台灣地區汽車客運合理路線成本之研究

Abstract

合理成本是大眾運輸業者於生產力衡量、績效評估及政府於補貼審查時所關切之課題。交通部運輸研究所於民國八十八年推行「汽車客運業路線別成本計算制度」，提供一套規則將汽車客運業之各項成本分攤至各營運路線上，以路線為成本展現之單位。徐哲強【民92】在「台灣地區汽車客運路線成本歸類之研究」中，指出台灣地區各項汽車客運路線成本中有異常偏高或偏低、路線成本未能反映路線特性等現象。根據本研究蒐集之台灣地區汽車客運路線別成本資料，其亦顯示路線成本高低離散程度大，最大值與最小值倍差甚大之情形，而現今研究尚無一套邏輯或準則來說明路線成本之合理性。

本研究先從合理性之基本意涵出發，在此基礎上定義「汽車客運合理路線成本」及本研究欲考量之合理性。再以「台灣地區汽車客運路線別成本資料」進行分析，最終找出各項成本之因素影響關係與合理關係。

本研究根據變異數分析、類目分析及迴歸分析結果，建立各項成本之因素影響關係，本研究可依其關係不同將所有成本項目歸納為三類: (1) 類型一(存在正向或負向影響因素之成本項目): 此類成本項目包含燃料成本、輪胎成本、車輛折舊成本及修車材料成本四項。(2) 類型二(不同地區有顯著影響之成本項目): 此類成本項目包含行車人員薪資成本、修車員工薪資成本、修車附支成本、業務員工薪資成本、業務費用成本、各項設備折舊成本、管理員工薪資成本、管理費用成本及站場租金成本九項。(3) 類型三(無任何顯著影響因素之成本項目): 此類成本項目包含附屬油料成本及行車附支成本二項。

由於各項成本之特性及因素影響關係各不同，因此欲判別路線成本之合理性時，須將該路線之各項成本予以分開探討: (1) 類型一: 分別找到各項成本之影響因素，以衡量變數代入迴歸式，得到該項路線成本之預測值。若殘差在一個標準差之內之路線成本則合理，殘差在一個標準差之外之路線成本則不合理。(2) 類型二: 比照該路線所在地區之成本平均值與標準差，若路線成本在一個標準差之內則合理，若在一個標準差之外則不合理。(3) 類型三: 根據所有路線成本之平均值與標準差，若路線成本在一個標準差之內則合理，若在一個標準差之外則不合理。根據本研究所建立之成本合理關係，任一汽車客運路線皆可分別探討各項成本之合理性。

Reasonable cost issues are very important for transit companies when measuring productivity or assessing performance, and to government when endorsing subsidies. Institute of Transportation , MOTC constructed a rule to apportion expenses to each routes in 1999. It stipulates that costs show by the route. Je-Chiang Hsu [2003] pointed that some costs for bus routes in Taiwan are unusually high or low. In addition, a few costs can’t reflect the properties of routes. By reviewing the raw data of costs for bus routes in Taiwan, we found that costs are very scattered from one route to another and the maximum is mostly large times the amount of the minimum. However, there are no rules or logics up to now that can judge whether a cost for a route is reasonable or not.

This study comprehended the text of the word〝reasonable〞first. Based on that, the definition of〝reasonable costs for bus routes〞and〝reasonableness considered〞was made . After that, the data of costs for bus routes were analyzed statistically. This study clarified the relationship between costs and properties of routes. Finally 〝reasonable relationships〞 were established.

According to the results of Simple Factorial ANOVA, Category Analysis and Regression Analysis, this study established 〝reasonable relationships〞. All the costs were classified into 3 types by the relationships. Type 1 (Costs affected by factors positively or negatively ) includes fuel expense, tire expense, vehicle depreciation expense and vehicle maintenance expense. Type 2 (Costs differing from locations of routes) includes bus driver salary, maintenance personnel salary, secondary maintenance expense, business personnel salary, business expense, equipment depreciation expense, management personnel salary, management expense and depot rental expense. Type 3 (Costs with no influential fators) includes secondary fuel expense and secondary bus driving expense.

In order to determine whether a cost of a bus route is reasonable or not, we must judge costs individually due to the differences in characteristics and reasonable relationships among costs. We take all the variables which influence type 1 costs into each regression to judge whether type 1 costs are reasonable. The cost is reasonable if the residual is within one standard deviation of the residuals. We compare type 2 costs with means of costs for all routes in the same location to judge whether type 2 costs are reasonable. The cost is reasonable if the difference is within one standard deviation of the costs for all routes in the same location. We compare type 3 costs with means of costs for all routes to judge whether type 3 costs are reasonable. The cost is reasonable if the difference is within one standard deviation of the costs for all routes. With the reasonable relationships established by this study, we can judge whether any cost of any route is reasonable or not.