運用資料包絡分析法評量台灣地區健康城市度之研究

  
  
  
   The Application of DEA to assess degree of healthy cities in Taiwan

1

   2 Yeh Chin-Chia, Liu Li-Chuan

                  ! " # $ %& ' ( ) *+ , - . / " # ! 0 . 12 3 456 7 3 8 9 7 :;< = > 23? # @ A   & B C D E :F GH? # I J;K ? LM N ? L; O ? L;O # LP Q ? LR S ? 4T" # ! 0 E :F U H? # I JV? L V# LGW ? LX Y ? L;Y ? LZ [ # 4\ O ]^ _ ` ab c def V? LV# LGW ? LX Y ? g h i j k l m T;Y ? ) n o F GZ [ # p qr s9 t G4u v w 2 3 x y , z - { ) |} ~    € ‚ ƒ E : „… F † ? # 5‡ ˆ‰ Š ! " # 8 ‹ Œ  Ž   ‘ b c de4 Abstract

This research from the resources input efficiency viewpoint, the utilization Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to the healthy city indicator, unifies into a set of assessment system to evaluate city health degree. And this research based on the statistical data to the Taiwan area 23 counties cities, finally demonstrated the relative higher county city includes: Taipai County, Taoyuan County, Taichung County, Taichung City, Yunlin County, Penghu County. But city health relative comparatively lowers county city includes: Chiayi County, Chiayi City, Kaohsiung County, Pingtung County, Taitung County, Keelung City. In most should give in the project which improves, Chiayi County, the Chiayi City, Kaohsiung County, Pingtung County belong to the medical care personnel insufficient, but Taitung County for mortality rate higher, Keelung City is the vagabond’s number is too high. Through set up this system can provide policy resources input reference in the future, assists the relative lower efficiency city, and inspect as necessary the healthy city plan’s achievements and confirm indicators we need to improve first.

’ “ ” J      • ! " # •~ . / •. 12 3

Key Words: Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA); Healthy City; Policy Evaluation; Assessment System

  Introduction   Motive e¥ ¦ § ¨ I 7500~8000©" # ª  ! " # 8 ‹ 4C D – « f¬ ­ ® ¯ ! " # ¨ ( ) °  ± ² ³ – ´ µ ¶· @ w * ¸ 5¹? # O ˜ º ® ¯ 4\ O ;K # ;» # ¼ ¨ x y ! " # ½ g ¾ ¿{ ) À Á  à ;  Ä Å ¾ ¿42005¶;» # aÆ;» # ! " # Ç @ ÈÉÊ Vª  Ë Ì Í t à Π– « ! " # Ï Ð 4\ Ñ ? # ÒGW # ´ Ó ! " # Ô ¸ Õ ) °  ® ¯ Ö ~× Ø 52005¶Ù Ú GW # ! " # Û Ü 4 Ý ;< ¹" # HÞ  ! ß 0 à á â I *+ ã  š ä å Ù æ. 1~ çè A I ’ 8 ‹ Œ  ( B 4¹? # e¥   é H$ %2 3 ê ) ë 1ìí qî ï ð ! " # 5â I *+ ñ ò . 12 3 , - ¹? # E ó ô F H 4 õ ö L~ç´ ÷  6 7 ¹? # $ %ø ` ù ú ‚ ƒ   û ü 4ý w    ) ³ – ¬ ­ þ ð ! " # 
ˆ_  ' x y *+ ë 1ã  E ó ô F % { ) ¹? # b c \ „… l  de5{ ) |} ~ç‚ ƒ = × ~ç € 4   Purpose  f  ý   é        Data Envelopment Analysis:;< = > 23? #  ! ß 0 @ A ‰ Š . / 4  e  ‚ ƒ x ã  ' ù . 12 3 5u v w 2 3 & ' DEA  & B  

~    ab c °  de4   H  eI  Õ  J

*       x y . 12 3

. / ¹? # " # ! 0

{ ) |}    € 6 7

         The Assessment System to degree of Healthy City        The Meaning of the Assessment System

