Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/137151
|
| Title: | 台灣電動機車商業生態系統建構與演化之研究─以Gogoro為例
The Construction and Evolution of Taiwan`s Electric Scooter Business Ecosystem：A Case Study of Gogoro |
| Authors: | 王品雯
Wang, Pin-Wen |
| Contributors: | 吳豐祥
Wu, Feng-Shang
王品雯
Wang, Pin-Wen |
| Keywords: | 電動機車產業
商業生態系統
動態能力
企業策略
企業競爭優勢
Electric scooter industry
Business ecosystem
Dynamic capabilities
Corporate strategy
Competitive advantage |
| Date: | 2021 |
| Issue Date: | 2021-09-02 18:13:14 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 隨著全球二氧化碳濃度不斷上升、地球暖化現象加劇，世界各國開始發展較為環保的電動車輛，以此降低運輸所帶來的溫室氣體排放。各國政府紛紛透過禁售或補貼政策來加速國內電動車輛產業的發展，歐美國家由於地理與歷史發展因素，主要以發展電動車為主，亞洲國家則因地狹人稠，電動機車便成為亞洲各國爭相角逐的新戰場。台灣為加速電動機車產業發展，2009年行政院核定「電動機車產業發展推動計畫」，將電動機車產業視為我國重點發展產業之一，同時，透過賦稅減免、購車補助、減免貨物稅與牌照稅等方法，來提高民眾購買電動機車意願。
台灣機車密度為世界之冠，具有成熟的硬體基礎設施，以及完善的機車供應鏈等優勢，為發展電動機車提供良好的試驗場域。然而，台灣欲發展電動機車產業，無法僅憑政府推動或單一廠商之力即可成功，電動機車的動力系統、傳動系統、懸吊系統、車體設計到能源補充模式，都與傳統燃油機車有著極大差異。我國電動機車廠商若想在國際市場上站穩腳跟，就需要快速整合各環節專業知識，並打造專屬於我國的電動機車商業生態系統，方可成功。
然而，過往探討商業生態系統的文獻，大多將生態系統比擬為企業所面對的外部環境，強調系統成員應時刻關注生態系統的變化，注重的是外部環境變化，對於企業內外部資源的整合方式較少深入探討。此外，電動機車為近幾年才興起的產業，以此產業為研究背景的文獻相對缺乏。為了彌補此研究缺口，本研究以商業生態系統觀點切入，並結合動態能力的概念，選擇國內電動機車市場龍頭做為深入研究之對象，探討該廠商建構電動機車商業生態系統的策略、能力轉換的動態過程。本研究得到的主要結論如下：
結論一、我國電動機車業者在建構商業生態系統的誕生階段中，會著重於那些驅動整體系統發展的核心技術與能力之掌握，也會強調彈性的組織結構與創新的組織文化。
結論二、我國電動機車業者在擴展商業生態系統的過程中，其系統成員的組成會變得更加複雜，而系統成員間也會存在著更多重的關係（包括競合關係），每個系統成員對於關鍵企業的重要性也會不斷的改變。通常關鍵企業會降低對單一成員的依賴性，並善用系統內的多元關係，以驅動生態系統的成長。
結論三、隨著我國電動機車商業生態系統的擴展，原有電動機車業者間的競爭，會轉為電動機車商業生態系統間的競爭。關鍵者會透過核心技術與能力的精進，來維持其競爭地位、與其他業者區隔、建立壁壘，防止系統成員離開並保護成員。同時，也會透過資源的提供，來吸引更多的利基者加入。
結論四、我國電動機車關鍵業者建構商業生態系統的過程，會經歷誕生、擴展與領導階段。在誕生階段，會透過核心技術的掌握與政府政策的驅動，使系統初具雛形；在擴展階段則會善用系統成員的多元關係，推動系統成長；在領導階段，則會持續優化其核心技術，以提升整體生態系統的價值與競爭力。
本論文最後也進一步闡述本研究的學術貢獻、實務意涵與後續研究建議。
As the global carbon dioxide concentration continues to rise and the global warming phenomenon intensifies, countries around the world are trying to develop more environmentally electric vehicles to reduce greenhouse gas emissions caused by transportation. Governments of various countries have accelerated the development of the domestic electric vehicle industry through bans policy or subsidies. Due to geographical and historical development factors, European and American countries mainly focus on the development of electric vehicles. Asian countries are densely populated due to their local size, and mainly develop electric motorcycle. In order to accelerate the development of the electric scooter industry, Taiwan government has listed the electric scooter industry as one of the key development industries in Taiwan. At the same time, the government has increased people`s willingness to buy electric vehicles through tax relief, car purchase subsidies, excise tax relief and license tax relief.
