TheEfficiencyofEconomicPerformance,Electricity Consumption...

Research ArticleThe Efficiency of Economic Performance ElectricityConsumption and Environmental Pollutants in Taiwan

Wen-jie Zou1 Tai-Yu Lin 2 Yung-ho Chiu 3 Ting Teng4 and Kuei Ying Huang3

1Institute of Economics of Fujian Normal University Fuzhou China2Department of Business Administration National Cheng Kung University No1 University Road Tainan City 701 Taiwan3Department of Economics Soochow University 56 Kueiyang St Sec 1 Taipei 10048 Taiwan4Business School Soochow University 56 Kueiyang St Sec 1 Taipei 10048 Taiwan

Correspondence should be addressed to Tai-Yu Lin eickylagmailcom

Received 10 January 2020 Revised 5 April 2020 Accepted 17 April 2020 Published 5 May 2020

Academic Editor Gaetano Zizzo

Copyright copy 2020Wen-jie Zou et al -is is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution Licensewhich permits unrestricted use distribution and reproduction in any medium provided the original work is properly cited

Finding the balance between economic development and environmental protection is a major problem for many countries aroundthe world Air pollution caused by economic growth has caused serious damage to humansrsquo living environment and as improvingenergy and resource efficiencies is the first priority many countries are targeting to move towards a sustainable environment andeconomic development -is study uses the modified dynamic SBM (slack-based measure) model to explore the economicefficiency and air pollutants emission efficiency in Taiwanrsquos counties and cities from 2012 to 2015 by taking labor motor vehiclesand electricity consumption as inputs and average disposable income as output Particulate matter (PM25) nitrogen oxideemissions (NO2) and sulfur oxide emissions (SO2) are undesirable outputs whereas factory fixed assets are a carry-over variableand the results show the following (1) the regions with the best overall efficiency between 2012 and 2015 include Taipei CityKeelung City Hsinchu City Chiayi City and Taitung County (2) in counties and cities with poor overall efficiency performancethe average disposable income per household has no significant relationship with air pollutant emissions (3) in counties and citieswhere overall efficiency is poor the average efficiency of each householdrsquos disposable income is small and (4) except for the fivecounties and cities with the best overall performance the three air pollutants in the other fourteen counties and cities are highOverall the air pollution of most areas needs improvement

1 Introduction

Taiwan one of the Asian four dragons has high energy(electricity) consumption population and vehicle densityand severe air pollution -is study is going to explore theeconomic performance efficiency energy consumption(electricity) and air pollutant emission efficiency ofTaiwan

From the World Health Organizationrsquos [1] nationalranking of PM25 concentrations in September 2011Taiwan ranks 32nd among 38 survey countries Amongnearly 600 cities worldwide Chiayi and Kaohsiung madeit among the top ten From the average concentration ofPM25 in 2013 the risk of lung cancer and asthma in

children increased to 15 with the risk from stroke heartdisease and chronic respiratory disease increasing by25 In 2014 more than 6000 deaths in Taiwan werecaused by exposure to PM25

Indeed PM25 causes damage in Taiwan -e impact ofCO2 SO2 and PM25 cannot be overlooked Most studies inthe literature explore the effects of energy and environ-mental efficiencies on CO2 SO2 and NO2 emissions Manyresearches analyze the energy efficiency of China Wu et al[2] use two-stage network DEA (data envelopment analysis)to assess Chinarsquos energy conservation and emission re-duction efficiency during 2006ndash2010 Energy saving andemission reduction in the eastern region are better than inthe central and western regions Lin and Du [3] employ the

HindawiMathematical Problems in EngineeringVolume 2020 Article ID 8260965 16 pageshttpsdoiorg10115520208260965

new nonradial directional distance function to assess re-gional energy and carbon dioxide emissions efficiency inChina from 1997 to 2009 -e results show that most ofChinarsquos performances in energy use and carbon dioxideemissions are poor Industrial sector expansion is negativelycorrelated with Chinarsquos regional energy and CO2 emissionsperformance Wang et al [4] utilize multidirectional effi-ciency analysis (MEA) to look at regional energy andemissions efficiencies in China from 1997 to 2010 -eeastern region is more efficient than the central and westernregions Hebei Shanxi Inner Mongolia Shandong Henanand Hubei have higher potentials for energy conservationand emission reduction Li et al [5] collect energy data from2000 to 2009 in China and analyze the impact of threeinternal factors (economic structure energy consumptionstructure and technological progress) on energy intensity inChina using the DEA-based Malmquist method -eyconvert technology into three components to see the dif-ferent impacts in various regions Other researches such as[6ndash19] also focus on the energy efficiency of China

Some in the literature analyze the impacts of energy andenvironmental efficiencies on PM25 emissions such as[20ndash30] Martınez [20] uses two-stage DEA to assess theenergy efficiency of non-energy-intensive industries (NEISs)in Germany and Colombia from 1998 to 2005 -e highestenergy efficiency in non-energy-intensive industries (NEISs)in Colombia is derived from the cost minimization modelshowing that energy prices are not the key to improvingenergy efficiency Sueyoshi and Yuan [21] utilize the DEAmodel to explore regional environmental efficiency per-formance in China from 2013 to 2014 -e Chinese gov-ernment should allocate economic resources to cities locatedin the northwestern region (including Lanzhou XiningYinchuan andUrumqi) and strengthen stricter regulation ofenergy consumption in major urban environments (such asBeijing Tianjin Shanghai and Chongqing) Ma et al [22]use the spatial autoregressive model to analyze the spatialdiffusion effects of PM25 in 152 cities in China PM25 issignificantly affected by geospatial and regional economiesLi et al [23] utilize the multilevel frontiers DEA model toexplore the environmental efficiency of 49 cities in China-eir results present that PM25 and SO2 emissions aresignificantly related to urban population and energytechnologies

-ere are two contributions of this study First we usesmall economy as the research sample As can be seenfrom the above literature most of the research on airpollutants is based on large economies such as China-ese large economies have rich natural resources andfocus on industrial and manufacturing developmentHowever the problem of air pollution is not limited tolarge economies and it cannot be overlooked in somenon-industrial-oriented small economies For exampleaccording to the Taiwan Environmental ProtectionAgencyrsquos 2016 and 2017 Air Quality Monitoring Report[31] the annual air quality indicators (AQIs) hit 3934and 421 respectively or out of reach from a good gradeof 50 -e other contribution is model modification

Most past models are still dominated by radial (CharnesCooper and Rhodes model abbreviation as CCR modelBanker Charnes and Cooper model abbreviation as BCCmodel) nonradial (slack-based measure abbreviation asSBM) two-stage DEA analysis and directional distancefunction However these models employ static analysislack dynamic considerations and cannot understand thechanges in efficiency of energy and environmental pol-lutants -us this study employs the modified dynamicSBM to evaluate the situation for each county and city Weutilize 19 counties and cities in Taiwan from 2012 to 2015with data on the number of employed people motorvehicles and electricity consumption and take the averagedisposable income per household as output PM25 ni-trogen oxide emissions (NO2) and sulfur oxide emissions(SO2) as undesirable outputs (recently the problem of airpollution has drawn the attention of many scholars be-cause the issue of CO2 emission has been analyzed bymany researches this study focuses on the other airpollutants (SO2 NO2 and PM25 in Taiwan) and fixedassets as the carry-over variable) By above input andoutput variables this study evaluates the economic per-formance electricity consumption efficiency and airpollutant emission efficiency of Taiwan

2 Research Methods

21 DEA Farrell [32] proposes the efficiency frontier butthe model is only for a single input and a single outputCharnes et al [33] extend Farrellrsquos theory for multiple inputsand multiple outputs naming it the CCR model Bankeret al [34] propose their BCC model which can determinevariable returns to scale For the first time Tone [35] pro-poses nonradial and nonoriented estimation methodsthrough slacks calling it the SBM model Many efficiencyassessment methods have been subsequently proposed suchas super DEA hybrid DEA network DEA two-stage DEAfuzzy DEA and three-stage DEA

22 Dynamic DEA Many research studies utilize staticanalysis with dynamic DEA window analysis to analyzedynamic models Fare et al [36] offer the Malmquistindex but during two periods the researchers do notanalyze the impact of carry-over Fare and Grosskopf [37]then offer a new analysis of the dynamic impact of con-secutive activities Chen [38] and K S Park and K Park[39] subsequently present SBM studies of several dy-namics with the dynamic analysis model extended into aslack-based measure by Tone and Tsutsui [40] In order tocarry-over activities as a form of connectivity they pro-pose the SBM (slack-based measures) dynamic DEAmodel Tone and Tsutsui [40] develop the model into SBMdynamic analysis with carry-over activities as a link andthe existence of activities divided into a four-modelanalysis (1) desirable (Zgood) (2) undesirable (Zbad) (3)discretionary (Zfree) (4) nondiscretionary (Zfix) withcarry-over variables from period t to period t + 1

2 Mathematical Problems in Engineering

-e following is the nonoriented model

ρlowast0 min(1T)1113936

Tt1W

t 1 minus (1m + nbad) 1113936mi1 wminus

i sminusitxiot( 1113857 + 1113936

nbadr1 sbadit zbadrot( 11138571113872 11138731113960 1113961

(1T)1113936Tt1W

t 1 +(1s + ngood) 1113936sl1 w+

i s+ityiot( 1113857 + 1113936

ngoodr1 s

goodit zgoodrot1113872 11138731113872 11138731113876 1113877

(1)

1113944

n

r1zαrjtλ

tj 1113944

n

j1zαrjtλ

t+1j (foralli t 1 T minus 1) (2)

Equation (2) is the connection equation between t andt+ 1

xiot 1113944n

j1xijtλ

tj + s

minusit (i 1 m t 1 T)

xfixiot 1113944

n

j1xfixiotλ

tj (i 1 p t 1 T)

ylot 1113944

n

l1yljtλ

tj minus s

+lt (l 1 s t 1 T)

yfixlot 1113944

n

l1yfixlotλ

tj (l 1 r t 1 T)

zgoodrot 1113944

n

r1zgoodrot λt

j minus sgoodrt (r 1 ngood t 1 T)

zbadrot 1113944

n

r1zbadrjt λ

tj + s

badrt (r 1 nbad t 1 T)

zfreerot 1113944

n

r1zfreerjt λ

tj + s

freert (r 1 nfree t 1 T)

zfixrot 1113944

n

r1zfixrjtλ

tj (r 1 nfix t 1 T)

1113944

n

j1λt

j 1 (t 1 T)

λtj ge 0 s

minusit ge 0 s

+lt ge 0 s

goodrt ge 0 s

badrt ge 0 and s

freert free(foralli t)

(3)

-e most efficient solution is

ρ0t 1 minus (1m + nbad) 1113936

mi1 wminus

i sminus lowastiot xiot( 1113857 + 1113936

nbadr1 sbadlowastrot zbad

rot( 11138571113872 1113873

1+(1s + ngood) 1113936sl1 w+

i s+lowastit ylot( 1113857 + 1113936

ngoodr1 s

goodlowastrot zgood

rot1113872 11138731113872 1113873

(i 1 T)

(4)

23 2e Modified Dynamic SBM Model Since this studyconsiders the undesirable output in the dynamic SBM

model Tone and Tsutsuirsquos [40] dynamic SBM model can bemodified to be the undesirable output in the dynamic SBMmodel Suppose the observation is a J (J 1 n) di-mension decision-making unit (DMU) set in which theDMU under evaluation is represented by DMUO and subjectto DMUO isin J -e input and output used to compute theefficiency are labeled as m inputs xijt (i 1 m) and soutputs Yljt respectively Let output Y be divided into (YgYb) where Yg is the desirable output Yb is the undesirableoutput and Zgood is carried over from period t to periodt+ 1 -e following is the nonoriented model

Mathematical Problems in Engineering 3

θlowast0 min(1T)1113936

Tt1W

t 1 minus (1m)1113936mi1s

minusitxiot1113858 1113859

(1T)1113936Tt1W

t 1 + 1s1 + s2 + ngood( 1113857 1113936s1l1s

+g

jt yg

lot + 1113936s2l1s

minus bjt yb

lot + 1113936ngoodr1 s

goodrt zgoodrot1113876 11138771113876 1113877

(5)

-e following six equations show the connectionequation between t and t+ 1

1113944

n

j1zαijtλ

tj 1113944

n

j1zαijtλ

t+1j (foralli t 1 T minus 1)

xiot 1113944m

i1xijtλ

ti + s


ylot 1113944s1

l1y

+g

lotλtj minus s

+g

lt (l 1 s1 t 1 T)

ylot 1113944s2

l1y

minus blotλ

tj minus s

minus blt (l 1 s2 t 1 T)

zgoodrot 1113944

ngood

r1zgoodrot λt

j minus sgoodrt (R 1 ngood t 1 T)

1113944

n

j1λt

j 1 (t 1 T)

λtj ge 0 s

minusit ge 0 s

+g

lt ge 0 sminus blt ge 0 s

goodrt ge 0

(6)


ρ0t 1 minus (1m) 1113936

mi1 sminus lowast

iot xiot( 1113857( 1113857

1 +(1s1 + s2 + ngood) 1113936s1l1 s

+glowastjt ylot1113872 1113873 + 1113936

s2l1 sminus blowast

jt ylot1113872 1113873 + 1113936ngoodr1 s

goodlowastrot zgoodrot1113872 11138731113872 1113873

(i 1 T) (7)

In equation (5) Wt denotes the weight of time and therange of time of this model is from 2012 to 2015 xiot in-dicates outputs which are labor motor vehicle number andelectricity consumption y

+giot denotes desirable output which

is disposable income yminus biot denotes undesirable outputs

which are PM25 NOx and SO2 Zgoodrot is carry over which is

fixed assets sminusit indicates input slack s

+gjt indicates desirable

output slack sminus bjt indicates undesirable output slack s

goodrot

indicates undesirable output slack-is study lists labor motor vehicle number and elec-

tricity consumption as inputs Suspended particulateemissions (PM25) nitrogen oxide emissions (NO2) and

sulfur oxide emissions (SO2) are undesirable outputs Fixedassets are a carry-over variable Table 1 lists the details

-e number of motor vehicles electricity consumptionaverage disposable income and NO2 SO2 and PM25 effi-ciency indices

Hu and Wang [19] total-factor energy efficiency index isused to overcome any possible bias in the traditional energyefficiency indicator For each specific evaluated country wecalculate the number of motor vehicles electricity con-sumption average disposable income and NO2 SO2 andPM25 efficiencies from the following equations

the number of motor vehiclesrsquo efficiency targetmotor vehiclesrsquo efficiency input (i t)

actualmotor vehiclesrsquo efficiency input (i t) (8)

electricity consumption efficiency target electricity consumption input (i t)

actual electricity consumption input (i t) (9)


average disposable efficiency actual average disposible income output(i t)

target average disposible output(i t) (10)

NO2 efficiency target NO2 undesirable output(i t)

actual NO2 undesirable output(i t) (11)

PM25 efficiency target PM25 undesirable output(i t)

actual PM25 undesirable output(i t) (12)

SO2 efficiency target SO2 undesirable output(i t)

actual SO2 undesirable output(i t) (13)

-e efficiency index indicates the ratio of target valueand actual value -e target value indicates the most efficientvalue -us the efficiency index denotes the difference ofactual vale and target value -e index (ratio) equals to 1when the actual value reaches the target value and the actualvalue is most efficient -e index is more efficient when thevalue is close to 1

If the target motor vehicle number and electricityconsumption input equal the actual inputs and the NO2PM25 and SO2 outputs equal the actual undesirable out-puts then the motor vehicle number electricity con-sumption and NO2 PM25 and SO2 efficiencies equal 1indicating no room for improvement on their efficiency-e actual value reaches the target If the target motorvehicle number and electricity consumption inputs are lessthan the actual input and the NO2 PM25 and SO2 outputsare less than the actual undesirable outputs then the motorvehicle number electricity consumption and NO2 PM25and SO2 efficiencies are less than 1 indicating the actualvalue is inefficiency -ere is room for improvement onactual value

If the target average disposable income output is equal tothe actual average disposable income output then the av-erage disposable income efficiency equals 1 indicatingoverall efficiency If the actual average disposable incomeoutput is less than the target average disposable incomeoutput then the average disposable income efficiency is lessthan 1 indicating overall inefficiency

3 Empirical Results and Analysis

31 Sources and Variables

311 Data Source -is research takes Taiwan as a casestudy from 2012 to 2015 including New Taipei City TaipeiCity Taoyuan City Taichung City Tainan City KaohsiungCity Yilan County Hsinchu County Miaoli CountyChanghua County Nantou County Yunlin County ChiayiCounty Pingtung County Taitung County Hualien CountyKeelung City Hsinchu City and Chiayi City -e source isfrom Taiwan Statistics Department Taiwan Power Com-pany and the Environmental Protection Agency of theExecutive Yuan -e software used by this research isMaxDEA -is software is a benefit for DEA analysis es-pecially for model with undesirable output

312 Variable and the Structure of Model -is is a dynamicmodel with several periods such as period t and period t+ 1-e inputs are labor motor vehicle number and electricityconsumption Labor and electricity consumption are usedfor economic development Electricity is the main energyconsumption of Taiwan A large amount of air pollutants aregenerated during the production of electricity (ex thermalpower) Vehicles are a source of air pollutants in daily life

