (2005)，原油價格與台灣總體經濟，國立東華大學國際經濟研究所研究論文。
林江亮 (2009)，不同屬性對機場經營績效影響之實證研究，中原大學會計系研究論文。
吳本韓、蘇若望 (2004)，「飛行和紙飛機的教學活動」，亞太科學教育論壇，第 5 期，第 1 冊，頁 80-90。
陳麗娟 (2006) ，「美國航空運輸產業競爭規範之研究」，公平交易季刊，第 14 卷，第 4 期，頁 71-99。
耿驊 (2009)，航空器飛行原理－民航運輸機巡航性能分析，國立成功大學航空太空學系研究論文。
廖姵青 (2006)，航空貨運公司航線市場分析與頻次規劃研究，國立交通大學運輸科技與管理學系碩士論文。
蔣小偉 (2004) ，「百年來人類飛行動力的演進」，科學發展，第 378 期，頁42-51。
Baldwin, R. and P. Krugman (1988), “Industrial Policy and International Competition in Wide-bodied Jet Aircraft,” in Baldwin, R.E. (Ed.) , Trade Policy Issues and Empirical Analysis, University of Chicago Press for the NBER, Chicago.
Benkard, C. L. (2000), “Learning and Forgetting: the Dynamics of Aircraft Production,” American Economic Review, 90, 1034-1054.
Benkard, C. L. (2004), “A Dynamic Analysis of the Market for Wide-Bodied Commercial Aircraft,” Review of Economic Studies, 71, 581–611.
Brander, J. A. and B. J. Spencer (1985), “Export Subsidies and International Market Share Rivalry,” Journal of international Economics, 18, 83-100.
Carbaugh, R. J. and J. Olienyk (2004), “Boeing-Airbus Subsidy Dispute: A Sequel,” Global Economy Journal, 4, 2, 6, 1-11.
Collie, D. (1991), “Export Subsidies and Countervailing Tariffs,” Journal of International Economics, 31, 3-4, 309-324.
Eaton, J. and G. M. Grossman (1985), “Tariffs as Insurance: Optimal Commercial Policy When Domestic Markets Are Incomplete,” The Canadian Journal of Economics, 18, 2, 258-272.
Edwards, E. (1988) ”Introductory Overview.” San Diego: Academic Press, 3-25.
Esty, B. and P. Ghemawat, (2002), “Airbus vs. Boeing in Super Jumbos: A Case of Failed Preemption,” Harvard Business School Strategy Working Paper Series.
Fox, E. M. (1998), “Antitrust Regulation Across National Borders: The United States of Boeing versus the European Union of Airbus?” The Brookings Review, 16, 1, 30-45.
Harrigan, F. (2006), “Integrating Theories of Boundary Choice: A Case from the Global Aircraft Industry,” Paper prepared for the International Conference on Coordination and Cooperation across Organizational Boundaries, Università Cattolica Sacro Cuore, Milan.
Hartley, R. F. (2009) , “Marketing Mistakes and Success” Wiley, 7, 127-155.
Irwin, D. A and, N. Pavcnik (2004), “Airbus versus Boeing Revisited: International Competition in the Aircraft Market,” Journal of International Economics, 64, 223-245.
Karren, J. and R. Riezman (1998), “Do Big Countries Win Tariff Wars?”, International Economic Review, 29, 1, 81-100.
Kaivanto, K. (1997), “UK Launch Aid and Experience,” Working paper.
Kaivanto, K. (2006), “Premise and Practice of UK Launch Aid,” The Journal of World Trade, 40, 3.
Kaivanto, K. and P. Stoneman (2007), “Risk Shifting, Technology Policy and Sales Contingent Claims: When is Launch Aid to the Aerospace Industry a Subsidy?” Working Paper.
Kenneth, D. Boyer (2005), Principles of Transportation Economics, Addison Wesley.
Korrapati, R. B (2007), “The International Journal of Applied Management and Technology,” International Journal, 5, 1-276.
Logan, T. J. (1999), “Trend Toward Wider Sharing of Safety Data is Resisted by Industry Concerns”, ICAO Journal, 54, 1, 7-9.
Oster, C. V. and C.K. Zone (1989) , Airline Deregulation：Is It Still Safe to Fly?, Oxford University Press.
Pritchard, D. and A. Macpherson (2005), “Boeing’s Diffusion of Commercial Aircraft Design and Manufacturing Technology to Japan: Surrendering the US Aircraft Industry for Foreign Financial Support,” Canada-United States Trade Center Department of Geography State University of New York.
Roitner, A. and F, Pützl (2005), “Market Structure in the Commercial Aircraft Industry: Boeing vs. Airbus,” Industrial Organization review, Center for Business Studies Department of Economics, University of Vienna.
Sandholtz, W. and W. Love (2001), “Dogfight over Asia: Airbus vs. Boeing.” Business, 3, 2, 135-157.
Seabright, P. and G. M, Grossman (1991), “Centre for Economic Policy Research Center for Economic Studies Maison des Sciences de l'Homme,” Economic Policy, 6,13, 342-392.
Shaffer, G. C. (2006), “What’s New in EU Trade Dispute Settlement? Judicialisation, Public-Private Networks and the WTO,” Journal of European Public Policy, 13, 6, 67-105.
Sutton, J. (1996), “Technology and Market Structure,” European Economic Review, 40, 511-530.
Tong, C. H. and L. I. Tong (2001), “Boeing vs. Airbus: Competing for the Future,” Global Competitiveness, 9, 1, 206-215.
Thomas, G. and F. Holzäpfel and D. Darracq (2002), “Commercial Aircraft Wake Vortices,” Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 38, 3, 181-208.
USTR (2006), “European Communities and Certain Member States- Measures Affecting Trade in Civil Aircraft, Executive Summary of the First Submission of the United States of America” WTO Publications, World Trade Organization.
Vasigh, B. and S, Helmkay (2000), “An Empirical Examination of Airframe Manufacturers’ Safety Performance: Boeing versus Airbus,” Public Works Management Policy. 5, 147-159.
World Trade Organization (2004), European Communities — Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft, WTO Publications, World Trade Organization.
World Trade Organization (2005), Air Transport and the Gates, WTO Publications, World Trade Organization.
World Trade Organization (2006), The DSB Establishes Panel in Reference to Aircraft Subsidy Dispute, WTO Publications, World Trade Organization.
World Trade Organization (2006), The DSB Considers Aircraft Disputes Brought by the US and EC, WTO Publications, World Trade Organization.
World Trade Organization (2006), DSB Holds a Special Meeting for Aircraft Subsidy Dispute Brought by the EC against US, WTO Publications, World Trade Organization.
World Trade Organization (2007), The EU WTO challenge to US Government Subsidies to Boeing, WTO Publication.