   . 12 3 _    ©(  *q. 1% • q. 1d

e p _   qî I  4. 1de  ,   $ %2 3 Ô ¸ ª a

x y  ÒWHO32d$ %4. 1% ,  ) ! :%  Òx

y e%" 5¬ ­  … #b c $ e%" GW #  ÈGGX = × % } &

'  ( ) * aE :%  Ò+ , 4. 1dep ê - x y $ % 2 3 E
Ý $ %2 3  ( ) , - . 1. / á 0    ' 4  æ  , u v 1 2   × 3\ O *d  4 5 6 7Ø :¹©? # ` a6 7\ 8 )   8 9  @ A     3 8 9 7 GU ` a: ; T|ö < <   ¹d$ %a= ª : ; ã  >4w ? x y $ %@ A , a/ B ë 1 " #  ! ß 0 
ˆ´ , A C D *" # ]¹© ! $ %fE F G HI # , \ J " # @ A ã  ô F 4

‘ h W Ô ¸ X ) Y Z  ©j L[ \ L] > L] È^ – [ ¹©_ ` •
ˆ´  a Ÿ _ ` b c $ d Ÿ L] Èù _ ^ e f  ¸ g l
Ü h 4i w X G a æ– « Þ €" # ‡ H= ª *j TO  ! " # & ' i k ,  ) l ©m n J1. z o Ʀ s ! ÉHÔ ¸ x y p q Ö r · s t å ]¹" # O b G \ ® ¯ ! × ð •2. ª u ¹" # :~ H  L u Hv w 2 3 ¹x y Þ Hz & aA ¯ ) s ð ~ 8 ‹ •3. š à = { w ] È& ' Lu 6 ! 8 ‹ ò ' 
ˆ| } ¹" # ~ I 2 3 =  € . 1•4. u 6 !  ‚ . / (Health impact assessment)L ! ƒ # 8 ‹ (Healthy urban planning) ! „ H(Healthy aging)× ð (;» # ! " # … † ‡ 2005)4  f l m n Hˆ ‰ , Š  *Lm n ‹ °  ! " # Ÿ ¸ x y  N s  m n Œ p ‹ °  ! " # ® ¯ Œ  H. 14 i  ™ Ž 0 æ  ‘ ~ ® ¯ è A ’ “     ” ë 1T• . – *© " # qî ‰ ! ë 1*©qî — ' ! %  ; x y $ %˜ q°  × ]w  é aÆ" # ! 0 Éæ„D *©" # — ' ! ß 0 45       ™ ¹ì. / $ %& ' ( ) , aE :ô F . 12 3 4

        ! " The Development of the Assessment System ! " # $ %2 3 & ' š  ! " # Ô ¸ / B b c T( 1984 ¶ ]ª › ˜ œ  Æê ž ê 2000Éȟ  Èz  ! " # _ ' ¡  Õ 14©$ %J1.G0 # s¢ £ ] > €•2.I h W ¤ Ù 0   Ç @ !  £ ¢ £ ¥ ¦ ] > I G§ ¨ h W •3.] > ©sI ª « › ¢ £ •4.¬ ­ ® ¯ •5.° ± ' ² ³ ´ µ ' ² ©s° ¶ Œ •6. ·  l  ¸ ¹ ³ — ' # sº » •7. ¼  ˜ ½ å ȕ8. ! L¼ ë a ¾ × 3•9. ¼ m - _ !

¿ À •10.•I Á í ³ ¦ × Â & ' ©j à ~ ™ Ä å ȕ11.. { . ˆI Å

@ ¥ @   Õ HWHO$ %? ;» # p = H¹ö ? $ %) J ! $ % = ª A B d ø ) C D a ü ¶% LÃ ¼ j E F 9 LìG ! ô  LÃ ¼ j , ¶ HÌ a
H LI J LK J LL M N LM N O 9 1LP À Q  L  R E S A L°  R E T ‰ L] > U L) V  ¯ j  ô  L© s ! B ~ Ls(16-65W)ÈCPRô  LI X Y %D HZ [ \ [ ô  L ] ^ _ i L4 | i z - H§ ¨ L­ Y LY i å z - H§ ¨ •Ê Ë$ % = ª B d ø ) Ò = ) * `  E #LÐ x a ( 4 Lb  å  w I L c b  d I e e ` ¬ Lf  Ò Þ Lj A e Ò Þ Â g 0 Lhi  g j >  k 9 L   w I Ll m n ô  •] È$ %= ª de^ ê › A d