-ere are two kinds of output -e desirable output isaverage disposable income which is an indicator of eco-nomic performance -e undesirable outputs are air pol-lutant which is generated by economic development andcitizenrsquos daily life -e carry-over factor which continues toeach period (ex period t to period t+ 1) is fixed assets -elinkage of variables is shown in Figure 1

32 Statistics of Input and Output Variables Table 2 sum-marizes the statistics of Taiwanrsquos counties and cities from2012 to 2015 In 2012 the average number of laborers is569474 the maximum is 1892000 in New Taipei City andthe minimum is 103000 in Taitung County with a standarddeviation of 523758 -e average number of motor vehiclesis 1166673 with a maximum of 3309078 units in NewTaipei City a minimum of 246208 units in Taitung Countyand a standard deviation of 1013652 units -e averageelectricity consumption is 7819 billion the maximum is22399 billion in New Taipei City the minimum is 4851million in Taitung County and the standard deviation is7529 billion degrees -e average yearly disposable incomeis NT$874514 the maximum is NT$1278278 in TaipeiCity the minimum is NT$670017 in Taitung County andthe standard deviation is NT$158827 -e average amountof suspended particulate emissions is 3941 metric tons themaximum is 10696 metric tons in Kaohsiung City theminimum is 514 metric tons in Chiayi City and the standarddeviation of 2631 -e average sulfur oxide emissions are6397 metric tons with a maximum of 42929 metric tons inKaohsiung City a minimum of 60metric tons in Chiayi Cityand a standard deviation of 10594 metric tons -e averageNOx emissions are 20213 metric tons with a maximum of76826 metric tons in Kaohsiung City a minimum of 2281metric tons in Chiayi City and a standard deviation of19626 metric tons -e average fixed asset investment for afactory is NT$56753880 thousand the maximum value is


NT$199155007 thousand in Tainan City the minimum isNT$324609 thousand in Chiayi City and the standarddeviation is NT$66919221 thousand (Figure 2)

According to Table 2 regardless of the amount of labormotor vehicles and electricity consumption the maxi-mum values are mainly concentrated in New Taipei Cityand Tainan City -e minimum values are mainly con-centrated in Taitung County and Chiayi City For averagedisposable income the maximum value in the 4 years is inTaipei City -e minimum values are mainly concen-trated in Taitung County and Chiayi City -e maximumemission of suspended particulates is mainly in Kaoh-siung City and the minimum emissions are in ChiayiCity -e maximum emissions of sulfur oxides are inKaohsiung City and the minimum emissions are inChiayi City -e maximum fixed asset investment for afactory is in Tainan City and the minimum value is inTaitung County

33 Empirical Analysis -is study explore the overall effi-ciency of Taiwanrsquos counties and cities from 2012 to 2015

331 Overall Efficiency As shown in Table 3 the overallefficiency average is 08215 and the average efficiency foreach year from 2012 to 2015 is respectively 08360 0798408199 and 08370 -e room for improvement is still be-tween 163 and 202 -e four-year average efficiencymaximum is 1 in Taipei City Taitung County Keelung CityHsinchu City and Chiayi City -e lowest 4-year averageefficiency is in Tainan City -e bottom three rankings areYunlin County Changhua County and Tainan City

-e average efficiency in 2012 is 08360 and the mostefficient regions are Taipei City Taitung County KeelungCity Hsinchu City and Chiayi City -e bottom three areTaichung City Yunlin County and Tainan City -e averageefficiency in 2013 is 07984 and the most efficient are Taipei

Table 1 Definitions of variables

Variable Definition

Input

Labor Above fifteen-year-old paid worker or engaged in unpaid family work for more than 15hours (unit person)

Motor vehicle number Number of motor vehicles with uniform licenses to the supervision authorities at the end ofthe year (unit vehicle)

Electricity consumption Electricity sold to the service industry government schools agriculture forestry fisheriesand industrial sales (unit degree)

Desirable output Average disposableincome Disposable incometotal number of households (unit NT$)

Undesirableoutput

Suspended particulateemissions Total emissions of suspended particulates (PM25) (unit metric tons)

NOx emissions Total emissions of nitrogen oxides (including nitrogen monoxide and nitrogen dioxide)(unit metric tons)

Sulfur oxide emissions Total emissions of sulfur oxides (including sulfur dioxide) (unit metric tons)

Carry-over Fixed assets

-e amount of fixed assets newly added by the factory in normal operations includingequipment investment (antipollution equipment machinery and equipment transportationvehicles and other equipment) land acquisition dormitory factory warehouse office and

other construction projects (unit NT$1000)

Period t

Input

Output

Period t + 1

OutputDisposable incomePM25SO2NOx

(i)(ii)

(iii)(iv)

Disposable incomePM25SO2NOx

(i)(ii)

(iii)(iv)

Carry-over fix asset

(i)(ii)

(iii)

LaborMotor vehicle Electricity consumption

Input(i)

(ii)(iii)


Figure 1 -e structure of the model


Tabl

e2

Descriptio

nof

statistics

Variable

2012

2013

2014

2015

Inpu

ts

Labo

r(people)

Maxim

um1892000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1910000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1927000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1945000(N

ewTaipei

City

)Minim

um103000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

569474

574947

580736

586947

Standard

deviation

523758

529741

534914

541477

Motor

vehicles

Maxim

um3309078(N

ewTaipei

City

)3233275(N

ewTaipei

City

)3178499(N

ewTaipei

City

)3183551(N

ewTaipei

City

)Minim

um246208(Taitung

Cou

nty)

233394(Taitung

Cou

nty)

230890(Taitung

Cou

nty)

230954(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

1166673

1125181

1110507

1115854

Standard

deviation

1013652

979776

966127

971184

Electricity

consum

ption(degrees)

Maxim

um22399088277

(New

Taipei

City

)22850473858

(Taoyuan

City

)23045858780

(Taoyuan

City

)22801815338

(Taoyuan

City

)

Minim

um485166744(Taitung

Cou

nty)

488240891(Taitung

Cou

nty)

496469053(Taitung

Cou

nty)

520574022(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

7819496456

7988861231

8102790831

8121363829

Standard

deviation

7529994233

7694682886

7811168091

7826312606

Desira

bleou

tput

Average

disposable

income(N

T$)

Maxim

um1278278(TaipeiC

ity)

1279195(TaipeiC

ity)

1292604(TaipeiC

ity)

1314031(TaipeiC

ity)

Minim

um670017(Taitung

Cou

nty)

676390(Taitung

Cou

nty)

667933(C

hiayiC

ity)

636162(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

874514

889033

896941

895059

Standard

deviation

158827

171147

182797

167073

Und

esira

bleou

tput

Suspendedparticulateem

issions

(PM

25)

(metrictons)

Maxim

um10696

(Kaohsiung

City

)10336

(Kaohsiung

City

)10174

(Kaohsiung

City

)9893(K

aohsiung

City

)Minim

um514(C

hiayiC

ity)

491(C

hiayiC

ity)

479(C

hiayiC

ity)

471(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

3941

3901

3825

3742

Standard

deviation

2631

2606

2557

2487

Sulfu

roxideem

issions

(SO2)

(metric

tons)

Maxim

um42929

(Kaohsiung

City

)37849

(Kaohsiung

City

)37132

(Kaohsiung

City

)35667

(Kaohsiung

City

)Minim

um60

(ChiayiC

ity)

44(C

hiayiC

ity)

44(C

hiayiC

ity)

43(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

6397

5960

5845

5638

Standard

deviation

10594

9614

9428

9051

Nitrogen

oxideem

issions

(NO

2)(m

etrictons)

Maxim

um76826

(Kaohsiung

City

)74061

(Kaohsiung

City

)69934

(Kaohsiung

City

)65068

(Kaohsiung

City

)Minim

um2281(C

hiayiC

ity)

2283(C

hiayiC

ity)

2101(C

hiayiC

ity)

1944(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

20213

20321

19250

18120

Standard

deviation

19626

19228

18167

16922

Carryover

Fixedassets

(NT$

1000)

Maxim

um199155007(TainanCity

)199637849(Taichun

gCity

)213953949(TainanCity

)232090820(Taoyuan

City

)Minim

um324609(C

hiayiC

ity)

264800(Taitung

Cou

nty)

773560(Taitung

Cou

nty)

903929(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

56753880

55750421

62653275

65734355

Standard

deviation

66919221

68137797

75504497

74984091


City Taitung County Keelung City Hsinchu City andChiayi City -e bottom three are Tainan City ChanghuaCounty and Yunlin County-e average efficiency in 2014 is08199 with the most efficient being Taipei City TaitungCounty Keelung City Hsinchu City and Chiayi City -eaverage efficiency in 2015 is 08370 with the most efficientbeing Taipei City Taitung County Keelung City HsinchuCity and Chiayi City -e bottom three are Yunlin CountyChanghua County and Tainan City In 2012 the averageefficiency of 08360 is the highest In 2013 the average ef-ficiency is 07984 the average efficiency in 2014 is 08199

and the average efficiency in 2015 is 08370 -e most ef-ficient are Taipei City Taitung County Keelung CityHsinchu City and Chiayi City the worst are Tainan CountyChanghua County and Yunlin County

332 Annual Input and Output Variable EfficienciesFrom electricity consumption in Table 4 the four-year ef-ficiency value of 1 covers Taipei City Hsinchu CountyNantou County Yunlin County Chiayi County PingtungCounty Taitung County Hsinchu City and Chiayi City

Maximum Minimum Average Standarddeviation

Labor (people)

20122013

20142015

0

1000000

2000000

3000000

(a)


20122013

20142015

Average disposable income (NT$)

0

1000000

2000000

(b)


20122013

20142015

Electricity consumption (degrees)

0100000000002000000000030000000000

(c)


20122013

20142015


0500000

10000001500000

(d)


20122013

20142015

Suspended particulate emissions (PM25) (metric tons)

0

10000

20000

(e)


20122013

20142015

Sulfur oxide emissions (SO2) (metric tons)

0

20000

40000

60000

(f )


20122013

20142015

Nitrogen oxide emissions (NO2)

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

(g)


20122013

20142015

Fixed assets (NT$1000)

050000000

100000000150000000200000000250000000

(h)

Figure 2 Description of statistics


-ose with efficiency values below the four-year average of08387 are Taoyuan City Taichung City Tainan CityKaohsiung City Yilan County andHualien County In 2012there are 9 counties and cities that need to be adjustedAmong them Taoyuan City Kaohsiung City and TainanCity need the greatest improvement as their efficiencyvalues are 04376 04741 and 04376 -e remaining 10counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1 and do not

need to adjust In 2013 there are 8 counties and cities thatneed to be adjusted Among them Taoyuan City KaohsiungCity and Tainan City need the greatest improvement astheir efficiency values are 04312 04690 and 04586 -eremaining 11 counties and cities have an efficiency value of1 In 2014 there are 9 counties and cities that need to beadjusted Among them Taoyuan City Kaohsiung City andTainan City need the greatest improvement as their effi-ciency values are 04279 04589 and 04716 -e remaining10 counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1 In 2015there are 9 counties and cities that need to be adjustedAmong them Taoyuan City Kaohsiung City and TainanCity need the greatest improvement as their efficiencyvalues are 04312 04791 and 04463 -e remaining 10counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1

From Table 5 on motor vehicles the cities with a four-year efficiency value of 1 are Taipei City Taitung CountyKeelung City Hsinchu City and Chiayi City -ose withefficiency values below the four-year average of 08351 areNew Taipei City Taoyuan City Taichung City Tainan CityKaohsiung City Changhua County Yunlin County ChiayiCounty and Pingtung County In 2012 there are 14 countiesand cities with motor vehicles that need to be adjustedAmong them New Taipei City Kaohsiung City andPingtung County need the greatest improvement as theirefficiency values are 05610 05963 and 06503 -eremaining 5 counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1In 2013 there are 14 counties and cities with motor vehiclesthat need to be adjusted Among them New Taipei CityKaohsiung City and Pingtung County need the greatestimprovement as their efficiency values are 05576 06143and 06587 -e remaining 5 counties and cities have anefficiency value of 1 In 2014 there are 14 counties and citieswith motor vehicles that need to be adjusted Among them

Table 3 Overall efficiency of Taiwanrsquos counties and cities from 2012 to 2015

DMU 2012 2013 2014 2015 Average RankNew Taipei City 07134 07280 07331 07302 07261 13Taipei City 1 1 1 1 1 1Taoyuan City 08140 08134 08509 08482 08312 8Taichung City 06937 07262 07393 07383 07239 14Tainan City 06242 06579 06497 06649 06488 19Kaohsiung City 06995 07155 07099 07206 07113 15Yilan County 09381 07687 09077 09944 08940 7Hsinchu County 09952 09048 09348 093 09401 6Miaoli County 07982 07312 08411 07948 07893 9Changhua County 07037 06566 06611 06671 06716 18Nantou County 08736 07083 07808 07647 07775 11Yunlin County 06761 06365 06824 07115 06756 17Chiayi County 07870 06899 06712 07818 07287 12Pingtung County 07424 06687 06764 07312 07032 16Taitung County 1 1 1 1 1 1Hualien County 08255 07640 07398 08251 07868 10Keelung City 1 1 1 1 1 1Hsinchu City 1 1 1 1 1 1Chiayi City 1 1 1 1 1 1Average value 08360 07984 08199 08370 08215Standard deviation 01347 01377 01363 01284 1Maximum 1 1 1 1 06488Minimum 06242 06365 06497 06649 01312

Table 4 Electricity consumption efficiency of counties and cities inTaiwan from 2012 to 2015

Electricity consumptionDMU 2012 2013 2014 2015New Taipei City 0879 08759 08672 08676Taipei City 1 1 1 1Taoyuan City 04376 04312 04279 04312Taichung City 05447 05229 05147 05093Tainan City 04993 04856 04589 04463Kaohsiung City 04741 0469 04716 04791Yilan County 07851 08123 07012 08878Hsinchu County 1 1 1 1Miaoli County 08566 09567 07435 08359Changhua County 09485 1 09369 1Nantou County 1 1 1 1Yunlin County 1 1 1 1Chiayi County 1 1 1 1Pingtung County 1 1 1 1Taitung County 1 1 1 1Hualien County 05506 05268 0508 05954Keelung City 1 1 1 1Hsinchu City 1 1 1 1Chiayi City 1 1 1 1Average value 08408 08463 08226 08449Standard deviation 02122 02207 02243 02183


New Taipei City Kaohsiung City and Taichung City needthe greatest improvement as their efficiency values are05563 06156 and 06640 -e remaining 5 counties andcities have an efficiency value of 1 In 2015 there are 14counties and cities with motor vehicles that need to beadjusted Among them New Taipei City Kaohsiung Cityand Taichung City need the greatest improvement as theirefficiency values are 05535 06127 and 06542 -eremaining 5 counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1

From the average disposable income of Table 6 the citieswith a four-year efficiency value of 1 are Taipei City TaitungCounty Keelung City Hsinchu City and Chiayi City -osewith efficiency values below the four-year average of 08228are New Taipei City Taichung City Tainan City KaohsiungCity Miaoli County Changhua County Nantou CountyYunlin County Chiayi County Pingtung County andHualien County In 2012 there are 14 counties and cities thatneed to be adjusted Among them Taichung City KaohsiungCity and New Taipei City need the most improvement astheir efficiency values are 06937 06995 and 07134 -eremaining 5 counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1In 2013 there are 14 counties and cities that need to beadjusted Among them Changhua County PingtungCounty and Chiayi County need the most improvement astheir efficiency values are 06566 06687 and 06899 -eremaining 5 counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1In 2014 there are 14 counties and cities that need to beadjusted Among them Tainan City Changhua County andChiayi County need the most improvement as their effi-ciency values are 06497 06611 and 06712-e remaining 5counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1 In 2015there are 14 counties and cities that need to be adjustedAmong them Tainan City Changhua County and Yunlin

County need the most improvement as their efficiencyvalues are 06649 06671 and 07115 -e remaining 5counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1

333 Annual PM25 SO2 and NO2 Efficiencies From Ta-ble 7 on PM25 the cities with a four-year efficiency value of 1are Taipei City Taitung County Keelung City Hsinchu Cityand Chiayi City -ose with efficiency values below the four-year average 04362 are Taipei City Taoyuan City TaichungCity Tainan City Kaohsiung City Yilan County HsinchuCounty Miaoli County Changhua County Nantou CountyYunlin County Chiayi County Pingtung County andHualien County In 2012 there are 14 counties and cities thatneed to make adjustments for suspended particulate emis-sions Hualien County Kaohsiung City and Yilan Countyneed the greatest improvement as their efficiency values are00874 01609 and 01969 -e remaining 5 counties andcities have an efficiency value of 1 In 2013 there are 14counties and cities that need to make adjustments forsuspended particulate emissions Hualien County Kaoh-siung City and Yilan County need the greatest improve-ment as their efficiency values are 00852 01615 and 01644-e remaining 5 counties and cities have an efficiency valueof 1 In 2014 there are 14 counties and cities that need tomake adjustments for suspended particulate emissionsHualien County Kaohsiung City and Yilan County need thegreatest improvement as their efficiency values are 0084001616 and 01673 -e remaining 5 counties and cities havean efficiency value of 1 In 2015 there are 14 counties andcities that need to make adjustments for suspended par-ticulate emissions Hualien County Kaohsiung City andYilan County need the greatest improvement as their

Table 5 Motor vehicle efficiency in counties and cities of Taiwanfrom 2012 to 2015

