本研究以台電公司現有之統計資料為基礎，利用三階段資料包絡分析法(Data Envelopment Analysis)衡量台電公司輸電系統6個供電區營運處民國91~95年間之經營效率。第一階段利用SBM-DEA方法分析6個供電區營運處之管理效率及投入、產出變數金額，第二階段利用SFA迴歸分析探討環境變數對於各營運處投入、產出變數差額之影響程度。並考量環境影響及隨機干擾效果調整原投入及產出變數。另籍由第三階段DEA及Malmquist生產力分析衡量各營運處之相對管理效率、調整前後整體排各順序及生產力變動情形。
實証結果顯示SBM-DEA可以同時衡量總投入差額與總產出差額，採用的方式為比率調整，而非數值差異的調整，有助於界定出各供電區處真正的管理效率。依第一階段分析結果，僅有7個DMUs效率值為1，僅佔全部DMUs之23%，表示尚有很大的改善空間；經由第二階段SFA迴歸分析得知，環境變數對投入、產出變數差額會產生影響，其中以資產總值比率對於營運費、資產總值、事故次數、線路損失及供電量差額影響最大。各DMUs經調整後效率值提高的有20個，不變的有5個（效率值均為1），減少的有5個，效率值提高之DMUs個數約佔全部的67%。有7成3以上DMUs經由環境變數調整後，在排序上都有改變，共有9個DMUs在排序上進步；有13個DMUs在排序上退步；僅有8個DMUs在排序上維持不變。可看出這9個DMUs未經調整前是處於較差經營環境；有13個DMUs未經調整前是處於較好的經營環境，表示各供電區處經營環境仍有差異存在。雖整個供電系統效率表現還不錯，但仍有進步與改善空間。另藉由民國91-95年各供電區營運處Malmquist模型各項效率指標分析結果得知，台北、新桃、嘉南及高屏區處總要素生產力大於1，主要原因源自於技術的進步，而台中及花東區處則小於1，主要原因則源自於技術效率的下降。

This research use three phase stage- Data Envelopment Analysis to examine six power transmit organizations of Taipower Company from 2002 to 2006 regarding the statistical data of Taipower Company. In phase one, using SBM-DEA method analyses the management efficiency and the amount of input and output variable. Second, using SFA regression analysis probe into the environmental variable influencing degree to each power transmit organizations of Taipower Company. In addition, it take account of the environmental effect and the random interference effect to improve input and output variable. Finally, by way of DEA and Malmguist productivity index, it can measure the relative effects and the productivity change situation between each power transmit organization.
The model result shows that SBM-DEA can weigh input difference and total output difference at the same time, by the way of using ratio adjustment, it can determine the really administration efficiency of every power transmit organization. According to phase one analysis results, Only 7 DMUs efficiency value are 1, it is 23% of all the DMUs efficiency value and shows that still have very big improvement space. By the regression analysis of phase 2, we know that the environmental parameter will exert an huge influence on input and output difference, in which the most influence is total asserts rate for working capital, asserts value, accident times, circuit lose and power supply. After adjustment every DMUs, there are 20 efficiency values getting higher, with 5 efficiency values unchanged, with 5 efficiency values decreasing. The amount of getting higher efficiency value is approximately 67% all of the DMUs. After adjustment environmental parameter, there is above 73% change in rank, with 9 DMUs advancement in rank ,13 DMUs degeneracy in rank, and only 8 DMUs unchanged. It shows that 9 DMUs work in unwell environment before adjustment, and 13 DMUs work in well environment before adjustment. It also shows that each power transmit organization still exist difference in working environment. Although the whole power transmit system efficiency represent is no bad ,but it still has large improvement space. Furthermore, according to Malmquist model efficiency index analysis from 2002 to 2006 data of power transmit system show that the total productivity element in Taipei, Hsintou, Chinan and Kaoping power transmit organization are higher than 1, it can attributes to the increasing of technology ,and Taizhong, Huitung, power transmit organization are lesser than 1, it can attributes to the decreasing of technology efficiency.