Taiwan has the highest scooter density in the world. Taiwan has the advantages of a mature scooter hardware infrastructure and a complete supply chain, which is suitable for developing the electric scooter market. However, if Taiwan wants to develop the electric scooter industry, it cannot succeed with the government or a single manufacturer alone. The power system, transmission system, suspension system, car body design and energy supplement mode of electric scooter are very different from traditional fuel scooter. If Taiwanese electric scooter manufacturers want to have a place in the international market, they need to integrate diverse expertise and create a Taiwan`s electric scooter business ecosystem as soon as possible.
However, most of the past literature on business ecosystems has likened ecosystems to the external environment faced by enterprises, emphasizing that system members should always pay attention to changes in the ecosystem. In the past, the literature seldom discussed the integration methods of internal and external resources for enterprises when they constructed business ecosystems. In addition, electric scooter industry is an industry that has emerged in recent years, and there are few literatures on this industry. In order to make up for the gaps in the previous literature, this study is based on the perspective of business ecosystem and dynamic capabilities, and chooses Taiwan`s electric scooter market leader as the object of in-depth study. This study explores the dynamic process of Taiwanese manufacturer`s strategy and capability conversion for constructing an electric scooter business ecosystem. The main conclusions of this study are as follows:
Conclusion 1: In the birth stage of the construction of the business ecosystem, the Taiwanese electric scooter manufacturer will focus on the mastery of the core technologies and capabilities that drive the development of the overall system, as well as the flexible organizational structure and innovative organizational culture.
Conclusion 2: In the process of expanding Taiwan`s electric scooter business ecosystem, the composition of system members will become more complicated, and there will also be multiple relationships （including competition and cooperation） among system members. The importance of each system member to key businesses is constantly changing. Usually key enterprises will reduce their dependence on a single member and make good use of the multiple relationships within the system to drive the growth of the ecosystem.
Conclusion 3: With the expansion of Taiwan`s electric scooter business ecosystem, the competition among the original electric scooter manufacturer will turn into competition among the electric scooter business ecosystems. The keystone players will maintain their competitive position, separate themselves from other players, establish barriers, prevent system members from leaving and protect members through the improvement of core technologies and capabilities. At the same time, the keystone players will also attract more niche players to join through the provision of resources.
Conclusion 4: The process of constructing a business ecosystem by key Taiwanese electric scooter manufacturer will go through the stage of birth, expansion, and leadership. In the birth stage, the system will take shape through the mastery of core technologies and driven by government policies; in the expansion stage, the multiple relationships between system members will be used to promote the growth of the system; in the leadership stage, the core technology will be continuously optimized, in order to enhance the value and competitiveness of the overall ecosystem.
At the end of this thesis, the academic contribution, practical implications and follow-up research suggestions of this research are further elaborated. |
| Reference: | 一、英文文獻
Adner, R.(2006). Match your innovation strategy to your innovation ecosystem. Harvard business review, 84(4), 98-107; 148.
Adner, R.(2017). Ecosystem as structure:an actionable construct for strategy. Journal of Management, 43(1), 39-58. doi:10.1177/0149206316678451
Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2010). Value creation in innovation ecosystems: How the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations. Strategic Management Journal, 31(3), 306-333.
Amit, R., & Paul, J. H. S. (1993). Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strategic Management Journal, 14(1), 33-46. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2486548
Aoki, M. (1990). The participatory generation of information rents and the theory
of the firm. In M. Aoki et al. (eds.), The Firm as a Nexus of Treaties(London: Sage).
Argyres, N. S. (1995). Technology strategy, governance structure and interdivisional coordination. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 28(3), 337-358.
Bamberger, I. (1989). Developing competitive advantage in small and medium-size firms. Long Range Planning, 22(5), 80-88.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120. doi:10.1177/014920639101700108
Bateson, G. (1979). Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity (Vol. 255): Bantam Books New York.
Bogner, W. C., & Barr, P. S. (2000). Making sense in hypercompetitive environments: A cognitive explanation for the persistence of high velocity competition. Organization Science, 11(2), 212-226. doi:10.1287/orsc.11.2.212.12511
Brusoni, S., & Prencipe, A. (2013). The organization of innovation in ecosystems : problem framing, problem solving, and patterns of coupling. Collaboration and competition in business ecosystems, 167-194.
Castro, N. R., & Chousa, J. P. (2006). An integrated framework for the financial analysis of sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15(5), 322-333.