Motor vehicleDMU 2012 2013 2014 2015New Taipei City 05610 05576 05563 05535Taipei City 1 1 1 1Taoyuan City 07954 07811 07759 07609Taichung City 06809 06755 06640 06542Tainan City 06901 07083 06974 06949Kaohsiung City 05963 06143 06156 06127Yilan County 09602 09530 09365 09359Hsinchu County 09584 09424 09330 09222Miaoli County 08804 08748 08673 08708Changhua County 07211 07271 07215 07187Nantou County 08385 08425 08417 08426Yunlin County 07965 08094 08045 08051Chiayi County 08267 08368 08312 08342Pingtung County 06503 06587 06652 06622Taitung County 1 1 1 1Hualien County 09281 09189 09424 09599Keelung City 1 1 1 1Hsinchu City 1 1 1 1Chiayi City 1 1 1 1Average value 08360 08369 08343 08330Standard deviation 01460 01421 01430 01454

Table 6 Average disposable income efficiency of counties andcities in Taiwan from 2012 to 2015

Average disposable incomeDMU 2012 2013 2014 2015New Taipei City 07134 0728 07331 07302Taipei City 1 1 1 1Taoyuan City 0814 08134 08509 08482Taichung City 06937 07262 07393 07383Tainan City 06242 06579 06497 06649Kaohsiung City 06995 07155 07099 07206Yilan County 09381 07687 09077 09944Hsinchu County 09952 09048 09348 093Miaoli County 07982 07312 08411 07948Changhua County 07037 06566 06611 06671Nantou County 08736 07083 07808 07647Yunlin County 06761 06365 06824 07115Chiayi County 0787 06899 06712 07818Pingtung County 07424 06687 06764 07312Taitung County 1 1 1 1Hualien County 08255 0764 07398 08251Keelung City 1 1 1 1Hsinchu City 1 1 1 1Chiayi City 1 1 1 1Average value 0836 07984 08199 0837Standard deviation 01311 0134 01327 0125


efficiency values are 00829 01635 and 01671 -eremaining 5 counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1

From Table 8 on SO2 the cities with a four-year effi-ciency value of 1 are Taipei City Taitung County KeelungCity Hsinchu City and Chiayi City -ose with efficiencyvalues below the four-year average of 03288 are New TaipeiCity Taoyuan City Taichung City Tainan City KaohsiungCity Yilan County Hsinchu County Miaoli CountyChanghua County Nantou County Yunlin County ChiayiCounty Pingtung County and Hualien County In 2012 14counties and cities need to make adjustments for sulfuroxide emissions Hualien County Yunlin County andTaichung City need the greatest improvement as their ef-ficiency values are 00188 00209 and 00207-e remaining5 counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1 In 2013 14counties and cities need to make adjustments for sulfuroxide emissions Kaohsiung City Hualien County andYunlin County need the greatest improvement as theirefficiency values are 00108 00125 and 00145 -eremaining 5 counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1In 2014 14 counties and cities need to make adjustments forsulfur oxide emissions Kaohsiung City Hualien Countyand Yunlin County need the greatest improvement as theirefficiency values are 00109 00128 and 00144 -eremaining 5 counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1In 2015 14 counties and cities need to make adjustments forsulfur oxide emissions Kaohsiung City Hualien Countyand Yunlin County need the greatest improvement as theirefficiency values are 00112 00131 and 00145 -eremaining 5 counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1

From Table 9 on NO2 the cities with a four-year effi-ciency value of 1 are Taipei City Taitung County KeelungCity Hsinchu City and Chiayi City -ose with efficiency

values below the four-year average 04597 are New TaipeiCity Taoyuan City Taichung City Tainan City KaohsiungCity Yilan County Hsinchu County Miaoli CountyChanghua County Nantou County Yunlin County ChiayiCounty Pingtung County and Hualien County In 2012there are 14 counties and cities that need to make adjust-ments in NOx emissions Hualien County Kaohsiung Cityand Yunlin County need the greatest improvement as their

Table 7 PM25 emission efficiency in counties and cities of Taiwanfrom 2012 to 2015

PM25

DMU 2012 2013 2014 2015New Taipei City 03001 02960 02970 02981Taipei City 1 1 1 1Taoyuan City 02493 02475 02535 02568Taichung City 02111 01964 01981 02016Tainan City 02585 02499 02504 02534Kaohsiung City 01609 01615 01616 01635Yilan County 01969 01644 01673 01671Hsinchu County 04408 04068 04029 04078Miaoli County 02752 02552 02526 02545Changhua County 02788 02940 03004 03034Nantou County 02243 02224 02214 02211Yunlin County 02175 02028 02032 02068Chiayi County 02818 02788 02785 02806Pingtung County 01992 01803 01800 01800Taitung County 1 1 1 1Hualien County 00874 00852 00840 00829Keelung City 1 1 1 1Hsinchu City 1 1 1 1Chiayi City 1 1 1 1Average value 04411 04337 04343 04357Standard deviation 03405 03444 03441 03434

Table 8 SO2 emission efficiency in counties and cities of Taiwanfrom 2012 to 2015

SO2


Table 9 NO2 emission efficiency of counties and cities in Taiwanfrom 2012 to 2015

NO2



Tabl

e10O

verallscore

electricity

consum

ption

motor

vehicleem

issionssuspend

edparticlesem

issionssulfuroxideem

issionsn

itrogen

oxideem

issionsa

ndaverageho

usehold

disposable

incomeeffi

ciency

analysis

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

New

Taipei

City

Dropp

edfrom

11th

placein

2013

to15

th

placein

2015

Maintained12

thor

13thplace

Inlast

placeall4

years(19th )

7thin

2012

and2013

anddrop

pedto

8th

placein

2014

and

2015

10thin

2012

and2014

anddrop

pedto

11th

placein

2013

and2015

10thin

2012

and2014

and

drop

pedto

11thplacein

2013

and2015

14thin

2012p

rogressedto

11thplacein2013retired

to13

thplacein

2014and

regressedto

15thplacein

2015

Taipei

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Taoyuan

City

Con

tinuedto

improvesligh

tlyfrom

10thin

2012

to8thin

2015

Last

placein

the4

years(19thplace)

13thplacein

the4

years

12thin

2012

and2013

andprogressed

to10

thplacein

2014

and2015

15thin

2012

and2015

andprogressed

to14

th

in2013

and2014

14thin

2012

andregressed

to15

thplacein

20132014

and2015

10thplacein

2012

progressed

to7thplacein

2013

andregressedto

8th

placein

2014

and2015

Taichu

ngCity

Con

tinued

improvingfrom

17th

in2012

to13

thin

2015

4thin

20122013and

2015

16thin

2012

and

2013

andto

17th

placein

2014

and

2015

15thplacein

the4

years

16thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to15

thin

2014

15thplacein

2012w

hile

20132

014

and2015

all

regressedto

16thplace

17thin

2012

(3rd

last)

progressed

to12

thplacein

2013

and2014and

regressedto

13thplacein

2015

Tainan

City

Last

placein

2012

2014a

nd2015

-irdto

last

placein

20122

013

and2014

andsecond

tolast

in2015

15thin

the4years

11thin

2012

and2013

and12

thin

2014

and

2015

12thin

20122

013

and

2015

and11

thin

2014

8thplacein201210thplace

in2013a

nd9thplacein

2014

and2015

Last

(19thplace)

in2012

2014and

2015

and17

thin

2013

Kaohsiung

City

In2013

itslipp

edfrom

13th

Last

in20122

013

and2014

and

progressed

tothird

from

last

in2015

18thin

the4years

18thin

the4years

19thin

20122

013and

2015p

rogressin

gto

18thplacein

2014

17thin

2012

and2015

and

18thplacein2013

and2014

16thin

2012

and20151

3th

in2013a

nd14

thin

2014

Yilan

Cou

nty

Average

6thplace

14thin

20122

013

and2014

progressingto

12th

placein

2015

6thin

2012

and

2013

and7thin

2014

and2015

17thplacein

the

4years

13thin

20122

013

and

2015

andto

12thin

2014

13thin

2012

and14

thin

20132

014

and2015

Average

7thplace

Hsin

chu

Cou

nty

Average

7thplace

1stplaceinthe4

years

7thin

2012

and

2013

and8thin

2014

and2015

6thplacein

the4

years

Average

7thplace

7thplacein20122013and

2015

and11

thplacein2014

6thin

20122

013

and2014

and7thin

2015

Miaoli

Cou

nty

Con

tinued

improvem

entfrom

11thin

2012

to9thin

2014

Average

13thplace

9thplacein

the4

years

10thin

2012

and2013

and11

thin

2014

and

2015

11thin

2012p

rogressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014and

returned

to9thin

2015

12thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

all

regressedto

13th

Average

10thplace

Chang

hua

Cou

nty

Second

tolast

place

in20132

014

and

2015

1stin

2013

and2015

but1

1thin

2012

and

2014

14thin

the4years

9thin

2012

progressed

to8thin

2013and

progressed

to7thin

2014

and

2015

9thin2012

and2014but

regressedto

10thin

2013

and2015

Last

placein

2012

(19th )

progressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014

andbacktrackedto

10thin

2015

15thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

allregressed

to18

th


Tabl

e10C

ontin

ued

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

Nantou

Cou

nty

11thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

10thin

the4years

13thin

the4years

6thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to5thin

2014

6thin

the4years

11thon

average

Yunlin

Cou

nty

17thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

12thin

the4years

14thin

the4years

17thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to16

thin

2014

16thin

20121

7thin

2013

and2014and

18thin

2015

18thin

2012retracedto

19th(la

st)in

2013

progressed

to15

thin

2014

andregressedto

17thin

2015

Chiayi

Cou

nty

12thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

11thin

4years

11thplacein

2012

and9thin

20132014

and2015

14thon

average

11thin

2012

and12

thin

20132

014

and2015

12thin

20121

5thin

2013

17thin

2014a

nd11

thin

2015

Ping

tung

Cou

nty

16thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

17thin

2012

and

2013

and16

thin

2014

and2015

16thplacein

the4

years

7thin

2012

and2014

and

regressedto

8thin

2013

and2015

8thon

average

13thin

20121

6thin

2013

and2014and

14thin

2015

Taitu

ngCou

nty

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

Hualien

Cou

nty

10thon

average

15thin

20122

013

and2014

8thin

2012

and

2013

and

progressed

to6th

in2014

and2015

Last

placein

the

4years(19th )

18thplacein

20122013

and2015

and17

thplace

in2014

18thin

2012

and19

thin

20132

014

and2015

9thin

20122

013

and2015

and11

thin

2014

Keelung

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

20122

013

and2015b

utregressed

to19

th(la

st)in

2014

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Hsin

chu

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

ChiayiC

ity1s

t place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years


efficiency values are 01322 01483 and 01582 -eremaining 5 counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1In 2013 there are 14 counties and cities that need to makeadjustments in NOx emissions Hualien County KaohsiungCity and Yunlin County need the greatest improvement astheir efficiency values are 01289 01329 and 01450 -eremaining 5 counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1In 2014 there are 14 counties and cities that need to makeadjustments in NOx emissions Hualien County KaohsiungCity and Yunlin County need the greatest improvement astheir efficiency values are 01225 01324 and 02213 -eremaining 5 counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1In 2015 there are 14 counties and cities that need to makeadjustments in NOx emissions Hualien County YunlinCounty and Kaohsiung City need the greatest improvementas their efficiency values are 01166 01352 and 01365 -eremaining 5 counties and cities have an efficiency value of 1

In order to further understand the countiesrsquo and citiesrsquoelectricity consumption motor vehicles aerosol emissionssulfur oxide emissions nitrogen oxide emissions and av-erage disposable income per household this research offersTable 10 for illustration From Table 10 Taipei City TaitungCounty Hsinchu City Chiayi City and Keelung Citymaintain the highest efficiency values in the 4 years re-gardless of overall score electricity consumption motorvehicles fine aerosol emissions nitrogen oxide emissionsand average per efficiency analysis of household disposableincome From the efficiency analysis of sulfur oxide emis-sions Taipei City Taitung County Hsinchu City and ChiayiCity still rank first in 4 years Keelung City also maintainsfirst place in 2012 2013 and 2015 but in 2014 it ranks 19th(last) In 2014 the Keelung Port Art Exhibition attracted alarge number of people from other counties and cities andthe air pollution was serious

-e 19th overall score (last place) is Tainan City -eelectricity efficiency value of Tainan City is also in second tolast place or third from last place Its value for motor vehicleefficiency remains in 15th place in the 4 years (5th from last)For its efficiencies of suspended particulate emissions andsulfur oxide emissions it maintains 11th or 12th place in the 4years -e average efficiency of each householdrsquos disposableincome is last place in 2012 2014 and 2015 (19th place) In2013 it improves slightly to 17th (third from last place)

Among the six municipalities only Taipei City andTaoyuan City rank first and eighth -e remaining 4 mu-nicipalities have poor overall scores In last place (19th) isTainan City 15th is Kaohsiung City 14th is Taichung Cityand 13th is New Taipei City

Among the 13 nonmunicipalities with low overall scores18th is Changhua County (second lowest) 17th is YunlinCounty (third lowest) 16th is Pingtung County and 12th isChiayi County For nonmunicipalities with middle overallscores 6th is Hsinchu County 7th is Yilan County 9th isMiaoli County 10th is Hualien County and 11th is NantouCounty

For the efficiency of electricity consumption in last placeis Taoyuan City for all 4 years For the efficiency of motorvehicles in last place is New Taipei City and in 18th isKaohsiung City for the 4 years (second to last place) For the

efficiency of suspended matter emissions in last place isHualien County in 18th is Kaohsiung City (second lowest)in 17th is Yilan County (third from last) and PingtungCounty is in 16th place in the 4 years-e undesirable outputand desirable output of each county and city have differentdegrees of progress or regression in the 4 years

We note that Taipei City Taitung County Hsinchu CityChiayi City and Keelung City have the best performances-e rest of the counties and cities have a lot of room forimprovement Taiwanrsquos local governments thus shouldformulate strong policy interventions in air pollution

4 Conclusions

During the current situation of global warming and dete-riorating environmental conditions countries around theworld are thinking about how to balance economic growthreduce environmental pollution and move forward in thedirection of sustainable development -erefore this articlecollects data from 19 counties and cities in Taiwan from 2012to 2015 using the modified dynamic SBM model to explorethe change in efficiency of air pollutants in various regions ofthe country from the economic perspective -e results areas follows

(1) From 2012 to 2015 the counties with the best overallefficiency performance are Taipei City TaitungCounty Keelung City Hsinchu City and ChiayiCity -eir average overall efficiency value is 1 -eaverage overall efficiency performances are poor inTainan City Changhua County Yunlin CountyPingtung County and Kaohsiung City with effi-ciency values of 06488 06716 06756 07032 and07113 In counties and cities with the best overallperformance and poor performance the averagedisposable income per household has no significantrelationship with air pollutant emissions

(2) In the counties and cities with better overall effi-ciency from 2012 to 2015 the efficiency values ofmotor vehicles average household disposable in-come and three air pollutant emissions are all 1Counties and cities with poor performance havelarge room for improvement in average disposableincome per household

(3) Regarding the undesirable output of suspendedparticulate emissions sulfur oxide emissions andnitrogen oxide emissions the efficiency values ofTaipei City Taitung County Keelung City HsinchuCity and Chiayi City are all 1-e efficiency values ofthe three air pollutants in the remaining 14 countiesand cities are far below 05 indicating that the airpollution situation there is in urgent need ofimprovement

(4) -e five counties and cities with the lowest electricityconsumption efficiency are Taoyuan City KaohsiungCity Tainan City Taichung City and HualienCounty -e cement industry mining industry andtourism industry are concentrated in Hualien


County and need to improve their efficiency Due tothe high demand for industrial electricity TaoyuanCity accounts for more than half of all electricity inTaiwan -e authority must increase the utilizationrate of energy use

Compared with advanced countries Taiwan has fallenfar behind in air pollution control -e prevention of airpollution still only focuses on propaganda and shouldchange to enforcement as soon as possible More detailedregulations of pollution reduction in different industries arealso necessary -is study has pointed out that the efficiencyvalues of the three air pollutants in fourteen counties andcities are far below 05 Among the six municipalities directlyunder the central government with relatively high financialautonomy only Taipei City and Taoyuan City have higheroverall scores -e remaining 4 municipalities of TainanCity Kaohsiung City Taichung City and New Taipei Cityhave poor overall scores Taiwan must pay attention to thefuture adjustment of its energy structure such as the use ofcoal and petrochemical energy and renewable energy de-velopment policies Lastly Taiwan should face the problemof air pollution without dividing the political parties in orderto achieve a steady economy and sustainable developmentfor all involved

By above results this research provides the followingpolicy recommendation

(1) Air pollutants move with air flow thus the issue ofair pollution should be jointly treated with sur-rounding countries

(2) Local governments reduce coal use to generateelectricity to reduce air pollution

(3) Public sector and private sector should replacepetrochemical energy with renewable energy to re-duce air pollution

(4) -e government encourages the public sector andthe private sector to use electric vehicles to reduce airpollutant emission by vehicle

Data Availability

-e data used to support the findings of this study are in-cluded within the article

Conflicts of Interest

-e authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest

References

[1] World Health Organization httpswwwwhoint[2] J Wu L Lv J Sun and X Ji ldquoA comprehensive analysis of