目錄
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 研究方法 3
第四節 研究範圍 4
第五節 研究流程 5
第二章 文獻探討 7
第一節 績效評估 7
第二節 國內電力事業效率衡量之文獻探討 11
第三節 國外電力公司相關的研究文獻探討 14
第四節 同時應用參數法SFA及非參數法DEA之相關文獻 17
第五節 應用三階段資料包絡分析法相關文獻 19
第六節 小結 20
第三章 台電公司供電系統經營概況及績效衡量之簡介 22
第一節 電業自由化後台電輸電系統之經營 22
第二節 台電公司績效衡量制度之簡介 22
第三節 台電公司供電單位責任中心制度之績效衡量指標 24
第四節 台電公司責任中心制度所衍生的問題 26
第四章 研究方法與設計 28
第一節 效率的基本概念 28
第二節DEA基本模式－資料包絡分析法 29
第三節 隨機邊界法(SFA) 44
第四節 DEA與SFA之比較 51
第五節 三階段分析法 53
第六節 研究設計 57
第五章 實證分析與研究發現 64
第一節 第一階段SBM-DEA分析結果 64
第二節 第二階段SFA迴歸分析 69
第三節 第三階段SBM- DEA模式分析 76
第四節 麥氏指數模型實證結果 84
第五節 管理意涵 93
第六章 結論與建議 95
第一節 結論 95
第二節 後續研究建議 97

中文部分：
王美惠（2002），「臺灣銀行業經濟效率與規模經濟分析-參數法與非參數法之比較」，淡江大學管理科學研究所博士論文。
白雲年（2006），「組織改組前後員工在工作特性、組織變革、工作生活品質及工作投入之變化及關聯性研究:以台電供電系統維護部門組織改組為例」，南台科技大學高階主管企管碩士班碩士論文
吳濟華、何柏正（2008），「組織效率與生產力評估-資料包絡分析法」，前程文化
林文信（2000），「台灣產業的環境資源效率— 以資料包絡分析法探討」，國立台北大學資源所碩士論文。
林建良（2004），「環境變數調整後之銀行效率-Three stage approach」，東吳大學經濟學研究所
林嘉信（2006），「台灣地區國道客運業之績效評估－ 三階段資料包絡分析法之應用」國立中山大學公共事務研究所
林嘉玲（1998），「台電公司經營績效之研究--DEA之應用」，國立中興大學企業管理研究所
孫遜（2004），『資料包絡分析法－理論與應用、（Data Envelopment Analysis－Theory and Application）』。台北：揚智文化。
馬偉富，（2005），「台電輸電系統之生產力與效率分析」，國立交通大學經營管理研究所碩士論文
許玥涵（2003），「台電公司各區營業處相對經營績效之研究」，銘傳大學管理科學研究所
曾尹亭（2005），「技術學院經營效率之評估─以三階段DEA法並考量非意欲因素之影響」，東吳大學企業管理研究所
曾僑俞（2005），「營運環境對台灣生技廠商營運績效影響之研究」，東吳大學經濟學研究所
黃旭男（1993），「資料包絡分析法使用程序之研究及其在非營利組織效率評估上之應用」，交通大學管理科學研究所博士論文。
黃凱莉（2006），「作業風險對銀行績效的影響-三階段DEA分析法之應用」，東吳大學經濟學研究所
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」，清華大學工業工程與工程管理研究所博士論文。
藍武王、林村基，(2003)，「鐵路運輸之生產效率分析：DEA與SFA方法之比較」，運輸學刊，第十五卷第一期，頁49~78。
羅正華（2000），「以資料包絡分析法探討台電公司發電部門經營績效之研究」，成功大學國際企業研究所碩士論文。
龔良智（1999），「DEA模型應用於台電配電技術部門績效評估之研究」，國立交通大學經營管理研究所
英文部分：
Aigner, D.J., Lovell, C.A.K., Schmidt, P., 1977, “Formulation and Estimation of Stochastic Frontier Production Function Models”, Journal of Econometrics 6(1), 21~37.
Bagdadioglu, N., Price, C.M.W. and Weyman-Jones, T.G. (1996),“Efficiency and Ownership in Electricity Distribution: A Non-parametric Model of the Turkish Experience, ” Energy Economics 18,1-23.
Banker, R. D., Charnes, A. and Cooper, W. W., 1984. “Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Efficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis,” Management Science, Vol. 30, No. 9, pp.1078-1092,
Battese, G. E. and T.J. Coelli, 1988,” Prediction of Firm-Level Technical Efficiency with a Generalized Frontier Production Function and Panel Data,” Journal of Econometrics Vol. 38, pp. 387-99.
Battese, G. E. and T.J. Coelli, 1988,” Prediction of Firm-Level Technical Efficiency with a Generalized Frontier Production Function and Panel Data,” Journal of Econometrics Vol. 38, pp. 387-99.