Ceccagnoli, M., Forman, C., Huang, P., & Wu, D. (2012). Cocreation of value in a platform ecosystem! The case of enterprise software. MIS Quarterly, 263-290.
Cennamo, C., & Santalo, J. (2013). Platform competition: Strategic trade-offs in platform markets. Strategic Management Journal, 34(11), 1331-1350. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2066
Chamberlin, E. (1933). The Theory of Monopolistic Competition (1st ed.). Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology: Harvard Business Press.
Chesbrough, H., & Rosenbloom, R. S. (2002). The role of the business model in capturing value from innovation: evidence from Xerox Corporation`s technology spin‐off companies. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(3), 529-555.
Clark, K. B., Fujimoto, T., & Fujimoto, P. (1991). Product Development Performance: Strategy, Organization, and Management in the World Auto Industry: Harvard Business School Press.
Collis, D. J., & Montgomery, C. A. (1995). Competing on resources: Strategy in the 1990s. Knowledge and strategy, 73(4), 25-40.
Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006). Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 659-669. doi:10.5465/amr.2006.21318923
Doz, Y. L., & Shuen, A. (1988). From Intent to Outcome: A Process Framework for Partnerships: INSEAD.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10/11), 1105-1121. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.autorpa.lib.nccu.edu.tw/stable/3094429
Freeman, C. (1974). The Economics of Industrial Innovation: Penguin: Harmondsworth, U.K.
Garnsey, E., & Leong, Y. Y. (2008). Combining Resource-Based and Evolutionary Theory to Explain the Genesis of Bio-networks. Industry & Innovation, 15, 669-686. doi:10.1080/13662710802565271
Garvin, D. A. (1994). The Processes of Organization and Management: Division of Research, Harvard Business School.
Gogoro官網. (2021). Retrieved from https://www.gogoro.com/tw/
Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 109-122. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250171110
Grant, R. M. (2008). Contemporary Strategy Analysis: Concepts, Techniques, Applications (6th ed.): Malden (MA): Blackwell Publish.
Griffith, D. A., & Harvey, M. G. (2001). A resource perspective of global dynamic capabilities. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(3), 597-606. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490987
Harreld, J. B., O`Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2007). Dynamic capabilities at IBM: Driving strategy into action. California Management Review, 49(4), 21-43. doi:10.2307/41166404
Helms, M. M., & Ettkin, L. P. (2000). Time-based competitiveness: A strategic perspective. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, 10(2), 1-14. doi:10.1108/eb046395
Hill, C. W., Jones, G. R., & Schilling, M. A. (2014). Strategic Management: Theory & Cases: An Integrated Approach: Cengage Learning.
Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004a). Strategy as ecology. Harvard business review, 82(3), 68-78, 126.
Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004b). The Keystone Advantage: What the New Dynamics of Business Ecosystems Mean or Strategy, Innovation, and Sustainability.
Iyer, B., Lee, C.-H., & Venkatraman, N. (2006). Managing in a “small world ecosystem”: Lessons from the software sector. California Management Review, 48(3), 28-47. doi:10.2307/41166348
Kapoor, R., & Agarwal, S. (2017). Sustaining superior performance in business ecosystems: evidence from application software developers in the iOS and Android smartphone ecosystems. Organization Science, 28(3), 531-551. doi:10.1287/orsc.2017.1122
Kapoor, R., & Lee, J. M. (2013). Coordinating and competing in ecosystems: How organizational forms shape new technology investments. Strategic Management Journal, 34(3), 274-296. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2010
King, N., Horrocks, C., & Brooks, J. (2018). Interviews in Qualitative Research: Sage.
Langlois, R. N., & Robertson, P. L. (1995). Firms, Markets and Economic Change: A Dynamic Theory of Business Institutions: Routledge.
Li, S., Ragu-Nathan, B., Ragu-Nathan, T., & Rao, S. S. (2006). The impact of supply chain management practices on competitive advantage and organizational performance. Omega, 34(2), 107-124.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Establishing trustworthiness. Naturalistic inquiry, 289(331), 289-327.
Mody, A. (1993). Learning through alliances. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 20(2), 151-170.
Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and prey: a new ecology of competition. Harvard business review, 71(3), 75-86.
Moore, J. F. (1996). The Death of Competition: Leadership & Strategy in the Age of Business Ecosystems. New York: Harper Business.
Nelson, R. R. (1994). The co-evolution of technology, industrial structure, and supporting institutions. Industrial and Corporate Change, 3(1), 47-63.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company: Oxford University Press: New York.