 ø ) o p j  Lo p & a Lo p q r Lå ¯  s œ 9 1Lt u v  s œ Lw j x y & a 8 9 L? z  { ô  ( ˜ | )L[ \ } º  ~ 9 L  € L ² ý þ , Ç L‚ ©„ j L] ȃ  v ô L„ @ ¾ ¯ Ò Þ „… † B 9 1L„ @ ¾ ¯ „… ‡ 8 €j 9 Lˆ ‰ Š ‹ x À 9 1L ¶$ #  Œ Hù j 9 L©s  Ž . ô  L€Á í ™ Ä ¾ ¯ Hj 8 L€ ] > X  Ø 9 ô  L } E ƒ ‘ 9 Lz ’  ¨ “ ¯ º L“ ¯ ” ‡ Ê Ë' Ÿ H(;» # ! " # … † ‡ 2005)4 $ ;< \ J " #  | } Ó ! " #   Ö ~H°  Ó ý ¹" # $ %• ]x O 4 ! " # $ %2 3   Y Z H! " ¨  h W Ü h b c $ Ê ËL] ÈL@ Hg Ü h ]® ¯ è A f´ º  ~çLsÞ † B # sg x y H€' { ґ x ù 1 H$ %B 2 5{ ) Œ  . / H p q ! " # °  . { 4 # $ % (Research Method)

& ' ( ) * + % (Data Envelopment Analysis, DEA)

         q  i  ™ Ô ¸ . / *– —  D Â

Decision making unit•a ˜ ™ ) DMUHÞ E : ú š ©D Â

  › œ T” › ê C D . ©D  Œ  F G4ý w ,     

  ê   ê ” . / 4DEA ^  Ô ¸ Œ  ìV˜  i  ™ [

Pareto  z ž Ÿ   ^ ù ËT Pareto optimality4i  ™ O ÓÆl


  '   ~ ¶ ^ ^ ˜ ” ə H) a ” ¡ 9 ý T^ ˜   ' Ó¢

]Æa ” ¥ £ É Product Frontierf4

¤ |CharnesLCooperaRhodes (1978)ÓFarrell (1957)  ×  ª ab ® & „4Charnes et al]¥  a ” v ß ) ¦ ; ) § ~ ¨ (constant returns to scale)I # ë 1DMUù Ü á  (total technical efficiency)5

 © >) * ® s I  DMU  (  ¥ £ w ª ) CCR§ 34|

¯

∑

∑

= =

=

_m i i ik s r r rk k

X

v

Y

u

Max

E

1 1

.

.t

s

1

1 1

_≤

∑

∑

= = m i i ij s r r rj

X

v

Y

u

,

j

=

1

,

K

,

n

¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ 31

0

,

i

≥ ε

>

r

v

u

_,

r

=

1

,

K

,

s

,

i

=

1

,

K

,

m

rk

Y

_JDMUk

_r

_{©” d}

X

_ikJDMUk

_i

_{©  d} rj

Y

JDMUj₍

d

≠

k

_)

r

_{©” d}

X

ij_JDMUj₍

d

≠

k

_)

i

_{©  d} CCRBCC§3 1 ö ) Z DEA  §3 4CCR§3 q ¥  a ” v ß g  ¦ ; ) §~ ¨ ¢ ª   1 a g ô  = ª ˆ È` ¶ ”  ° … g ô  = ª I ± 4  g  CCR §3 O” s ð   output-based efficiency4$]E
    ô F” ¹ ( E # 4
    (Research Step)

6 7 Golany & Roll (1989) z        { v ß ˜ ² f Y Z

Õ l©m n J(1)Ž  ô Fe % •(2)— ; DMU 9 e •(3)  ” d

H T ; •(4)DEA§3  5   & B4  H DMU) ; < = > 23?