Chinarsquos regional energy saving and emission reduction effi-ciency from production and treatment perspectivesrdquo EnergyPolicy vol 84 pp 166ndash176 2015

[3] B Lin and K Du ldquoEnergy and CO2 emissions performance inChinarsquos regional economies do market-oriented reformsmatterrdquo Energy Policy vol 78 pp 113ndash124 2014

[4] K Wang Y-M Wei and X Zhang ldquoEnergy and emissionsefficiency patterns of Chinese regions a multi-directionalefficiency analysisrdquo Applied Energy vol 104 pp 105ndash1162013

[5] Y Li L Sun T Feng and C Zhu ldquoHow to reduce energyintensity in China a regional comparison perspectiverdquo EnergyPolicy vol 61 pp 513ndash522 2013

[6] T Zhang ldquoFrame work of data envelopment analysis-a modelto evaluate the environmental efficiency of Chinarsquos industrialsectorsrdquo Biomedical and Environmental Sciences vol 22no 1 pp 8ndash13 2009

[7] K Wang S Yu and W Zhang ldquoChinarsquos regional energy andenvironmental efficiency a DEA window analysis based dy-namic evaluationrdquo Mathematical and Computer Modellingvol 58 no 5-6 pp 1117ndash1127 2013

[8] G-B Bi W Song P Zhou and L Liang ldquoDoes environ-mental regulation affect energy efficiency in Chinarsquos thermalpower generation Empirical evidence from a slacks-basedDEA modelrdquo Energy Policy vol 66 pp 537ndash546 2014

[9] A Ustun ldquoEvaluating environmental efficiency of Turkishcities by data envelopment analysisrdquo Global NEST Journalvol 17 pp 281ndash290 2015

[10] X Liu and J Liu ldquoMeasurement of low carbon economyefficiency with a three-stage data envelopment analysis acomparison of the largest twenty CO2 emitting countriesrdquoInternational Journal of Environmental Research and PublicHealth vol 13 no 11 pp 1116ndash1130 2016

[11] R Mavi and C Standing ldquoEvaluating eco-innovation ofOECD countries with data envelopment analysisrdquo in Pro-ceedings of the International Conferences ITS Zagreb CroatiaJune 2016

[12] L Wen and E Zhang ldquoAllocation of CO2 emissions with zerosum gains data envelopment analysis modelsrdquo Nature Envi-ronment and Pollution Technology vol 15 pp 1065ndash1069 2016

[13] X Yao C Guo S Shao and Z Jiang ldquoTotal-factor CO2emission performance of Chinarsquos provincial industrial sectora meta-frontier non-radial Malmquist index approachrdquo Ap-plied Energy vol 184 pp 1142ndash1153 2016

[14] K Du C Xie and X Ouyang ldquoA comparison of carbondioxide (CO2) emission trends among provinces in ChinardquoRenewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews vol 73 pp 19ndash252017

[15] Q Qin X Li L Li W Zhen and Y-M Wei ldquoAir emissionsperspective on energy efficiency an empirical analysis ofChinarsquos coastal areasrdquo Applied Energy vol 185 pp 604ndash6142017

[16] J Yi ldquoStudy on carbon emission efficiency of Chinarsquos in-dustrial industry and analysis of its influencing factorsrdquo LowCarbon Economy vol 8 no 1 pp 20ndash30 2017

[17] Q Feng Q Qiu Y Quan and L Tang ldquoSustainability effi-ciency of Chinese cities involving coal-fired power plants withdata envelopment analysisrdquo International Journal of Sus-tainable Development amp World Ecology vol 24 no 5pp 395ndash400 2017

[18] C Feng H Zhang and J-B Huang ldquo-e approach to re-alizing the potential of emissions reduction in China animplication from data envelopment analysisrdquo Renewable andSustainable Energy Reviews vol 71 pp 859ndash872 2017

[19] J-L Hu and S-C Wang ldquoTotal-factor energy efficiency ofregions in Chinardquo Energy Policy vol 34 no 17 pp 3206ndash3217 2006

[20] C Martınez ldquoEnergy efficiency development in German andColombian non-energy-intensive sectors a non-parametricanalysisrdquo Energy Efficiency vol 4 pp 115ndash131 2011


[21] T Sueyoshi and Y Yuan ldquoChinarsquos regional sustainability anddiversified resource allocation DEA environmental assess-ment on economic development and air pollutionrdquo EnergyEconomics vol 49 pp 239ndash256 2015

[22] Y-R Ma Q Ji and Y Fan ldquoSpatial linkage analysis of theimpact of regional economic activities on PM25 pollution inChinardquo Journal of Cleaner Production vol 139 pp 1157ndash1167 2016

[23] J Li L Gong Z Chen L Zeng G Yang and J Zhang ldquo-ehierarchy and transition of Chinarsquos urban energy efficiencyrdquoEnergy Procedia vol 104 pp 110ndash117 2016

[24] J Choi and D Roberts ldquoImpacts of air pollution on pro-ductivity growth in the air and truck transportation industriesin the US an application of the data envelopment analysismalmquist environmental productivity indexrdquo Open Journalof Social Sciences vol 3 pp 120ndash129 2015

[25] F D C Camioto H F Moralles E B Mariano andD A D N Rebelatto ldquoEnergy efficiency analysis of G7 andBRICS considering total-factor structurerdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 122 pp 67ndash77 2016

[26] G Halkos and M Polemis 2e Good the Bad and the UglyBalancing Environmental and Economic Impacts towardsEfficiency pp 72132ndash72260 MPRA Munich Germany 2016

[27] X Wu L Tan J Guo Y Wang H Liu andW Zhu ldquoA studyof allocative efficiency of PM25 emission rights based on azero sum gains data envelopment modelrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 113 pp 1024ndash1031 2016

[28] J Guo D Zhu X Wu and Y Yan ldquoStudy on environmentperformance evaluation and regional differences of strictly-environmental-monitored cities in Chinardquo Sustainabilityvol 9 no 12 pp 2094ndash2114 2017

[29] S Zhang D Li S Li H Jiang and Y Shen ldquoAnalysis ofregional total factor energy efficiency in China under envi-ronmental constraints based on undesirable-minds and DEAwindow modelrdquo IOP Conference Series Earth and Environ-mental Science vol 69 pp 1204ndash1220 2017

[30] Y Li Y Chiu and L Lu ldquoUrban energy environment effi-ciency in China based on dynamic meta-frontier SBMrdquoJournal of the Air amp Waste Management Association vol 69pp 1ndash13 2018

[31] Environmental Protection Administration httpstaqmepagovtw

[32] M J Farrell ldquo-e measurement of productive efficiencyrdquoJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (General)vol 120 no 3 pp 253ndash281 1957

[33] A Charnes W W Cooper and E Rhodes ldquoMeasuring theefficiency of decision making unitsrdquo European Journal ofOperational Research vol 2 no 6 pp 429ndash444 1978

[34] R D Banker A Charnes and W W Cooper ldquoSome modelsfor estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data en-velopment analysisrdquo Management Science vol 30 no 9pp 1078ndash1092 1984

[35] K Tone ldquoA slacks-based measure of efficiency in data en-velopment analysisrdquo European Journal of Operational Re-search vol 130 no 3 pp 498ndash509 2001

[36] R Fare S Grosskopf M Norris and Z Zhang ldquoProductivitygrowth technical progress and efficiency change in indus-trialized countriesrdquo 2e American Economic Review vol 84pp 66ndash83 1994

[37] R Fare and S Grosskopf ldquoProductivity and intermediateproducts a frontier approachrdquo Economics Letters vol 50no 1 pp 65ndash70 1996

[38] C-M Chen ldquoA network-DEA model with new efficiencymeasures to incorporate the dynamic effect in production

networksrdquo European Journal of Operational Researchvol 194 no 3 pp 687ndash699 2009

[39] K S Park and K Park ldquoMeasurement of multiperiod ag-gregative efficiencyrdquo European Journal of Operational Re-search vol 193 no 2 pp 567ndash580 2009

[40] K Tone and M Tsutsui ldquoDynamic DEA a slacks-basedmeasure approachrdquo Omega vol 38 no 3-4 pp 145ndash1562010


new nonradial directional distance function to assess re-gional energy and carbon dioxide emissions efficiency inChina from 1997 to 2009 -e results show that most ofChinarsquos performances in energy use and carbon dioxideemissions are poor Industrial sector expansion is negativelycorrelated with Chinarsquos regional energy and CO2 emissionsperformance Wang et al [4] utilize multidirectional effi-ciency analysis (MEA) to look at regional energy andemissions efficiencies in China from 1997 to 2010 -eeastern region is more efficient than the central and westernregions Hebei Shanxi Inner Mongolia Shandong Henanand Hubei have higher potentials for energy conservationand emission reduction Li et al [5] collect energy data from2000 to 2009 in China and analyze the impact of threeinternal factors (economic structure energy consumptionstructure and technological progress) on energy intensity inChina using the DEA-based Malmquist method -eyconvert technology into three components to see the dif-ferent impacts in various regions Other researches such as[6ndash19] also focus on the energy efficiency of China

Some in the literature analyze the impacts of energy andenvironmental efficiencies on PM25 emissions such as[20ndash30] Martınez [20] uses two-stage DEA to assess theenergy efficiency of non-energy-intensive industries (NEISs)in Germany and Colombia from 1998 to 2005 -e highestenergy efficiency in non-energy-intensive industries (NEISs)in Colombia is derived from the cost minimization modelshowing that energy prices are not the key to improvingenergy efficiency Sueyoshi and Yuan [21] utilize the DEAmodel to explore regional environmental efficiency per-formance in China from 2013 to 2014 -e Chinese gov-ernment should allocate economic resources to cities locatedin the northwestern region (including Lanzhou XiningYinchuan andUrumqi) and strengthen stricter regulation ofenergy consumption in major urban environments (such asBeijing Tianjin Shanghai and Chongqing) Ma et al [22]use the spatial autoregressive model to analyze the spatialdiffusion effects of PM25 in 152 cities in China PM25 issignificantly affected by geospatial and regional economiesLi et al [23] utilize the multilevel frontiers DEA model toexplore the environmental efficiency of 49 cities in China-eir results present that PM25 and SO2 emissions aresignificantly related to urban population and energytechnologies

-ere are two contributions of this study First we usesmall economy as the research sample As can be seenfrom the above literature most of the research on airpollutants is based on large economies such as China-ese large economies have rich natural resources andfocus on industrial and manufacturing developmentHowever the problem of air pollution is not limited tolarge economies and it cannot be overlooked in somenon-industrial-oriented small economies For exampleaccording to the Taiwan Environmental ProtectionAgencyrsquos 2016 and 2017 Air Quality Monitoring Report[31] the annual air quality indicators (AQIs) hit 3934and 421 respectively or out of reach from a good gradeof 50 -e other contribution is model modification

Most past models are still dominated by radial (CharnesCooper and Rhodes model abbreviation as CCR modelBanker Charnes and Cooper model abbreviation as BCCmodel) nonradial (slack-based measure abbreviation asSBM) two-stage DEA analysis and directional distancefunction However these models employ static analysislack dynamic considerations and cannot understand thechanges in efficiency of energy and environmental pol-lutants -us this study employs the modified dynamicSBM to evaluate the situation for each county and city Weutilize 19 counties and cities in Taiwan from 2012 to 2015with data on the number of employed people motorvehicles and electricity consumption and take the averagedisposable income per household as output PM25 ni-trogen oxide emissions (NO2) and sulfur oxide emissions(SO2) as undesirable outputs (recently the problem of airpollution has drawn the attention of many scholars be-cause the issue of CO2 emission has been analyzed bymany researches this study focuses on the other airpollutants (SO2 NO2 and PM25 in Taiwan) and fixedassets as the carry-over variable) By above input andoutput variables this study evaluates the economic per-formance electricity consumption efficiency and airpollutant emission efficiency of Taiwan

2 Research Methods

21 DEA Farrell [32] proposes the efficiency frontier butthe model is only for a single input and a single outputCharnes et al [33] extend Farrellrsquos theory for multiple inputsand multiple outputs naming it the CCR model Bankeret al [34] propose their BCC model which can determinevariable returns to scale For the first time Tone [35] pro-poses nonradial and nonoriented estimation methodsthrough slacks calling it the SBM model Many efficiencyassessment methods have been subsequently proposed suchas super DEA hybrid DEA network DEA two-stage DEAfuzzy DEA and three-stage DEA

22 Dynamic DEA Many research studies utilize staticanalysis with dynamic DEA window analysis to analyzedynamic models Fare et al [36] offer the Malmquistindex but during two periods the researchers do notanalyze the impact of carry-over Fare and Grosskopf [37]then offer a new analysis of the dynamic impact of con-secutive activities Chen [38] and K S Park and K Park[39] subsequently present SBM studies of several dy-namics with the dynamic analysis model extended into aslack-based measure by Tone and Tsutsui [40] In order tocarry-over activities as a form of connectivity they pro-pose the SBM (slack-based measures) dynamic DEAmodel Tone and Tsutsui [40] develop the model into SBMdynamic analysis with carry-over activities as a link andthe existence of activities divided into a four-modelanalysis (1) desirable (Zgood) (2) undesirable (Zbad) (3)discretionary (Zfree) (4) nondiscretionary (Zfix) withcarry-over variables from period t to period t + 1




Tt1W


i sminusitxiot( 1113857 + 1113936


(1T)1113936Tt1W

t 1 +(1s + ngood) 1113936sl1 w+

i s+ityiot( 1113857 + 1113936

ngoodr1 s

goodit zgoodrot1113872 11138731113872 11138731113876 1113877

(1)

1113944

n

r1zαrjtλ

tj 1113944

n

j1zαrjtλ



xiot 1113944n

j1xijtλ

tj + s


xfixiot 1113944

n

j1xfixiotλ

tj (i 1 p t 1 T)

ylot 1113944

n

l1yljtλ

tj minus s

+lt (l 1 s t 1 T)

yfixlot 1113944

n

l1yfixlotλ

tj (l 1 r t 1 T)

zgoodrot 1113944

n

r1zgoodrot λt


zbadrot 1113944

n

r1zbadrjt λ

tj + s


zfreerot 1113944

n

r1zfreerjt λ

tj + s


zfixrot 1113944

n

r1zfixrjtλ

tj (r 1 nfix t 1 T)

1113944

n

j1λt

j 1 (t 1 T)

λtj ge 0 s

minusit ge 0 s

+lt ge 0 s

goodrt ge 0 s

badrt ge 0 and s


(3)


ρ0t 1 minus (1m + nbad) 1113936

mi1 wminus



rot( 11138571113872 1113873

1+(1s + ngood) 1113936sl1 w+

i s+lowastit ylot( 1113857 + 1113936

ngoodr1 s

goodlowastrot zgood

rot1113872 11138731113872 1113873

(i 1 T)

(4)





Tt1W



(1T)1113936Tt1W

t 1 + 1s1 + s2 + ngood( 1113857 1113936s1l1s

+g

jt yg

lot + 1113936s2l1s

minus bjt yb


goodrt zgoodrot1113876 11138771113876 1113877

(5)


1113944

n

j1zαijtλ

tj 1113944

n

j1zαijtλ


xiot 1113944m

i1xijtλ

ti + s


ylot 1113944s1

l1y

+g

lotλtj minus s

+g

lt (l 1 s1 t 1 T)

ylot 1113944s2

l1y

minus blotλ

tj minus s


zgoodrot 1113944

ngood

r1zgoodrot λt


1113944

n

j1λt

j 1 (t 1 T)

λtj ge 0 s

minusit ge 0 s

+g


goodrt ge 0

(6)


ρ0t 1 minus (1m) 1113936

mi1 sminus lowast

iot xiot( 1113857( 1113857

1 +(1s1 + s2 + ngood) 1113936s1l1 s

+glowastjt ylot1113872 1113873 + 1113936

s2l1 sminus blowast

jt ylot1113872 1113873 + 1113936ngoodr1 s


(i 1 T) (7)








goodrot



































Variable Definition

Input





Undesirableoutput







Period t

Input

Output

Period t + 1


(i)(ii)

(iii)(iv)


(i)(ii)

(iii)(iv)


(i)(ii)

(iii)


Input(i)

(ii)(iii)




Tabl

e2

Descriptio

nof

statistics

Variable

2012

2013

2014

2015

Inpu

ts

Labo

r(people)

Maxim

um1892000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1910000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1927000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1945000(N

ewTaipei

City

)Minim

um103000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

569474

574947

580736

586947

Standard

deviation

523758

529741

534914

541477

Motor

vehicles

Maxim

um3309078(N

ewTaipei

City

)3233275(N

ewTaipei

City

)3178499(N

ewTaipei

City

)3183551(N

ewTaipei

City

)Minim

um246208(Taitung

Cou

nty)

233394(Taitung

Cou

nty)

230890(Taitung

Cou

nty)

230954(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

1166673

1125181

1110507

1115854

Standard

deviation

1013652

979776

966127

971184

Electricity

consum

ption(degrees)

Maxim

um22399088277

(New

Taipei

City

)22850473858

(Taoyuan

City

)23045858780

(Taoyuan

City

)22801815338

(Taoyuan

City

)

Minim

um485166744(Taitung

Cou

nty)

488240891(Taitung

Cou

nty)

496469053(Taitung

Cou

nty)

520574022(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

7819496456

7988861231

8102790831

8121363829

Standard

deviation

7529994233

7694682886

7811168091

7826312606

Desira

bleou

tput

Average

disposable

income(N

T$)