Pavlou, P. A., & El Sawy, O. A. (2005). Understanding the`black box`of dynamic capabilities. ManSci http://agsm. ucr. edu/faculty/papers/pavlou/ms_pavlou_elsawy_rev3, 201.
Peltoniemi, M., & Vuori, E. (2004). Business Ecosystem as The New Approach to Complex Adaptive Business Environments.
Penrose, E. T. (1959). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy the free press: new york. Porter Competitive Strategy1980, 324-425.
Porter, M. E. (1985). The Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance: NY: Free Press.
Prahalad, C., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard business review, 68(3), 79-91.
Preeti Wadhwani, P. S. (2020). Electric Motorcycles & Scooters Market Size. Retrieved from https://www.gminsights.com/industry-analysis/electric-motorcycles-and-scooters-market
Priem, R. L., & Butler, J. E. (2001). Is the resource-based "view" a useful perspective for strategic management research? The Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 22-40. doi:10.2307/259392
Richardson, G. B. (1972). The organisation of industry. Economic Journal, 82(327), 883-896. Retrieved from https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ecj:econjl:v:82:y:1972:i:327:p:883-96
Rong, K., & Shi, Y. (2014). Business Ecosystems: Constructs, Configurations, and the Nurturing Process.
Rumelt, R. P. (1982). Diversification strategy and profitability. Strategic Management Journal, 3(4), 359-369. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2486302
Rumelt, R. P. (2012). Good strategy/bad strategy: The difference and why it matters. Strategic Direction.
Schendel, D., & Hofer, C. W. (1978). Strategy Formulation: Analytical Concepts. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing.
Simon, H. A. (2002). Near decomposability and the speed of evolution. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(3), 587-599.
Spradley, J. P. (2016). Participant Observation: Waveland Press.
Tang, Y. C., & Liou, F. M. (2010). Does firm performance reveal its own causes? The role of bayesian inference. Strategic Management Journal, 31(1), 39-57.
Tansley, A. G. (1935). The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms. Ecology, 16(3), 284-307. doi:10.2307/1930070
Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15(6), 285-305.
Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319-1350. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640
Teece, D. J. (2015). Intangible assets and a theory of heterogeneous firms. In Intangibles, Market Failure and Innovation Performance (pp. 217-239): Springer.
Teece, D. J. (2018a). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 40-49. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2017.06.007
Teece, D. J. (2018b). Dynamic capabilities as (workable) management systems theory. Journal of Management & Organization, 24(3), 359-368. doi:10.1017/jmo.2017.75
Teece, D. J., & Pisano, G. (1994). The dynamic capabilities of firms: An introduction. Industrial and Corporate Change, 3, 537-556. doi:10.1093/icc/3.3.537-a
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z
Thomas, L. D. W., Autio, E., & Gann, D. M. (2014). Architectural leverage: Putting platforms in context. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(2), 198-219. doi:10.5465/amp.2011.0105
Tsujimoto, M., Kajikawa, Y., Tomita, J., & Matsumoto, Y. (2018). A review of the ecosystem concept — Towards coherent ecosystem design. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 49-58. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.06.032
Wareham, J., Fox, P. B., & Giner, J. L. C. (2014). Technology ecosystem governance. Organization Science, 25(4), 1195-1215. doi:10.1287/orsc.2014.0895
Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250050207
Williamson, P. J., & De Meyer, A. (2012). Ecosystem advantage: How to successfully harness the power of partners. California Management Review, 55(1), 24-46. doi:10.1525/cmr.2012.55.1.24
Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 991-995. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.318
Yin, R. K. (2017). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods: Sage publications.
Zahra, S. A., Sapienza, H. J., & Davidsson, P. (2006). Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: A review, model and research agenda*. Journal of Management Studies, 43(4), 917-955. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00616.x
Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13(3), 339-351. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3086025
Zott, C. (2003). Dynamic capabilities and the emergence of intraindustry differential firm performance: insights from a simulation study. Strategic Management Journal, 24(2), 97-125. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.288
二、中文文獻
方至民. (2000). 企業競爭優勢: 方至民出版.
王畯洋. (2018). 越南政府發展綠能，帶動電動二輪車快速奔馳. Retrieved from https://www.artc.org.tw/chinese/03_service/03_02detail.aspx?pid=13310
王雅寧. (2011). 商業生態系統中網絡核心型企業競爭戰略研究.
王鐵驪, 牛永芳, & 張繼艷. (2013). 企業動態能力研究的回顧與展望. 現代企業(05).