#$  , . de p 6 7  Õ ñ ³  Ÿ J

*$% ¤´ T ¤$%

í ‘ a WHO  š µ 32©$% ) Z ÷ @ A ‰ Š   329 1 ¶ v

DMU©9 ý w ÷  @ A   ³ > ¨ ° · H $% ]8 H f ÈIª ¸ {

  a Iô õ $% 9 e H 0  4õ ö   WHO$% OIx g  ¨ H

 E ú °  4  Ä Å – È I’ ! " #3 8  h W Lƒ #& 'LÊ Ë g I’ ~ ç D  ¾ ¿  ø  ÆA ~ Ä  8  3ÉLÆÈ ~ xX x Å4ÉLÆA ~ Ä Ì a Å5Ég D    r  H ¾ ¿ f š ä & Æ H    ˆ Þ 3 *) 2004¶4 $% ¢ V X Ç *m n ô õ | 9d$% 5 ÷  È    DEA H   Z   d ý º ‘ @ A $% 9 7 X Ç 41. É @D  4  J) É @3 8 9 7 OD     ( H  ‚ ‘ Ó 9 7 ` a %  H õ @ A   42.   d” d
ð G ¯ Jx Ê ð $% _X Ç ) Ú ð $% a — '
ð > (Isotonicity)´ ˜q ˆ  = ª l _ s ² ” õ œ 4 Ò no  _X H ) no  •x  $% p º H ( ô  ± 3  Ò Ã ý   9 @a j  9 X H ) à ý   ô  4x º  ´ Ë 9  Ò Ã ¼   h i j k ú  j  9 º X H ) Ë 9 •I*/ p º ‘ H ) ô  ± 3 õ X H ) Ú ð $% 4 Ò r s j 9 @a j  9 ‘ X H ) ô  ± 3 4$  Ê ð $% ]DEAO, a  ´   Ì & Ú " { ) Í ; Î ö H ) ô  ± 3 | 1Ö õ Ó Ê ð $% X H ) Ú ð $% 4 lÏ @l / Ð ø º$% i v *m n & B  C D 90%a f DMU¼ I  C D w 9d

$% H Ð ø 0 l m 4
ˆ L6 7 DEAH i k  p (rule of thumb)DMU_

) , . de 9 e 1 Ñ 4) A C — w *4    Ó 9©$% OÐ ø 0 F U4©Ï @45 ³ 6 7 w 5©$% @ A | }     \& BC D  no  L j d Ih i j k ô  LÐ   Là ý   ô  Lr s ô  g 5 ©$% F/ IÐ ø º( )  ^ | T ¤. / de 4   (Research Result)    (Efficiency Analysis)    g       OCCR§3 ” s ð 
ˆ     d]  ê  ´ D *  de ý w Ó   dH 9 " ¦ ; ) 14Ý . Ò ê ~  Ó DMUù   T÷   Ó Ü á   4 ù   & B Ó @ >  I  . / D  ÷   . / D  H ? á , 6 7 ù   9 " G

U` a + , 4\Où   ) 1DMUC D ) E : I  D Â 4&  1

„ CCR(CRS) model Õ Ö ?#Ê ™    9 ù   (A) A1 × K # Taipei City 1.21380 0.82 A2 GW # Kaohsiung City 1.18704 0.84 A3 × K ? Taipei County 1.00000 1.00 A4 ² 7 ? Yilan County 1.12219 0.89 A5 M N ? Taoyuan County 1.00000 1.00 A6 p Ø ? Hsinchu County 1.09103 0.92 A7 Ù Ú ? Miaoli County 1.06601 0.94 A8 × O? Taichung County 1.00000 1.00 A9 Û H ? Changhua County 1.15572 0.87 A10 » ? Naniou County 1.17813 0.85 A11 P Q ? Yunlin County 1.00000 1.00 A12



 Chiayi County 1.23734 0.81 A13 × »? Tainan County 1.15127 0.87 A14    Kaohsiung County 1.67540 0.60 A15    Pingtung County _{1.23797 0.81} A16    Taitung County 1.42215 0.70 A17  Hualien County 1.17263 0.85 A18 R S ? Penghu County 1.00000 1.00 A19   Keelung City _{1.28957 0.78} A20 p Ø # Hsinchu City 1.17106 0.85 A21 × O# Taichung City 1.00000 1.00 A22



 Chiayi City 1.49460 0.67

A23 × »# Tainan City 1.18849 0.84

      ( Analysis)