Maxim

um1278278(TaipeiC

ity)

1279195(TaipeiC

ity)

1292604(TaipeiC

ity)

1314031(TaipeiC

ity)

Minim

um670017(Taitung

Cou

nty)

676390(Taitung

Cou

nty)

667933(C

hiayiC

ity)

636162(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

874514

889033

896941

895059

Standard

deviation

158827

171147

182797

167073

Und

esira

bleou

tput


issions

(PM

25)

(metrictons)

Maxim

um10696

(Kaohsiung

City

)10336

(Kaohsiung

City

)10174

(Kaohsiung

City

)9893(K

aohsiung

City

)Minim

um514(C

hiayiC

ity)

491(C

hiayiC

ity)

479(C

hiayiC

ity)

471(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

3941

3901

3825

3742

Standard

deviation

2631

2606

2557

2487

Sulfu

roxideem

issions

(SO2)

(metric

tons)

Maxim

um42929

(Kaohsiung

City

)37849

(Kaohsiung

City

)37132

(Kaohsiung

City

)35667

(Kaohsiung

City

)Minim

um60

(ChiayiC

ity)

44(C

hiayiC

ity)

44(C

hiayiC

ity)

43(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

6397

5960

5845

5638

Standard

deviation

10594

9614

9428

9051

Nitrogen

oxideem

issions

(NO

2)(m

etrictons)

Maxim

um76826

(Kaohsiung

City

)74061

(Kaohsiung

City

)69934

(Kaohsiung

City

)65068

(Kaohsiung

City

)Minim

um2281(C

hiayiC

ity)

2283(C

hiayiC

ity)

2101(C

hiayiC

ity)

1944(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

20213

20321

19250

18120

Standard

deviation

19626

19228

18167

16922

Carryover

Fixedassets

(NT$

1000)

Maxim


)199637849(Taichun

gCity


)232090820(Taoyuan

City

)Minim

um324609(C

hiayiC

ity)

264800(Taitung

Cou

nty)

773560(Taitung

Cou

nty)

903929(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

56753880

55750421

62653275

65734355

Standard

deviation

66919221

68137797

75504497

74984091






Labor (people)

20122013

20142015

0

1000000

2000000

3000000

(a)


20122013

20142015


0

1000000

2000000

(b)


20122013

20142015


0100000000002000000000030000000000

(c)


20122013

20142015


0500000

10000001500000

(d)


20122013

20142015


0

10000

20000

(e)


20122013

20142015


0

20000

40000

60000

(f )


20122013

20142015


0

20000

40000

60000

80000

(g)


20122013

20142015


050000000

100000000150000000200000000250000000

(h)

























PM25



SO2



NO2



Tabl

e10O

verallscore

electricity

consum

ption

motor

vehicleem

issionssuspend

edparticlesem


issionsn

itrogen

oxideem

issionsa

ndaverageho

usehold

disposable

incomeeffi

ciency

analysis

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

New

Taipei

City

Dropp

edfrom

11th

placein

2013

to15

th

placein

2015

Maintained12

thor

13thplace

Inlast

placeall4

years(19th )

7thin

2012

and2013

anddrop

pedto

8th

placein

2014

and

2015

10thin

2012

and2014

anddrop

pedto

11th

placein

2013

and2015

10thin

2012

and2014

and

drop

pedto

11thplacein

2013

and2015

14thin

2012p

rogressedto


to13

thplacein

2014and

regressedto

15thplacein

2015

Taipei

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Taoyuan

City

Con

tinuedto

improvesligh

tlyfrom

10thin

2012

to8thin

2015

Last

placein

the4

years(19thplace)

13thplacein

the4

years

12thin

2012

and2013

andprogressed

to10

thplacein

2014

and2015

15thin

2012

and2015

andprogressed

to14

th

in2013

and2014

14thin

2012

andregressed

to15

thplacein

20132014

and2015

10thplacein

2012

progressed

to7thplacein

2013

andregressedto

8th

placein

2014

and2015

Taichu

ngCity

Con

tinued

improvingfrom

17th

in2012

to13

thin

2015

4thin

20122013and

2015

16thin

2012

and

2013

andto

17th

placein

2014

and

2015

15thplacein

the4

years

16thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to15

thin

2014

15thplacein

2012w

hile

20132

014

and2015

all

regressedto

16thplace

17thin

2012

(3rd

last)

progressed

to12

thplacein

2013

and2014and

regressedto

13thplacein

2015

Tainan

City

Last

placein

2012

2014a

nd2015

-irdto

last

placein

20122

013

and2014

andsecond

tolast

in2015

15thin

the4years

11thin

2012

and2013

and12

thin

2014

and

2015

12thin

20122

013

and

2015

and11

thin

2014


in2013a

nd9thplacein

2014

and2015

Last

(19thplace)

in2012

2014and

2015

and17

thin

2013

Kaohsiung

City

In2013

itslipp

edfrom

13th

Last

in20122

013

and2014

and

progressed

tothird

from

last

in2015

18thin

the4years

18thin

the4years

19thin

20122

013and

2015p

rogressin

gto

18thplacein

2014

17thin

2012

and2015

and

18thplacein2013

and2014

16thin

2012

and20151

3th

in2013a

nd14

thin

2014

Yilan

Cou

nty

Average

6thplace

14thin

20122

013

and2014

progressingto

12th

placein

2015

6thin

2012

and

2013

and7thin

2014

and2015

17thplacein

the

4years

13thin

20122

013

and

2015

andto

12thin

2014

13thin

2012

and14

thin

20132

014

and2015

Average

7thplace

Hsin

chu

Cou

nty

Average

7thplace

1stplaceinthe4

years

7thin

2012

and

2013

and8thin

2014

and2015

6thplacein

the4

years

Average

7thplace


2015

and11

thplacein2014

6thin

20122

013

and2014

and7thin

2015

Miaoli

Cou

nty

Con

tinued

improvem

entfrom

11thin

2012

to9thin

2014

Average

13thplace

9thplacein

the4

years

10thin

2012

and2013

and11

thin

2014

and

2015

11thin

2012p

rogressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014and

returned

to9thin

2015

12thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

all

regressedto

13th

Average

10thplace

Chang

hua

Cou

nty

Second

tolast

place

in20132

014

and

2015

1stin

2013

and2015

but1

1thin

2012

and

2014

14thin

the4years

9thin

2012

progressed

to8thin

2013and

progressed

to7thin

2014

and

2015

9thin2012

and2014but

regressedto

10thin

2013

and2015

Last

placein

2012

(19th )

progressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014

andbacktrackedto

10thin

2015

15thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

allregressed

to18

th


Tabl

e10C

ontin

ued

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

Nantou

Cou

nty

11thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

10thin

the4years

13thin

the4years

6thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to5thin

2014

6thin

the4years

11thon

average

Yunlin

Cou

nty

17thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

12thin

the4years

14thin

the4years

17thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to16

thin

2014

16thin

20121

7thin

2013

and2014and

18thin

2015

18thin

2012retracedto

19th(la

st)in

2013

progressed

to15

thin

2014

andregressedto

17thin

2015

Chiayi

Cou

nty

12thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

11thin

4years

11thplacein

2012

and9thin

20132014

and2015

14thon

average

11thin

2012

and12

thin

20132

014

and2015

12thin

20121

5thin

2013

17thin

2014a

nd11

thin

2015

Ping

tung

Cou

nty

16thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

17thin

2012

and

2013

and16

thin

2014

and2015

16thplacein

the4

years

7thin

2012

and2014

and

regressedto

8thin

2013

and2015

8thon

average

13thin

20121

6thin

2013

and2014and

14thin

2015

Taitu

ngCou

nty

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

Hualien

Cou

nty

10thon

average

15thin

20122

013

and2014

8thin

2012

and

2013

and

progressed

to6th

in2014

and2015

Last

placein

the

4years(19th )

18thplacein

20122013

and2015

and17

thplace

in2014

18thin

2012

and19

thin

20132

014

and2015

9thin

20122

013

and2015

and11

thin

2014

Keelung

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

20122

013

and2015b

utregressed

to19

th(la

st)in

2014

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Hsin

chu

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

ChiayiC

ity1s

t place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years










4 Conclusions














Data Availability




References














































Tt1W


i sminusitxiot( 1113857 + 1113936


(1T)1113936Tt1W

t 1 +(1s + ngood) 1113936sl1 w+

i s+ityiot( 1113857 + 1113936

ngoodr1 s

goodit zgoodrot1113872 11138731113872 11138731113876 1113877

(1)

1113944

n

r1zαrjtλ

tj 1113944

n

j1zαrjtλ



xiot 1113944n

j1xijtλ

tj + s


xfixiot 1113944

n

j1xfixiotλ

tj (i 1 p t 1 T)

ylot 1113944

n

l1yljtλ

tj minus s

+lt (l 1 s t 1 T)

yfixlot 1113944

n

l1yfixlotλ

tj (l 1 r t 1 T)

zgoodrot 1113944

n

r1zgoodrot λt


zbadrot 1113944

n

r1zbadrjt λ

tj + s


zfreerot 1113944

n

r1zfreerjt λ

tj + s


zfixrot 1113944

n

r1zfixrjtλ

tj (r 1 nfix t 1 T)

1113944

n

j1λt

j 1 (t 1 T)

λtj ge 0 s

minusit ge 0 s

+lt ge 0 s

goodrt ge 0 s

badrt ge 0 and s


(3)


ρ0t 1 minus (1m + nbad) 1113936

mi1 wminus



rot( 11138571113872 1113873

1+(1s + ngood) 1113936sl1 w+

i s+lowastit ylot( 1113857 + 1113936

ngoodr1 s

goodlowastrot zgood

rot1113872 11138731113872 1113873

(i 1 T)

(4)





Tt1W



(1T)1113936Tt1W

t 1 + 1s1 + s2 + ngood( 1113857 1113936s1l1s

+g

jt yg

lot + 1113936s2l1s

minus bjt yb


goodrt zgoodrot1113876 11138771113876 1113877

(5)


1113944

n

j1zαijtλ

tj 1113944

n

j1zαijtλ


xiot 1113944m

i1xijtλ

ti + s


ylot 1113944s1

l1y

+g

lotλtj minus s

+g

lt (l 1 s1 t 1 T)

ylot 1113944s2

l1y

minus blotλ

tj minus s


zgoodrot 1113944

ngood

r1zgoodrot λt


1113944

n

j1λt

j 1 (t 1 T)

λtj ge 0 s

minusit ge 0 s

+g


goodrt ge 0

(6)


ρ0t 1 minus (1m) 1113936

mi1 sminus lowast

iot xiot( 1113857( 1113857

1 +(1s1 + s2 + ngood) 1113936s1l1 s

+glowastjt ylot1113872 1113873 + 1113936

s2l1 sminus blowast

jt ylot1113872 1113873 + 1113936ngoodr1 s


(i 1 T) (7)








goodrot



































Variable Definition

Input





Undesirableoutput







Period t

Input

Output

Period t + 1


(i)(ii)

(iii)(iv)


(i)(ii)

(iii)(iv)


(i)(ii)

(iii)


Input(i)

(ii)(iii)




Tabl

e2

Descriptio

nof

statistics

Variable

2012

2013

2014

2015

Inpu

ts

Labo

r(people)

Maxim

um1892000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1910000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1927000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1945000(N

ewTaipei

City

)Minim

um103000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

569474

574947

580736

586947

Standard

deviation

523758

529741

534914

541477

Motor

vehicles

Maxim

um3309078(N

ewTaipei

City

)3233275(N

ewTaipei

City

)3178499(N

ewTaipei

City

)3183551(N

ewTaipei

City

)Minim

um246208(Taitung

Cou

nty)

233394(Taitung

Cou

nty)

230890(Taitung

Cou

nty)

230954(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

1166673

1125181

1110507

1115854

Standard

deviation

1013652

979776

966127

971184

Electricity

consum

ption(degrees)

Maxim

um22399088277

(New

Taipei

City

)22850473858

(Taoyuan

City

)23045858780

(Taoyuan

City

)22801815338

(Taoyuan

City

)

Minim

um485166744(Taitung

Cou

nty)

488240891(Taitung

Cou

nty)

496469053(Taitung

Cou

nty)

520574022(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

7819496456

7988861231

8102790831

8121363829

Standard

deviation

7529994233

7694682886

7811168091

7826312606

Desira

bleou

tput

Average

disposable

income(N

T$)

Maxim

um1278278(TaipeiC

ity)

1279195(TaipeiC

ity)

1292604(TaipeiC

ity)

1314031(TaipeiC

ity)

Minim

um670017(Taitung

Cou

nty)

676390(Taitung

Cou

nty)

667933(C

hiayiC

ity)

636162(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

874514

889033

896941

895059

Standard

deviation

158827

171147

182797

167073

Und

esira

bleou

tput


issions

(PM

25)

(metrictons)

Maxim

um10696

(Kaohsiung

City

)10336

(Kaohsiung

City

)10174

(Kaohsiung

City

)9893(K

aohsiung

City

)Minim

um514(C

hiayiC

ity)

491(C

hiayiC

ity)

479(C

hiayiC

ity)

471(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

3941

3901

3825

3742

Standard

deviation

2631

2606

2557

2487

Sulfu

roxideem

issions

(SO2)

(metric

tons)

Maxim

um42929

(Kaohsiung

City

)37849

(Kaohsiung

City

)37132

(Kaohsiung

City

)35667

(Kaohsiung

City

)Minim

um60

(ChiayiC

ity)

44(C

hiayiC

ity)

44(C

hiayiC

ity)

43(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

6397

5960

5845

5638

Standard

deviation

10594

9614

9428

9051

Nitrogen

oxideem

issions

(NO

2)(m

etrictons)

Maxim

um76826

(Kaohsiung

City

)74061

(Kaohsiung

City

)69934

(Kaohsiung

City

)65068

(Kaohsiung

City

)Minim

um2281(C

hiayiC

ity)

2283(C

hiayiC

ity)

2101(C

hiayiC

ity)

1944(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

20213

20321

19250

18120

Standard

deviation

19626

19228

18167

16922

Carryover

Fixedassets

(NT$

1000)

Maxim


)199637849(Taichun

gCity


)232090820(Taoyuan

City

)Minim

um324609(C

hiayiC

ity)

264800(Taitung

Cou

nty)

773560(Taitung

Cou

nty)

903929(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

56753880

55750421

62653275

65734355

Standard

deviation

66919221

68137797

75504497

74984091






Labor (people)

20122013

20142015

0

1000000

2000000

3000000

(a)


20122013

20142015


0

1000000

2000000

(b)


20122013

20142015


0100000000002000000000030000000000

(c)


20122013

20142015


0500000

10000001500000

(d)


20122013

20142015


0

10000

20000

(e)


20122013

20142015


0

20000

40000

60000

(f )


20122013

20142015


0

20000

40000

60000

80000

(g)


20122013

20142015


050000000

100000000150000000200000000250000000

(h)

























PM25



SO2



NO2



Tabl

e10O

verallscore

electricity

consum

ption

motor

vehicleem

issionssuspend

edparticlesem


issionsn

itrogen

oxideem

issionsa

ndaverageho

usehold

disposable

incomeeffi

ciency

analysis

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

New

Taipei

City

Dropp

edfrom

11th

placein

2013

to15

th

placein

2015

Maintained12

thor

13thplace

Inlast

placeall4

years(19th )

7thin

2012

and2013

anddrop

pedto

8th

placein

2014

and

2015

10thin

2012

and2014

anddrop

pedto

11th

placein

2013

and2015

10thin

2012

and2014

and

drop

pedto

11thplacein

2013

and2015

14thin

2012p

rogressedto


to13

thplacein

2014and

regressedto

15thplacein

2015

Taipei

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Taoyuan

City

Con

tinuedto

improvesligh

tlyfrom

10thin

2012

to8thin

2015

Last

placein

the4

years(19thplace)