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W. and Rhodes, E., 1978. “Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 2, No. 6, pp.429-444,
Coelli, T., 1996, ‘A Guide to FRONTIER Version 4.1：A Computer Program for Stochastic Frontier Production and Cost Function Estimation’, CEPA Working Paper NO.96/07, Center for Efficiency and Productivity Analysis, University of New England, Armidale.
Farrell, M. J., 1957. “The Measurement of Productive Efficiency,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A, Vol. 120, No. 3, pp.253-290,
Førsund, F., Kittelsen, S. (1998), “Productivity Development of Norwegian Electricity Distribution Utilities, ”Resource and Energy Economics, 20, 207–224.
Giannakis, D. , Jamasb, T. and Pollitt, M. (2003), “Benchmarking and Incentive Regulation of Quality of Service: an Application to the UK Electricity Distribution Utilities, ” Cambridge Working Papers in Economics CWPE 0408.
Gibson, J.L., J.M Ibancevich, and J.H. Donnelly, 1988, OrganizationBehavior, Structure, Processes, Business Publications, inc.
Golany, B. and Roll, Y., 1989. “An Application Procedure for DEA,” OMEGA, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp.237-250
Hjalmarsson, L. and Veiderplass, A. (1992),. “Productivity in Swedish electricity retail distribution,” Scandinavian Journal of Economics , 94, 193-205.
Kao, C. and Yang, Y. C., 1992. “Reorganization of Forest Districts via Efficiency Measurement, ” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 58, pp.356-362,
Kopp R. J., and Diewert W. E. , 1982, “The Decomposition of Frontier Cost Function Deviations into Measures of Technical and Allocative Efficiency.” Journal of Econometrics, 19(2-3): 319-31.
Kumbhakar, C.S., 1987, “The Specification of Technical and Allocative Inefficiency in Stochastic Production and Profit Frontier,” Journal of Econometrics ,Vol. 34, pp. 335-48.
Lewin, A. Y. and Minton, J. W., 1986. “Determining Organizational Effectiveness: Another Look, and an Agenda for Research,” ManagementScience, Vol. 32, No. 5, pp.514-538
Meeusen, W., & van den Broeck, J. 1977, “Efficiency Estimation from Cobb-Douglas Production Functions with Composed Error”, International Economic Review 18(2), 435~444.
Miliotis, P.A. (1992), “Data Envelopment Analysis Applied to Electricity Distribution Districts,” Journal of Operational Research Society , 43, 549–555.
Murillo, Luis R., & Vega, Juan, 2000, “The Use of Parametric and Non Parametric Frontier Methods to Measure the Productive Efficiency in the Industrial Sector: A Comparative Study”, No. 2000/17, Department of Economics and Related Studies, University of York.
Pels, Eric, Nijkamp, Peter, & Rietveld, Piet, 2003, “Inefficiencies and Scale of European Airport Operations”, Transportation Research Part E 39, 341~361.
Pitt, M. M. and L.F. Lee, 1981, “ The Measurement and Sources of Technical Inefficiency in the Indonesian Weaving Industry,” Journal of Development Economics, Vol. 9, No. 1 , pp. 43-64.
Pollitt (1995), Ownership and Performance in Electric Utilities, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Pollitt, M. and Jamasb, T. (2003) , “International Benchmarking and Regulation: An Application to European Electricity Distribution Utilities,” Energy Policy, 31, 1609-1622, December.
Reinhard, Stijn, Lovell, C.A. Knox, & Thijssen, Geert J., 2000, “Environmental Efficiency with Multiple Environmentally Detrimental Variables; Estimated with SFA and DEA”, European Journal of Operational Research 121, 287~303.
Robbins, S.P., 1994, P.Management, 4th ed., New Jersey:Prentice-Hall.
Sanhueza, R. , Rudnick, H. and Lagunas, H. (2004), “DEA Efficiency for the Determination of the Electric Power Distribution Added Value”, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 19, 919-925.
Schmidt, P. and R. Sickles, 1984, “ Production Frontier and Panel Data,” Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp.367-74.
Stevenson, R., 1980, "Likelihood Functions for Generalized Stochastic Frontier Estimation", Journal of Econometrics, 13, 57-66.
Szilagyi, jr., A.D., 1984, Management and Performance, 2nd ed., NewJersey: Scott, Foresman and Company.
Zhang, Y. and Bartels, R. (1998), The Effect of Sample Size on the Mean Efficiency in DEA with an Application to Electricity Distribution in Australia, Sweden and New Zealand. Journal of Productivity Analysis , 9, 187–204.