† Ü G 9   q DEAO°    × 3   ö ,  ú OÝ C , . /

D  á , b c Ò Þ 4\z - ~  ¢ Y q { ) â æ  _  ‘ 2 de 

°  À 4„l) † Ü   „„ODMU]Þ d$% O¹ r ¶ l
ß 0 H

 9  9 ” › ˜ ö „D , . / D  ]w de O„… l  ¬    ¥ £ ©

› ß 4æ à | Ø :  de @ A b c Ó ` DMU›  µ  á © ¢ ª  

  B› ‰ C 4]    O23©?#@A  ‘ / IE :   6

©?#H ?  DMUH † Ü G 9 C D ) 0]  " + , F† 6©?#

O  \„… F† . / de \OV ?LGW ?LXY ?LV #l

©?#]Æ j d Ih i j k ô  ÉO„… l  T; Y ?no  q ^

UÝ Z [ #]¹ dde † Ü G 9 \† ã F& 4

õ ö L6 7 † Ü   & B¹ ?#,  \E : F)  ² de ª

A19         _{25.47322 25.47328 33.18469 24.53067 38.33774} A20 p Ø # 6.2932871 334.7868 296.43619 73.7165 5.9140577

A21 × O# 0 0 0 0 0

A22



 _{22.94754 275.5138 22.94759 15.82225 70.58644} A23 × »# 3.5278394 3.5278815 152.3764 1.958 88.785761

      (Research Conclusion and Suggestion)

      (The result of Comparison and Appraisal on Countys)  & … ; < = > " # ! 0 E : FGH ?#IJ; K ?LM N ?L

; O?L; O#LP Q ?LR S ?4T" # ! 0 FUH ?#IJV ?L

V #LGW ?LXY ?L; Y ?LZ [ #4\O]^ _` a b c de f 

V ?LV #LGW ?LXY ?l©?#h i j k l m T; Y ?) n o  FGZ [ #p q r s 9 t G4 w ? Lg  ƒ È> ?#Ò ; K #LGW #L; »#g ?#° … h W  ç è Ý q Ð = ä é Ò Þ l m … æ4L  Y x?#Ò ; Y ?ä å ?° … no  r s 9 â Gî G… æ4LE : I  ?#˜ ê g  ƒ È> ? " ?# ; K ?LM N ?L; O?LP Q ?a  ? ê R S ?4lLE :   " FU?#ê g  A ~  ë ì ?# GW ?L XY ?L; Y ?LV ?, ë b c ì í ?#h W  ­ ) °  4

 DEA   ! " (The Discovery by apply DEA)

    ´ WHO32©$% q – « > ˜DEA. ©×  TO  ; < ?#† ã ß 0 5 l ˜ ý w / IÐ ø º$% 5 l ê 4\8 Lº  1  d$% q î I3 8 9 7 , -   4
ˆ ) A — ' i k  p ODMU©9 _) , . / de 1 Ñ ý w ´ l ²  v ê $% 4]_DEA× 3 f ô Fù '  / I; „> Îö / Iï ' > H $% 4
ˆ ]$% X H f _ œ ‘ >  $% q Ú ð $% Îö q Ê ð $% ˜ ê 9 $% ƒ º  i v X H ð ~ ñ ` 4

#$ % & '   ( ) * + , - (Take an Improve Reference of City health)

5.GW #~ ç  & ' ò
k È 20044ÆGGX= × % } & ' ( ) *

~  ‡ ÉJGW #~ ç  È4

6.å æ ç Lè é  (2003)4 ! " #. 1 B 2 x H ð  OQ s – ƒ #8 ‹ ™ ÈL > h Û ™ ™ ÈL°  ™ ÈL= > & '™ È  Ï ' ¶È

ó @ ò ÈOQ ˜ ™ 4

7.Banker, R.D., A. Charnes and W.W. Cooper. (1984), Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis. Management Sciences, Vol.30, pp.1078-1092.

8.Banker, R.D., A. Charnes, W.W. Cooper, J. Swarts and D.A. Thomas(1989). An Introduction to Data Envelopment Analysis with Some of its Models and Their Uses", Research in Government and Nonprofit Accounting, pp.125-163. 9.Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of

decision making unit. European Journal of Operation Research, 2(6), 429-444.

10.Cooper, S. T., and Cohn, E. (1997). Education of a frontier production function for the South Carolina educational process. Economics of Education Review, 16, 313-327.

11.Farrell, M. J. (1957). The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society series A, 120, 253-281.