13thplacein

the4

years

12thin

2012

and2013

andprogressed

to10

thplacein

2014

and2015

15thin

2012

and2015

andprogressed

to14

th

in2013

and2014

14thin

2012

andregressed

to15

thplacein

20132014

and2015

10thplacein

2012

progressed

to7thplacein

2013

andregressedto

8th

placein

2014

and2015

Taichu

ngCity

Con

tinued

improvingfrom

17th

in2012

to13

thin

2015

4thin

20122013and

2015

16thin

2012

and

2013

andto

17th

placein

2014

and

2015

15thplacein

the4

years

16thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to15

thin

2014

15thplacein

2012w

hile

20132

014

and2015

all

regressedto

16thplace

17thin

2012

(3rd

last)

progressed

to12

thplacein

2013

and2014and

regressedto

13thplacein

2015

Tainan

City

Last

placein

2012

2014a

nd2015

-irdto

last

placein

20122

013

and2014

andsecond

tolast

in2015

15thin

the4years

11thin

2012

and2013

and12

thin

2014

and

2015

12thin

20122

013

and

2015

and11

thin

2014


in2013a

nd9thplacein

2014

and2015

Last

(19thplace)

in2012

2014and

2015

and17

thin

2013

Kaohsiung

City

In2013

itslipp

edfrom

13th

Last

in20122

013

and2014

and

progressed

tothird

from

last

in2015

18thin

the4years

18thin

the4years

19thin

20122

013and

2015p

rogressin

gto

18thplacein

2014

17thin

2012

and2015

and

18thplacein2013

and2014

16thin

2012

and20151

3th

in2013a

nd14

thin

2014

Yilan

Cou

nty

Average

6thplace

14thin

20122

013

and2014

progressingto

12th

placein

2015

6thin

2012

and

2013

and7thin

2014

and2015

17thplacein

the

4years

13thin

20122

013

and

2015

andto

12thin

2014

13thin

2012

and14

thin

20132

014

and2015

Average

7thplace

Hsin

chu

Cou

nty

Average

7thplace

1stplaceinthe4

years

7thin

2012

and

2013

and8thin

2014

and2015

6thplacein

the4

years

Average

7thplace


2015

and11

thplacein2014

6thin

20122

013

and2014

and7thin

2015

Miaoli

Cou

nty

Con

tinued

improvem

entfrom

11thin

2012

to9thin

2014

Average

13thplace

9thplacein

the4

years

10thin

2012

and2013

and11

thin

2014

and

2015

11thin

2012p

rogressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014and

returned

to9thin

2015

12thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

all

regressedto

13th

Average

10thplace

Chang

hua

Cou

nty

Second

tolast

place

in20132

014

and

2015

1stin

2013

and2015

but1

1thin

2012

and

2014

14thin

the4years

9thin

2012

progressed

to8thin

2013and

progressed

to7thin

2014

and

2015

9thin2012

and2014but

regressedto

10thin

2013

and2015

Last

placein

2012

(19th )

progressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014

andbacktrackedto

10thin

2015

15thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

allregressed

to18

th


Tabl

e10C

ontin

ued

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

Nantou

Cou

nty

11thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

10thin

the4years

13thin

the4years

6thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to5thin

2014

6thin

the4years

11thon

average

Yunlin

Cou

nty

17thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

12thin

the4years

14thin

the4years

17thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to16

thin

2014

16thin

20121

7thin

2013

and2014and

18thin

2015

18thin

2012retracedto

19th(la

st)in

2013

progressed

to15

thin

2014

andregressedto

17thin

2015

Chiayi

Cou

nty

12thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

11thin

4years

11thplacein

2012

and9thin

20132014

and2015

14thon

average

11thin

2012

and12

thin

20132

014

and2015

12thin

20121

5thin

2013

17thin

2014a

nd11

thin

2015

Ping

tung

Cou

nty

16thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

17thin

2012

and

2013

and16

thin

2014

and2015

16thplacein

the4

years

7thin

2012

and2014

and

regressedto

8thin

2013

and2015

8thon

average

13thin

20121

6thin

2013

and2014and

14thin

2015

Taitu

ngCou

nty

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

Hualien

Cou

nty

10thon

average

15thin

20122

013

and2014

8thin

2012

and

2013

and

progressed

to6th

in2014

and2015

Last

placein

the

4years(19th )

18thplacein

20122013

and2015

and17

thplace

in2014

18thin

2012

and19

thin

20132

014

and2015

9thin

20122

013

and2015

and11

thin

2014

Keelung

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

20122

013

and2015b

utregressed

to19

th(la

st)in

2014

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Hsin

chu

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

ChiayiC

ity1s

t place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years










4 Conclusions














Data Availability




References













































Tt1W



(1T)1113936Tt1W

t 1 + 1s1 + s2 + ngood( 1113857 1113936s1l1s

+g

jt yg

lot + 1113936s2l1s

minus bjt yb


goodrt zgoodrot1113876 11138771113876 1113877

(5)


1113944

n

j1zαijtλ

tj 1113944

n

j1zαijtλ


xiot 1113944m

i1xijtλ

ti + s


ylot 1113944s1

l1y

+g

lotλtj minus s

+g

lt (l 1 s1 t 1 T)

ylot 1113944s2

l1y

minus blotλ

tj minus s


zgoodrot 1113944

ngood

r1zgoodrot λt


1113944

n

j1λt

j 1 (t 1 T)

λtj ge 0 s

minusit ge 0 s

+g


goodrt ge 0

(6)


ρ0t 1 minus (1m) 1113936

mi1 sminus lowast

iot xiot( 1113857( 1113857

1 +(1s1 + s2 + ngood) 1113936s1l1 s

+glowastjt ylot1113872 1113873 + 1113936

s2l1 sminus blowast

jt ylot1113872 1113873 + 1113936ngoodr1 s


(i 1 T) (7)








goodrot



































Variable Definition

Input





Undesirableoutput







Period t

Input

Output

Period t + 1


(i)(ii)

(iii)(iv)


(i)(ii)

(iii)(iv)


(i)(ii)

(iii)


Input(i)

(ii)(iii)




Tabl

e2

Descriptio

nof

statistics

Variable

2012

2013

2014

2015

Inpu

ts

Labo

r(people)

Maxim

um1892000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1910000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1927000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1945000(N

ewTaipei

City

)Minim

um103000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

569474

574947

580736

586947

Standard

deviation

523758

529741

534914

541477

Motor

vehicles

Maxim

um3309078(N

ewTaipei

City

)3233275(N

ewTaipei

City

)3178499(N

ewTaipei

City

)3183551(N

ewTaipei

City

)Minim

um246208(Taitung

Cou

nty)

233394(Taitung

Cou

nty)

230890(Taitung

Cou

nty)

230954(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

1166673

1125181

1110507

1115854

Standard

deviation

1013652

979776

966127

971184

Electricity

consum

ption(degrees)

Maxim

um22399088277

(New

Taipei

City

)22850473858

(Taoyuan

City

)23045858780

(Taoyuan

City

)22801815338

(Taoyuan

City

)

Minim

um485166744(Taitung

Cou

nty)

488240891(Taitung

Cou

nty)

496469053(Taitung

Cou

nty)

520574022(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

7819496456

7988861231

8102790831

8121363829

Standard

deviation

7529994233

7694682886

7811168091

7826312606

Desira

bleou

tput

Average

disposable

income(N

T$)

Maxim

um1278278(TaipeiC

ity)

1279195(TaipeiC

ity)

1292604(TaipeiC

ity)

1314031(TaipeiC

ity)

Minim

um670017(Taitung

Cou

nty)

676390(Taitung

Cou

nty)

667933(C

hiayiC

ity)

636162(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

874514

889033

896941

895059

Standard

deviation

158827

171147

182797

167073

Und

esira

bleou

tput


issions

(PM

25)

(metrictons)

Maxim

um10696

(Kaohsiung

City

)10336

(Kaohsiung

City

)10174

(Kaohsiung

City

)9893(K

aohsiung

City

)Minim

um514(C

hiayiC

ity)

491(C

hiayiC

ity)

479(C

hiayiC

ity)

471(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

3941

3901

3825

3742

Standard

deviation

2631

2606

2557

2487

Sulfu

roxideem

issions

(SO2)

(metric

tons)

Maxim

um42929

(Kaohsiung

City

)37849

(Kaohsiung

City

)37132

(Kaohsiung

City

)35667

(Kaohsiung

City

)Minim

um60

(ChiayiC

ity)

44(C

hiayiC

ity)

44(C

hiayiC

ity)

43(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

6397

5960

5845

5638

Standard

deviation

10594

9614

9428

9051

Nitrogen

oxideem

issions

(NO

2)(m

etrictons)

Maxim

um76826

(Kaohsiung

City

)74061

(Kaohsiung

City

)69934

(Kaohsiung

City

)65068

(Kaohsiung

City

)Minim

um2281(C

hiayiC

ity)

2283(C

hiayiC

ity)

2101(C

hiayiC

ity)

1944(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

20213

20321

19250

18120

Standard

deviation

19626

19228

18167

16922

Carryover

Fixedassets

(NT$

1000)

Maxim


)199637849(Taichun

gCity


)232090820(Taoyuan

City

)Minim

um324609(C

hiayiC

ity)

264800(Taitung

Cou

nty)

773560(Taitung

Cou

nty)

903929(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

56753880

55750421

62653275

65734355

Standard

deviation

66919221

68137797

75504497

74984091






Labor (people)

20122013

20142015

0

1000000

2000000

3000000

(a)


20122013

20142015


0

1000000

2000000

(b)


20122013

20142015


0100000000002000000000030000000000

(c)


20122013

20142015


0500000

10000001500000

(d)


20122013

20142015


0

10000

20000

(e)


20122013

20142015


0

20000

40000

60000

(f )


20122013

20142015


0

20000

40000

60000

80000

(g)


20122013

20142015


050000000

100000000150000000200000000250000000

(h)

























PM25



SO2



NO2



Tabl

e10O

verallscore

electricity

consum

ption

motor

vehicleem

issionssuspend

edparticlesem


issionsn

itrogen

oxideem

issionsa

ndaverageho

usehold

disposable

incomeeffi

ciency

analysis

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

New

Taipei

City

Dropp

edfrom

11th

placein

2013

to15

th

placein

2015

Maintained12

thor

13thplace

Inlast

placeall4

years(19th )

7thin

2012

and2013

anddrop

pedto

8th

placein

2014

and

2015

10thin

2012

and2014

anddrop

pedto

11th

placein

2013

and2015

10thin

2012

and2014

and

drop

pedto

11thplacein

2013

and2015

14thin

2012p

rogressedto


to13

thplacein

2014and

regressedto

15thplacein

2015

Taipei

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Taoyuan

City

Con

tinuedto

improvesligh

tlyfrom

10thin

2012

to8thin

2015

Last

placein

the4

years(19thplace)

13thplacein

the4

years

12thin

2012

and2013

andprogressed

to10

thplacein

2014

and2015

15thin

2012

and2015

andprogressed

to14

th

in2013

and2014

14thin

2012

andregressed

to15

thplacein

20132014

and2015

10thplacein

2012

progressed

to7thplacein

2013

andregressedto

8th

placein

2014

and2015

Taichu

ngCity

Con

tinued

improvingfrom

17th

in2012

to13

thin

2015

4thin

20122013and

2015

16thin

2012

and

2013

andto

17th

placein

2014

and

2015

15thplacein

the4

years

16thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to15

thin

2014

15thplacein

2012w

hile

20132

014

and2015

all

regressedto

16thplace

17thin

2012

(3rd

last)

progressed

to12

thplacein

2013

and2014and

regressedto

13thplacein

2015

Tainan

City

Last

placein

2012

2014a

nd2015

-irdto

last

placein

20122

013

and2014

andsecond

tolast

in2015

15thin

the4years

11thin

2012

and2013

and12

thin

2014

and

2015

12thin

20122

013

and

2015

and11

thin

2014


in2013a

nd9thplacein

2014

and2015

Last

(19thplace)

in2012

2014and

2015

and17

thin

2013

Kaohsiung

City

In2013

itslipp

edfrom

13th

Last

in20122

013

and2014

and

progressed

tothird

from

last

in2015

18thin

the4years

18thin

the4years

19thin

20122

013and

2015p

rogressin

gto

18thplacein

2014

17thin

2012

and2015

and

18thplacein2013

and2014

16thin

2012

and20151

3th

in2013a

nd14

thin

2014

Yilan

Cou

nty

Average

6thplace

14thin

20122

013

and2014

progressingto

12th

placein

2015

6thin

2012

and

2013

and7thin

2014

and2015

17thplacein

the

4years

13thin

20122

013

and

2015

andto

12thin

2014

13thin

2012

and14

thin

20132

014

and2015

Average

7thplace

Hsin

chu

Cou

nty

Average

7thplace

1stplaceinthe4

years

7thin

2012

and

2013

and8thin

2014

and2015

6thplacein

the4

years

Average

7thplace


2015

and11

thplacein2014

6thin

20122

013

and2014

and7thin

2015

Miaoli

Cou

nty

Con

tinued

improvem

entfrom

11thin

2012

to9thin

2014

Average

13thplace

9thplacein

the4

years

10thin

2012

and2013

and11

thin

2014

and

2015

11thin

2012p

rogressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014and

returned

to9thin

2015

12thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

all

regressedto

13th

Average

10thplace

Chang

hua

Cou

nty

Second

tolast

place

in20132

014

and

2015

1stin

2013

and2015

but1

1thin

2012

and

2014

14thin

the4years

9thin

2012

progressed

to8thin

2013and

progressed

to7thin

2014

and

2015

9thin2012

and2014but

regressedto

10thin

2013

and2015

Last

placein

2012

(19th )

progressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014

andbacktrackedto

10thin

2015

15thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

allregressed

to18

th


Tabl

e10C

ontin

ued

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

Nantou

Cou

nty

11thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

10thin

the4years

13thin

the4years

6thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to5thin

2014

6thin

the4years

11thon

average

Yunlin

Cou

nty

17thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

12thin

the4years

14thin

the4years

17thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to16

thin

2014

16thin

20121

7thin

2013

and2014and

18thin

2015

18thin

2012retracedto

19th(la

st)in

2013

progressed

to15

thin

2014

andregressedto

17thin

2015

Chiayi

Cou

nty

12thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

11thin

4years

11thplacein

2012

and9thin

20132014

and2015

14thon

average

11thin

2012

and12

thin

20132

014

and2015

12thin

20121

5thin

2013

17thin

2014a

nd11

thin

2015

Ping

tung

Cou

nty

16thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

17thin

2012

and

2013

and16

thin

2014

and2015

16thplacein

the4

years

7thin

2012

and2014

and

regressedto

8thin

2013

and2015

8thon

average

13thin

20121

6thin

2013

and2014and

14thin

2015

Taitu

ngCou

nty

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

Hualien

Cou

nty

10thon

average

15thin

20122

013

and2014

8thin

2012

and

2013

and

progressed

to6th

in2014

and2015

Last

placein

the

4years(19th )

18thplacein

20122013

and2015

and17

thplace

in2014

18thin

2012

and19

thin

20132

014

and2015

9thin

20122

013

and2015

and11

thin

2014

Keelung

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

20122

013

and2015b

utregressed

to19

th(la

st)in

2014

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Hsin

chu

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

ChiayiC

ity1s

t place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years










4 Conclusions














Data Availability




References




































































Variable Definition

Input





Undesirableoutput







Period t

Input

Output

Period t + 1


(i)(ii)

(iii)(iv)


(i)(ii)

(iii)(iv)


(i)(ii)

(iii)


Input(i)

(ii)(iii)




Tabl

e2

Descriptio

nof

statistics

Variable

2012

2013

2014

2015

Inpu

ts

Labo

r(people)

Maxim

um1892000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1910000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1927000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1945000(N

ewTaipei

City

)Minim

um103000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

569474

574947

580736

586947

Standard

deviation

523758

529741

534914

541477

Motor

vehicles

Maxim

um3309078(N

ewTaipei

City

)3233275(N

ewTaipei

City

)3178499(N

ewTaipei

City

)3183551(N

ewTaipei

City

)Minim

um246208(Taitung

Cou

nty)

233394(Taitung

Cou

nty)

230890(Taitung

Cou

nty)

230954(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

1166673

1125181

1110507

1115854

Standard

deviation

1013652

979776

966127

971184

Electricity

consum

ption(degrees)

Maxim

um22399088277

(New

Taipei

City

)22850473858

(Taoyuan

City

)23045858780

(Taoyuan

City

)22801815338

(Taoyuan

City

)

Minim

um485166744(Taitung

Cou

nty)

488240891(Taitung

Cou

nty)

496469053(Taitung

Cou

nty)

520574022(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

7819496456

7988861231

8102790831

8121363829

Standard

deviation

7529994233

7694682886

7811168091

7826312606

Desira

bleou

tput

Average

disposable

income(N

T$)

Maxim

um1278278(TaipeiC

ity)

1279195(TaipeiC

ity)

1292604(TaipeiC

ity)

1314031(TaipeiC

ity)

Minim

um670017(Taitung

Cou

nty)

676390(Taitung

Cou

nty)

667933(C

hiayiC

ity)

636162(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

874514

889033

896941

895059

Standard

deviation

158827

171147

182797

167073

Und

esira

bleou

tput


issions

(PM

25)

(metrictons)

Maxim

um10696

(Kaohsiung

City

)10336

(Kaohsiung

City

)10174

(Kaohsiung

City

)9893(K

aohsiung

City

)Minim

um514(C

hiayiC

ity)

491(C

hiayiC

ity)

479(C

hiayiC

ity)

471(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

3941

3901

3825

3742

Standard

deviation

2631

2606

2557

2487

Sulfu

roxideem

issions

(SO2)

(metric

tons)

Maxim

um42929

(Kaohsiung

City

)37849

(Kaohsiung

City

)37132

(Kaohsiung

City

)35667

(Kaohsiung

City

)Minim

um60

(ChiayiC

ity)

44(C

hiayiC

ity)

44(C

hiayiC

ity)

43(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

6397

5960

5845

5638

Standard

deviation

10594

9614

9428

9051

Nitrogen

oxideem

issions

(NO

2)(m

etrictons)

Maxim

um76826

(Kaohsiung

City

)74061

(Kaohsiung

City

)69934

(Kaohsiung

City

)65068

(Kaohsiung

City

)Minim

um2281(C

hiayiC

ity)

2283(C

hiayiC

ity)

2101(C

hiayiC

ity)

1944(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

20213

20321

19250

18120

Standard

deviation

19626

19228

18167

16922

Carryover

Fixedassets

(NT$

1000)

Maxim


)199637849(Taichun

gCity


)232090820(Taoyuan

City

)Minim

um324609(C

hiayiC

ity)

264800(Taitung

Cou

nty)

773560(Taitung

Cou

nty)

903929(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

56753880

55750421

62653275

65734355

Standard

deviation

66919221

68137797

75504497

74984091






Labor (people)