庄紅韜. (2013). 汽車企業如何應對美國「ZEV法案」的2018年問題. Retrieved from http://finance.people.com.cn/BIG5/n/2013/0916/c348883-22931849-2.html
行政院環境保護署. (2019). 109年機車汰換補助有門路 車廠積極響應齊相助. Retrieved from https://enews.epa.gov.tw/Page/3B3C62C78849F32F/fee3bc02-bfc9-4cc5-9ab3-a8f6111db882
何浩哲. (2020). 臺灣發展電動機車對環境與經濟之影響評估. 臺灣大學農業經濟學研究所學位論文.
吳碧娥. (2018). 2018全球電動機車產業成長可期，台灣銷量將比去年成長2.3倍！. Retrieved from http://www.naipo.com/Portals/1/web_tw/Knowledge_Center/Industry_Economy/IPNC_181128_0704.htm
李德玉. (2004). 高技術風險企業持續競爭優勢的戰略構建研究.
辛晴. (2011). 動態能力的測度與功效: 知識觀視角的實證研究. 中國科技論壇, 8(8), 106-110.
林柏年. (2018). 建構產業生態系統與生態系統創新能力之研究 ─以電動機車產業為例. (碩士). 國立嘉義大學, 嘉義市. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/11296/3dh5w4
邱錦田、王玳琪、蕭喆鴻、馮馨儀, 簡. 湯. 吳. 黃. 葛. (2015). 創新生態系統發展策略研究. Retrieved from https://payment.narlabs.org.tw/stpibooks/book/bookDetail?id=000000004ca33539014d0e9a376105fc
洪啟原. (2020). 不只日本，這些國家也規劃禁售燃油車. Retrieved from https://udn.com/news/story/6811/5064890
紀品志. (2017). 荷蘭阿姆斯特丹推出共享電動機車，可隨處租還車，不需找停靠站. Retrieved from https://www.bnext.com.tw/article/44085/amsterdam-e-scooter-sharing-felyx
孫連才. (2013). 商業生態系統視角下的企業動態能力與商業模式互動研究. 華中科技大學,
寇元虎. (2017). 企業動態能力與績效關系研究. 北京科技大學,
康瓈云. (2018). 由動態能力觀點探討新創企業與創業生態系統互動 - 以Viscovery與Perkd為例. 政治大學, Available from Airiti AiritiLibrary database. (2018年)
張乃瑄, & 温蓓章. (2019). 我國電動機車產業現況與迎戰國際競爭策略. 經濟前瞻(183), 84-88.
張國鳳. (2020). 台灣電動機車特徵價格與購車補助政策分析. (碩士). 國立中央大學, 桃園縣. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/11296/29wk3r
許致維. (2019). 台灣電動機車廠商之成長策略探討：以Gogoro為例. 國立臺灣大學, Available from Airiti AiritiLibrary database. (2019年)
郭柏成. (2010). 台灣電動機車的消費者購買行為之研究. (碩士). 國立成功大學, 台南市. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/11296/9n4746
郭國泰, 司徒達賢, & 于卓民. (2010). 商業生態系統中利基者策略之變遷：以資訊安全軟體公司爲例(1986-2000). [Niche Players` Strategic Changes in the Business Ecosystem: The Case of Information Security Software Firms (1986-2000)]. 輔仁管理評論, 17(2), 1-38. doi:10.29698/fjmr.201005.0001
陳巧庭. (2020). 以動態資源觀點探討電動機車產業競爭優勢 - 以Gogoro為例. (碩士). 國立中山大學, 高雄市. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/11296/dtry67
曾郁茜. (2020). 越南電動機車市場現況與商機. 機械工業雜誌(442), 63-68.
鈕文英. (2021). 質性研究方法與論文寫作三版. 臺北市: 雙葉書廊有限公司.
經濟部工業局. (2017). 電動車輛免徵使用牌照稅(107~110 年)稅式支出評估報告. Retrieved from https://www.mof.gov.tw/download/69d3d46bf272437a9a4a381354e08047
廖恆漢. (2013). 台灣電動機車推廣政策研究. (碩士). 國立成功大學, 台南市. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/11296/75zzhq
蔡至兼. (2019). 電動車的百年怨念大反攻？油電爭輸贏誰能出線. Retrieved from https://www.lian-car.com/articles/read/29108.html
韓煒, & 鄧渝. (2020). 商業生態系統研究述評與展望. 南開管理評論(03). |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
科技管理與智慧財產研究所
108364122 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108364122 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| DOI: | 10.6814/NCCU202101199 |
| Appears in Collections: | [科技管理與智慧財產研究所] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 412201.pdf | 1852Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 1 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