20122013

20142015

0

1000000

2000000

3000000

(a)


20122013

20142015


0

1000000

2000000

(b)


20122013

20142015


0100000000002000000000030000000000

(c)


20122013

20142015


0500000

10000001500000

(d)


20122013

20142015


0

10000

20000

(e)


20122013

20142015


0

20000

40000

60000

(f )


20122013

20142015


0

20000

40000

60000

80000

(g)


20122013

20142015


050000000

100000000150000000200000000250000000

(h)

























PM25



SO2



NO2



Tabl

e10O

verallscore

electricity

consum

ption

motor

vehicleem

issionssuspend

edparticlesem


issionsn

itrogen

oxideem

issionsa

ndaverageho

usehold

disposable

incomeeffi

ciency

analysis

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

New

Taipei

City

Dropp

edfrom

11th

placein

2013

to15

th

placein

2015

Maintained12

thor

13thplace

Inlast

placeall4

years(19th )

7thin

2012

and2013

anddrop

pedto

8th

placein

2014

and

2015

10thin

2012

and2014

anddrop

pedto

11th

placein

2013

and2015

10thin

2012

and2014

and

drop

pedto

11thplacein

2013

and2015

14thin

2012p

rogressedto


to13

thplacein

2014and

regressedto

15thplacein

2015

Taipei

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Taoyuan

City

Con

tinuedto

improvesligh

tlyfrom

10thin

2012

to8thin

2015

Last

placein

the4

years(19thplace)

13thplacein

the4

years

12thin

2012

and2013

andprogressed

to10

thplacein

2014

and2015

15thin

2012

and2015

andprogressed

to14

th

in2013

and2014

14thin

2012

andregressed

to15

thplacein

20132014

and2015

10thplacein

2012

progressed

to7thplacein

2013

andregressedto

8th

placein

2014

and2015

Taichu

ngCity

Con

tinued

improvingfrom

17th

in2012

to13

thin

2015

4thin

20122013and

2015

16thin

2012

and

2013

andto

17th

placein

2014

and

2015

15thplacein

the4

years

16thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to15

thin

2014

15thplacein

2012w

hile

20132

014

and2015

all

regressedto

16thplace

17thin

2012

(3rd

last)

progressed

to12

thplacein

2013

and2014and

regressedto

13thplacein

2015

Tainan

City

Last

placein

2012

2014a

nd2015

-irdto

last

placein

20122

013

and2014

andsecond

tolast

in2015

15thin

the4years

11thin

2012

and2013

and12

thin

2014

and

2015

12thin

20122

013

and

2015

and11

thin

2014


in2013a

nd9thplacein

2014

and2015

Last

(19thplace)

in2012

2014and

2015

and17

thin

2013

Kaohsiung

City

In2013

itslipp

edfrom

13th

Last

in20122

013

and2014

and

progressed

tothird

from

last

in2015

18thin

the4years

18thin

the4years

19thin

20122

013and

2015p

rogressin

gto

18thplacein

2014

17thin

2012

and2015

and

18thplacein2013

and2014

16thin

2012

and20151

3th

in2013a

nd14

thin

2014

Yilan

Cou

nty

Average

6thplace

14thin

20122

013

and2014

progressingto

12th

placein

2015

6thin

2012

and

2013

and7thin

2014

and2015

17thplacein

the

4years

13thin

20122

013

and

2015

andto

12thin

2014

13thin

2012

and14

thin

20132

014

and2015

Average

7thplace

Hsin

chu

Cou

nty

Average

7thplace

1stplaceinthe4

years

7thin

2012

and

2013

and8thin

2014

and2015

6thplacein

the4

years

Average

7thplace


2015

and11

thplacein2014

6thin

20122

013

and2014

and7thin

2015

Miaoli

Cou

nty

Con

tinued

improvem

entfrom

11thin

2012

to9thin

2014

Average

13thplace

9thplacein

the4

years

10thin

2012

and2013

and11

thin

2014

and

2015

11thin

2012p

rogressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014and

returned

to9thin

2015

12thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

all

regressedto

13th

Average

10thplace

Chang

hua

Cou

nty

Second

tolast

place

in20132

014

and

2015

1stin

2013

and2015

but1

1thin

2012

and

2014

14thin

the4years

9thin

2012

progressed

to8thin

2013and

progressed

to7thin

2014

and

2015

9thin2012

and2014but

regressedto

10thin

2013

and2015

Last

placein

2012

(19th )

progressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014

andbacktrackedto

10thin

2015

15thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

allregressed

to18

th


Tabl

e10C

ontin

ued

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

Nantou

Cou

nty

11thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

10thin

the4years

13thin

the4years

6thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to5thin

2014

6thin

the4years

11thon

average

Yunlin

Cou

nty

17thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

12thin

the4years

14thin

the4years

17thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to16

thin

2014

16thin

20121

7thin

2013

and2014and

18thin

2015

18thin

2012retracedto

19th(la

st)in

2013

progressed

to15

thin

2014

andregressedto

17thin

2015

Chiayi

Cou

nty

12thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

11thin

4years

11thplacein

2012

and9thin

20132014

and2015

14thon

average

11thin

2012

and12

thin

20132

014

and2015

12thin

20121

5thin

2013

17thin

2014a

nd11

thin

2015

Ping

tung

Cou

nty

16thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

17thin

2012

and

2013

and16

thin

2014

and2015

16thplacein

the4

years

7thin

2012

and2014

and

regressedto

8thin

2013

and2015

8thon

average

13thin

20121

6thin

2013

and2014and

14thin

2015

Taitu

ngCou

nty

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

Hualien

Cou

nty

10thon

average

15thin

20122

013

and2014

8thin

2012

and

2013

and

progressed

to6th

in2014

and2015

Last

placein

the

4years(19th )

18thplacein

20122013

and2015

and17

thplace

in2014

18thin

2012

and19

thin

20132

014

and2015

9thin

20122

013

and2015

and11

thin

2014

Keelung

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

20122

013

and2015b

utregressed

to19

th(la

st)in

2014

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Hsin

chu

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

ChiayiC

ity1s

t place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years










4 Conclusions














Data Availability




References












































Tabl

e2

Descriptio

nof

statistics

Variable

2012

2013

2014

2015

Inpu

ts

Labo

r(people)

Maxim

um1892000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1910000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1927000(N

ewTaipei

City

)1945000(N

ewTaipei

City

)Minim

um103000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

104000(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

569474

574947

580736

586947

Standard

deviation

523758

529741

534914

541477

Motor

vehicles

Maxim

um3309078(N

ewTaipei

City

)3233275(N

ewTaipei

City

)3178499(N

ewTaipei

City

)3183551(N

ewTaipei

City

)Minim

um246208(Taitung

Cou

nty)

233394(Taitung

Cou

nty)

230890(Taitung

Cou

nty)

230954(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

1166673

1125181

1110507

1115854

Standard

deviation

1013652

979776

966127

971184

Electricity

consum

ption(degrees)

Maxim

um22399088277

(New

Taipei

City

)22850473858

(Taoyuan

City

)23045858780

(Taoyuan

City

)22801815338

(Taoyuan

City

)

Minim

um485166744(Taitung

Cou

nty)

488240891(Taitung

Cou

nty)

496469053(Taitung

Cou

nty)

520574022(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

7819496456

7988861231

8102790831

8121363829

Standard

deviation

7529994233

7694682886

7811168091

7826312606

Desira

bleou

tput

Average

disposable

income(N

T$)

Maxim

um1278278(TaipeiC

ity)

1279195(TaipeiC

ity)

1292604(TaipeiC

ity)

1314031(TaipeiC

ity)

Minim

um670017(Taitung

Cou

nty)

676390(Taitung

Cou

nty)

667933(C

hiayiC

ity)

636162(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

874514

889033

896941

895059

Standard

deviation

158827

171147

182797

167073

Und

esira

bleou

tput


issions

(PM

25)

(metrictons)

Maxim

um10696

(Kaohsiung

City

)10336

(Kaohsiung

City

)10174

(Kaohsiung

City

)9893(K

aohsiung

City

)Minim

um514(C

hiayiC

ity)

491(C

hiayiC

ity)

479(C

hiayiC

ity)

471(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

3941

3901

3825

3742

Standard

deviation

2631

2606

2557

2487

Sulfu

roxideem

issions

(SO2)

(metric

tons)

Maxim

um42929

(Kaohsiung

City

)37849

(Kaohsiung

City

)37132

(Kaohsiung

City

)35667

(Kaohsiung

City

)Minim

um60

(ChiayiC

ity)

44(C

hiayiC

ity)

44(C

hiayiC

ity)

43(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

6397

5960

5845

5638

Standard

deviation

10594

9614

9428

9051

Nitrogen

oxideem

issions

(NO

2)(m

etrictons)

Maxim

um76826

(Kaohsiung

City

)74061

(Kaohsiung

City

)69934

(Kaohsiung

City

)65068

(Kaohsiung

City

)Minim

um2281(C

hiayiC

ity)

2283(C

hiayiC

ity)

2101(C

hiayiC

ity)

1944(C

hiayiC

ity)

Average

20213

20321

19250

18120

Standard

deviation

19626

19228

18167

16922

Carryover

Fixedassets

(NT$

1000)

Maxim


)199637849(Taichun

gCity


)232090820(Taoyuan

City

)Minim

um324609(C

hiayiC

ity)

264800(Taitung

Cou

nty)

773560(Taitung

Cou

nty)

903929(Taitung

Cou

nty)

Average

56753880

55750421

62653275

65734355

Standard

deviation

66919221

68137797

75504497

74984091






Labor (people)

20122013

20142015

0

1000000

2000000

3000000

(a)


20122013

20142015


0

1000000

2000000

(b)


20122013

20142015


0100000000002000000000030000000000

(c)


20122013

20142015


0500000

10000001500000

(d)


20122013

20142015


0

10000

20000

(e)


20122013

20142015


0

20000

40000

60000

(f )


20122013

20142015


0

20000

40000

60000

80000

(g)


20122013

20142015


050000000

100000000150000000200000000250000000

(h)

























PM25



SO2



NO2



Tabl

e10O

verallscore

electricity

consum

ption

motor

vehicleem

issionssuspend

edparticlesem


issionsn

itrogen

oxideem

issionsa

ndaverageho

usehold

disposable

incomeeffi

ciency

analysis

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

New

Taipei

City

Dropp

edfrom

11th

placein

2013

to15

th

placein

2015

Maintained12

thor

13thplace

Inlast

placeall4

years(19th )

7thin

2012

and2013

anddrop

pedto

8th

placein

2014

and

2015

10thin

2012

and2014

anddrop

pedto

11th

placein

2013

and2015

10thin

2012

and2014

and

drop

pedto

11thplacein

2013

and2015

14thin

2012p

rogressedto


to13

thplacein

2014and

regressedto

15thplacein

2015

Taipei

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Taoyuan

City

Con

tinuedto

improvesligh

tlyfrom

10thin

2012

to8thin

2015

Last

placein

the4

years(19thplace)

13thplacein

the4

years

12thin

2012

and2013

andprogressed

to10

thplacein

2014

and2015

15thin

2012

and2015

andprogressed

to14

th

in2013

and2014

14thin

2012

andregressed

to15

thplacein

20132014

and2015

10thplacein

2012

progressed

to7thplacein

2013

andregressedto

8th

placein

2014

and2015

Taichu

ngCity

Con

tinued

improvingfrom

17th

in2012

to13

thin

2015

4thin

20122013and

2015

16thin

2012

and

2013

andto

17th

placein

2014

and

2015

15thplacein

the4

years

16thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to15

thin

2014

15thplacein

2012w

hile

20132

014

and2015

all

regressedto

16thplace

17thin

2012

(3rd

last)

progressed

to12

thplacein

2013

and2014and

regressedto

13thplacein

2015

Tainan

City

Last

placein

2012

2014a

nd2015

-irdto

last

placein

20122

013

and2014

andsecond

tolast

in2015

15thin

the4years

11thin

2012

and2013

and12

thin

2014

and

2015

12thin

20122

013

and

2015

and11

thin

2014


in2013a

nd9thplacein

2014

and2015

Last

(19thplace)

in2012

2014and

2015

and17

thin

2013

Kaohsiung

City

In2013

itslipp

edfrom

13th

Last

in20122

013

and2014

and

progressed

tothird

from

last

in2015

18thin

the4years

18thin

the4years

19thin

20122

013and

2015p

rogressin

gto

18thplacein

2014

17thin

2012

and2015

and

18thplacein2013

and2014

16thin

2012

and20151

3th

in2013a

nd14

thin

2014

Yilan

Cou

nty

Average

6thplace

14thin

20122

013

and2014

progressingto

12th

placein

2015

6thin

2012

and

2013

and7thin

2014

and2015

17thplacein

the

4years

13thin

20122

013

and

2015

andto

12thin

2014

13thin

2012

and14

thin

20132

014

and2015

Average

7thplace

Hsin

chu

Cou

nty

Average

7thplace

1stplaceinthe4

years

7thin

2012

and

2013

and8thin

2014

and2015

6thplacein

the4

years

Average

7thplace


2015

and11

thplacein2014

6thin

20122

013

and2014

and7thin

2015

Miaoli

Cou

nty

Con

tinued

improvem

entfrom

11thin

2012

to9thin

2014

Average

13thplace

9thplacein

the4

years

10thin

2012

and2013

and11

thin

2014

and

2015

11thin

2012p

rogressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014and

returned

to9thin

2015

12thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

all

regressedto

13th

Average

10thplace

Chang

hua

Cou

nty

Second

tolast

place

in20132

014

and

2015

1stin

2013

and2015

but1

1thin

2012

and

2014

14thin

the4years

9thin

2012

progressed

to8thin

2013and

progressed

to7thin

2014

and

2015

9thin2012

and2014but

regressedto

10thin

2013

and2015

Last

placein

2012

(19th )

progressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014

andbacktrackedto

10thin

2015

15thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

allregressed

to18

th


Tabl

e10C

ontin

ued

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

Nantou

Cou

nty

11thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

10thin

the4years

13thin

the4years

6thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to5thin

2014

6thin

the4years

11thon

average

Yunlin

Cou

nty

17thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

12thin

the4years

14thin

the4years

17thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to16

thin

2014

16thin

20121

7thin

2013

and2014and

18thin

2015

18thin

2012retracedto

19th(la

st)in

2013

progressed

to15

thin

2014

andregressedto

17thin

2015

Chiayi

Cou

nty

12thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

11thin

4years

11thplacein

2012

and9thin

20132014

and2015

14thon

average

11thin

2012

and12

thin

20132

014

and2015

12thin

20121

5thin

2013

17thin

2014a

nd11

thin

2015

Ping

tung

Cou

nty

16thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

17thin

2012

and

2013

and16

thin

2014

and2015

16thplacein

the4

years

7thin

2012

and2014

and

regressedto

8thin

2013

and2015

8thon

average

13thin

20121

6thin

2013

and2014and

14thin

2015

Taitu

ngCou

nty

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

Hualien

Cou

nty

10thon

average

15thin

20122

013

and2014

8thin

2012

and

2013

and

progressed

to6th

in2014

and2015

Last

placein

the

4years(19th )

18thplacein

20122013

and2015

and17

thplace

in2014

18thin

2012

and19

thin

20132

014

and2015

9thin

20122

013

and2015

and11

thin

2014

Keelung

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

20122

013

and2015b

utregressed

to19

th(la

st)in

2014

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Hsin

chu

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

ChiayiC

ity1s

t place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years










4 Conclusions














Data Availability




References
















































Labor (people)

20122013

20142015

0

1000000

2000000

3000000

(a)


20122013

20142015


0

1000000

2000000

(b)


20122013

20142015


0100000000002000000000030000000000

(c)


20122013

20142015


0500000

10000001500000

(d)


20122013

20142015


0

10000

20000

(e)


20122013

20142015


0

20000

40000

60000

(f )


20122013

20142015


0

20000

40000

60000

80000

(g)


20122013

20142015


050000000

100000000150000000200000000250000000

(h)

























PM25



SO2



NO2



Tabl

e10O

verallscore

electricity

consum

ption

motor

vehicleem

issionssuspend

edparticlesem


issionsn

itrogen

oxideem

issionsa

ndaverageho

usehold

disposable

incomeeffi

ciency

analysis

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

New

Taipei

City

Dropp

edfrom

11th

placein

2013

to15

th

placein

2015

Maintained12

thor

13thplace

Inlast

placeall4

years(19th )

7thin

2012

and2013

anddrop

pedto

8th

placein

2014

and

2015

10thin

2012

and2014

anddrop

pedto

11th

placein

2013

and2015

10thin

2012

and2014

and

drop

pedto

11thplacein

2013

and2015

14thin

2012p

rogressedto


to13

thplacein

2014and

regressedto

15thplacein

2015

Taipei

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Taoyuan

City

Con

tinuedto

improvesligh

tlyfrom

10thin

2012

to8thin

2015

Last

placein

the4

years(19thplace)

13thplacein

the4

years

12thin

2012

and2013

andprogressed

to10

thplacein

2014

and2015

15thin

2012

and2015

andprogressed

to14

th

in2013

and2014

14thin

2012

andregressed

to15

thplacein

20132014

and2015

10thplacein

2012

progressed

to7thplacein

2013

andregressedto

8th

placein

2014

and2015

Taichu

ngCity

Con

tinued

improvingfrom

17th

in2012

to13

thin

2015

4thin

20122013and

2015

16thin

2012

and

2013

andto

17th

placein

2014

and

2015

15thplacein

the4

years

16thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to15

thin

2014

15thplacein

2012w

hile

20132

014

and2015

all

regressedto

16thplace

17thin

2012

(3rd

last)

progressed

to12

thplacein

2013

and2014and

regressedto

13thplacein

2015

Tainan

City

Last

placein

2012

2014a

nd2015

-irdto

last

placein

20122

013

and2014

andsecond

tolast

in2015

15thin

the4years

11thin

2012

and2013

and12

thin

2014

and

2015

12thin

20122

013

and

2015

and11

thin

2014


in2013a

nd9thplacein

2014

and2015

Last

(19thplace)

in2012

2014and

2015

and17

thin

2013

Kaohsiung

City

In2013

itslipp

edfrom

13th

Last

in20122

013

and2014

and

progressed

tothird

from

last

in2015

18thin

the4years

18thin

the4years

19thin

20122

013and

2015p

rogressin

gto

18thplacein

2014

17thin

2012

and2015

and

18thplacein2013

and2014

16thin

2012

and20151

3th

in2013a

nd14

thin

2014

Yilan

Cou

nty

Average

6thplace

14thin

20122

013

and2014

progressingto

12th

placein

2015

6thin

2012

and

2013

and7thin

2014

and2015

17thplacein

the

4years

13thin

20122

013

and

2015

andto

12thin

2014

13thin

2012

and14

thin

20132

014

and2015

Average

7thplace

Hsin

chu

Cou

nty

Average

7thplace

1stplaceinthe4

years

7thin

2012

and

2013

and8thin

2014

and2015

6thplacein

the4

years

Average

7thplace


2015

and11

thplacein2014

6thin

20122

013

and2014

and7thin

2015

Miaoli

Cou

nty

Con

tinued

improvem

entfrom

11thin

2012

to9thin

2014

Average

13thplace

9thplacein

the4

years

10thin

2012

and2013

and11

thin

2014

and

2015

11thin

2012p

rogressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014and

returned

to9thin

2015

12thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

all

regressedto

13th

Average

10thplace

Chang

hua

Cou

nty

Second

tolast

place

in20132

014

and

2015

1stin

2013

and2015

but1

1thin

2012

and

2014

14thin

the4years

9thin

2012

progressed

to8thin

2013and

progressed

to7thin

2014

and

2015

9thin2012

and2014but

regressedto

10thin

2013

and2015

Last

placein

2012

(19th )

progressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014

andbacktrackedto

10thin

2015

15thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

allregressed

to18

th


Tabl

e10C

ontin

ued

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

Nantou

Cou

nty

11thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

10thin

the4years

13thin

the4years

6thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to5thin

2014

6thin

the4years

11thon

average

Yunlin

Cou

nty

17thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

12thin

the4years

14thin

the4years

17thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to16

thin

2014

16thin

20121

7thin

2013

and2014and

18thin

2015

18thin

2012retracedto

19th(la

st)in

2013

progressed

to15

thin

2014

andregressedto

17thin

2015

Chiayi

Cou

nty

12thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

11thin

4years

11thplacein

2012

and9thin

20132014

and2015

14thon

average

11thin

2012

and12

thin

20132

014

and2015

12thin

20121

5thin

2013

17thin

2014a

nd11

thin

2015

Ping

tung

Cou

nty

16thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

17thin

2012

and

2013

and16

thin

2014

and2015

16thplacein

the4

years

7thin

2012

and2014

and

regressedto

8thin

2013

and2015

8thon

average

13thin

20121

6thin

2013

and2014and

14thin

2015

Taitu

ngCou

nty

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

Hualien

Cou

nty

10thon

average

15thin

20122

013

and2014

8thin

2012

and

2013

and

progressed

to6th

in2014

and2015

Last

placein

the

4years(19th )

18thplacein

20122013

and2015

and17

thplace

in2014

18thin

2012

and19

thin

20132

014

and2015

9thin

20122

013

and2015

and11

thin

2014

Keelung

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

20122

013

and2015b

utregressed

to19

th(la

st)in

2014

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Hsin

chu

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

ChiayiC

ity1s

t place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years










4 Conclusions














Data Availability




References


































































PM25



SO2



NO2



Tabl

e10O

verallscore

electricity

consum

ption

motor

vehicleem

issionssuspend

edparticlesem


issionsn

itrogen

oxideem

issionsa

ndaverageho

usehold

disposable

incomeeffi

ciency

analysis

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

New

Taipei

City

Dropp

edfrom

11th

placein

2013

to15

th

placein

2015

Maintained12

thor

13thplace

Inlast

placeall4

years(19th )

7thin

2012

and2013

anddrop

pedto

8th

placein

2014

and

2015

10thin

2012

and2014

anddrop

pedto

11th

placein

2013

and2015

10thin

2012

and2014

and

drop

pedto

11thplacein

2013

and2015

14thin

2012p

rogressedto


to13

thplacein

2014and

regressedto

15thplacein

2015

Taipei

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Taoyuan

City

Con

tinuedto

improvesligh

tlyfrom

10thin

2012

to8thin

2015

Last

placein

the4

years(19thplace)

13thplacein

the4

years

12thin

2012

and2013

andprogressed

to10

thplacein

2014

and2015

15thin

2012

and2015

andprogressed

to14

th

in2013

and2014

14thin

2012

andregressed

to15

thplacein

20132014

and2015

10thplacein

2012

progressed

to7thplacein

2013

andregressedto

8th

placein

2014

and2015

Taichu

ngCity

Con

tinued

improvingfrom

17th

in2012

to13

thin

2015

4thin

20122013and

2015

16thin

2012

and

2013

andto

17th

placein

2014

and

2015

15thplacein

the4

years

16thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to15

thin

2014

15thplacein

2012w

hile

20132

014

and2015

all

regressedto

16thplace

17thin

2012

(3rd

last)

progressed

to12

thplacein

2013

and2014and

regressedto

13thplacein

2015

Tainan

City

Last

placein

2012

2014a

nd2015

-irdto

last

placein

20122

013

and2014

andsecond

tolast

in2015

15thin

the4years

11thin

2012

and2013

and12

thin

2014

and

2015

12thin

20122

013

and

2015

and11

thin

2014


in2013a

nd9thplacein

2014

and2015

Last

(19thplace)

in2012

2014and

2015

and17

thin

2013

Kaohsiung

City

In2013

itslipp

edfrom

13th

Last

in20122

013

and2014

and

progressed

tothird

from

last

in2015

18thin

the4years

18thin

the4years

19thin

20122

013and

2015p

rogressin

gto

18thplacein

2014

17thin

2012

and2015

and

18thplacein2013

and2014

16thin

2012

and20151

3th

in2013a

nd14

thin

2014

Yilan

Cou

nty

Average

6thplace

14thin

20122

013

and2014

progressingto

12th

placein

2015

6thin

2012

and

2013

and7thin

2014

and2015

17thplacein

the

4years

13thin

20122

013

and

2015

andto

12thin

2014

13thin

2012

and14

thin

20132

014

and2015

Average

7thplace

Hsin

chu

Cou

nty

Average

7thplace

1stplaceinthe4

years

7thin

2012

and

2013

and8thin

2014

and2015

6thplacein

the4

years

Average

7thplace


2015

and11

thplacein2014

6thin

20122

013

and2014

and7thin

2015

Miaoli

Cou

nty

Con

tinued

improvem

entfrom

11thin

2012

to9thin

2014

Average

13thplace

9thplacein

the4

years

10thin

2012

and2013

and11

thin

2014

and

2015

11thin

2012p

rogressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014and

returned

to9thin

2015

12thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

all

regressedto

13th

Average

10thplace

Chang

hua

Cou

nty

Second

tolast

place

in20132

014

and

2015

1stin

2013

and2015

but1

1thin

2012

and

2014

14thin

the4years

9thin

2012

progressed

to8thin

2013and

progressed

to7thin

2014

and

2015

9thin2012

and2014but

regressedto

10thin

2013

and2015

Last

placein

2012

(19th )

progressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014

andbacktrackedto

10thin

2015

15thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

allregressed

to18

th


Tabl

e10C

ontin

ued

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

Nantou

Cou

nty

11thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

10thin

the4years

13thin

the4years

6thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to5thin

2014

6thin

the4years

11thon

average

Yunlin

Cou

nty

17thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

12thin

the4years

14thin

the4years

17thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to16

thin

2014

16thin

20121

7thin

2013

and2014and

18thin

2015

18thin

2012retracedto

19th(la

st)in

2013

progressed

to15

thin

2014

andregressedto

17thin

2015

Chiayi

Cou

nty

12thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

11thin

4years

11thplacein

2012

and9thin

20132014

and2015

14thon

average

11thin

2012

and12

thin

20132

014

and2015

12thin

20121

5thin

2013

17thin

2014a

nd11

thin

2015

Ping

tung

Cou

nty

16thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

17thin

2012

and

2013

and16

thin

2014

and2015

16thplacein

the4

years

7thin

2012

and2014

and

regressedto

8thin

2013

and2015

8thon

average

13thin

20121

6thin

2013

and2014and

14thin

2015

Taitu

ngCou

nty

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

Hualien

Cou

nty

10thon

average

15thin

20122

013

and2014

8thin

2012

and

2013

and

progressed

to6th

in2014

and2015

Last

placein

the

4years(19th )

18thplacein

20122013

and2015

and17

thplace

in2014

18thin

2012

and19

thin

20132

014

and2015

9thin

20122

013

and2015

and11

thin

2014

Keelung

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

20122

013

and2015b

utregressed

to19

th(la

st)in

2014

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Hsin

chu

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

ChiayiC

ity1s

t place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years










4 Conclusions














Data Availability




References












































Tabl

e10O

verallscore

electricity

consum

ption

motor

vehicleem

issionssuspend

edparticlesem


issionsn

itrogen

oxideem

issionsa

ndaverageho

usehold

disposable

incomeeffi

ciency

analysis

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

New

Taipei

City

Dropp

edfrom

11th

placein

2013

to15

th

placein

2015

Maintained12

thor

13thplace

Inlast

placeall4

years(19th )

7thin

2012

and2013

anddrop

pedto

8th

placein

2014

and

2015

10thin

2012

and2014

anddrop

pedto

11th

placein

2013

and2015

10thin

2012

and2014

and

drop

pedto

11thplacein

2013

and2015

14thin

2012p

rogressedto


to13

thplacein

2014and

regressedto

15thplacein

2015

Taipei

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Taoyuan

City

Con

tinuedto

improvesligh

tlyfrom

10thin

2012

to8thin

2015

Last

placein

the4

years(19thplace)

13thplacein

the4

years

12thin

2012

and2013

andprogressed

to10

thplacein

2014

and2015

15thin

2012

and2015

andprogressed

to14

th

in2013

and2014

14thin

2012

andregressed

to15

thplacein

20132014

and2015

10thplacein

2012

progressed

to7thplacein

2013

andregressedto

8th

placein

2014

and2015

Taichu

ngCity

Con

tinued

improvingfrom

17th

in2012

to13

thin

2015

4thin

20122013and

2015

16thin

2012

and

2013

andto

17th

placein

2014

and

2015

15thplacein

the4

years

16thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to15

thin

2014

15thplacein

2012w

hile

20132

014

and2015

all

regressedto

16thplace

17thin

2012

(3rd

last)

progressed

to12

thplacein

2013

and2014and

regressedto

13thplacein

2015

Tainan

City

Last

placein

2012

2014a

nd2015

-irdto

last

placein

20122

013

and2014

andsecond

tolast

in2015

15thin

the4years

11thin

2012

and2013

and12

thin

2014

and

2015

12thin

20122

013

and

2015

and11

thin

2014


in2013a

nd9thplacein

2014

and2015

Last

(19thplace)

in2012

2014and

2015

and17

thin

2013

Kaohsiung

City

In2013

itslipp

edfrom

13th

Last

in20122

013

and2014

and

progressed

tothird

from

last

in2015

18thin

the4years

18thin

the4years

19thin

20122

013and

2015p

rogressin

gto

18thplacein

2014

17thin

2012

and2015

and

18thplacein2013

and2014

16thin

2012

and20151

3th

in2013a

nd14

thin

2014

Yilan

Cou

nty

Average

6thplace

14thin

20122

013

and2014

progressingto

12th

placein

2015

6thin

2012

and

2013

and7thin

2014

and2015

17thplacein

the

4years

13thin

20122

013

and

2015

andto

12thin

2014

13thin

2012

and14

thin

20132

014

and2015

Average

7thplace

Hsin

chu

Cou

nty

Average

7thplace

1stplaceinthe4

years

7thin

2012

and

2013

and8thin

2014

and2015

6thplacein

the4

years

Average

7thplace


2015

and11

thplacein2014

6thin

20122

013

and2014

and7thin

2015

Miaoli

Cou

nty

Con

tinued

improvem

entfrom

11thin

2012

to9thin

2014

Average

13thplace

9thplacein

the4

years

10thin

2012

and2013

and11

thin

2014

and

2015

11thin

2012p

rogressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014and

returned

to9thin

2015

12thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

all

regressedto

13th

Average

10thplace

Chang

hua

Cou

nty

Second

tolast

place

in20132

014

and

2015

1stin

2013

and2015

but1

1thin

2012

and

2014

14thin

the4years

9thin

2012

progressed

to8thin

2013and

progressed

to7thin

2014

and

2015

9thin2012

and2014but

regressedto

10thin

2013

and2015

Last

placein

2012

(19th )

progressed

to9thin

2013

progressed

to8thin

2014

andbacktrackedto

10thin

2015

15thin

2012w

hile

2013

2014and

2015

allregressed

to18

th


Tabl

e10C

ontin

ued

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

Nantou

Cou

nty

11thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

10thin

the4years

13thin

the4years

6thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to5thin

2014

6thin

the4years

11thon

average

Yunlin

Cou

nty

17thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

12thin

the4years

14thin

the4years

17thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to16

thin

2014

16thin

20121

7thin

2013

and2014and

18thin

2015

18thin

2012retracedto

19th(la

st)in

2013

progressed

to15

thin

2014

andregressedto

17thin

2015

Chiayi

Cou

nty

12thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

11thin

4years

11thplacein

2012

and9thin

20132014

and2015

14thon

average

11thin

2012

and12

thin

20132

014

and2015

12thin

20121

5thin

2013

17thin

2014a

nd11

thin

2015

Ping

tung

Cou

nty

16thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

17thin

2012

and

2013

and16

thin

2014

and2015

16thplacein

the4

years

7thin

2012

and2014

and

regressedto

8thin

2013

and2015

8thon

average

13thin

20121

6thin

2013

and2014and

14thin

2015

Taitu

ngCou

nty

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

Hualien

Cou

nty

10thon

average

15thin

20122

013

and2014

8thin

2012

and

2013

and

progressed

to6th

in2014

and2015

Last

placein

the

4years(19th )

18thplacein

20122013

and2015

and17

thplace

in2014

18thin

2012

and19

thin

20132

014

and2015

9thin

20122

013

and2015

and11

thin

2014

Keelung

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

20122

013

and2015b

utregressed

to19

th(la

st)in

2014

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Hsin

chu

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

ChiayiC

ity1s

t place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years










4 Conclusions














Data Availability




References












































Tabl

e10C

ontin

ued

DMU

Overalleffi

ciency

Electricity

consum

ption

Motor

vehicles

Suspendedparticles

SOx

NOx

Average

household

distribu

tableincome

Nantou

Cou

nty

11thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

10thin

the4years

13thin

the4years

6thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to5thin

2014

6thin

the4years

11thon

average

Yunlin

Cou

nty

17thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

12thin

the4years

14thin

the4years

17thin

20122

013

and

2015

andprogressed

to16

thin

2014

16thin

20121

7thin

2013

and2014and

18thin

2015

18thin

2012retracedto

19th(la

st)in

2013

progressed

to15

thin

2014

andregressedto

17thin

2015

Chiayi

Cou

nty

12thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

11thin

4years

11thplacein

2012

and9thin

20132014

and2015

14thon

average

11thin

2012

and12

thin

20132

014

and2015

12thin

20121

5thin

2013

17thin

2014a

nd11

thin

2015

Ping

tung

Cou

nty

16thon

average

1stplaceinthe4

years

17thin

2012

and

2013

and16

thin

2014

and2015

16thplacein

the4

years

7thin

2012

and2014

and

regressedto

8thin

2013

and2015

8thon

average

13thin

20121

6thin

2013

and2014and

14thin

2015

Taitu

ngCou

nty

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

1stplacein

the4

Hualien

Cou

nty

10thon

average

15thin

20122

013

and2014

8thin

2012

and

2013

and

progressed

to6th

in2014

and2015

Last

placein

the

4years(19th )

18thplacein

20122013

and2015

and17

thplace

in2014

18thin

2012

and19

thin

20132

014

and2015

9thin

20122

013

and2015

and11

thin

2014

Keelung

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

20122

013

and2015b

utregressed

to19

th(la

st)in

2014

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

Hsin

chu

City

1st place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

ChiayiC

ity1s

t place

inthe4

years

1stplaceinthe4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4

years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years

1stplacein

the4years










4 Conclusions














Data Availability




References




















































4 Conclusions














Data Availability




References



















































Data Availability




References












































TheEfficiencyofEconomicPerformance,Electricity Consumption...

Documents

Transcript of TheEfficiencyofEconomicPerformance,Electricity Consumption...