消費性電子產品購買與回收最適時間之研究

Optimal Consumer Electronics Product Purchase and Take-back Time with Consideration of Consumer Value

10.6840/cycu201700902

方翊澤

消費者價值 ； 生態化效益 ； 最適購買時間 ； 最適回收時間 ； TOPSIS ； Consumer value ； Eco-efficiency ； Optimal purchase time ； Optimal tack-back time ； TOPSIS

中原大學工業與系統工程學系學位論文

2017年

博士

饒忻

繁體中文

近年消費型電子產品因技術更新與市場需求快速變化，產品生命週期不斷縮短，多樣化的新產品不斷推陳出新，使得消費者不知何時為最佳購買的時間，擔心所購買的產品容易被淘汰或取代，然而購買產品使用之後，又將面臨何時將產品回收丟棄等問題，需有一套方法來協助消費者在產品購買與產品回收丟棄做為決策參考。而在環保議題趨勢下，許多製造廠商開始推出生態化設計的節能產品，過去產品購買的研究中多以產品功能規格與成本來評估產品價值，對於節能產品能帶給消費者多少效益鮮少有研究提出討論，然而在產品回收的研究，大多以產品製造商與回收商的角度探討生命終期產品的回收策略，鮮少以消費者立場來進行回收之評估，有鑑於此，本研究提出一套消費者價值與生態化效益的評估方法，以加入時間變動因子發展出三種評估模型，分別探討產品最適購買時間、產品最適回收時間與考量回收下產品最適購買時間。 在最適購買時間研究，本研究考量不同消費者族群與不同產品類型之情境，透過建構的消費者價值時間函數與生態化效益時間函數模型，求得產品最適購買時間與探討消費者價值與生態效益之變化，並使用TOPSIS偏好順序評估方法，找出產品建議購買之順序；在最適回收時間研究，本研究考量不同使用頻率消費者族群與不同回收獎勵金策略，透過消費者價值時間函數模型，求得產品最適回收時間與探討消費者價值之變化；在考量回收下最適購買時間研究，本研究綜合考量購買與回收兩者模式，以產品生命週期的觀點求得考量使用與回收下產品最適購買時間，並與未考量使用與回收之最適購買模型分析比較差異。最後透過實例數據分析提出產品最適決策與管理觀點，以提供製造商與消費者之參考。

Because of recent technical advancement and rapidly changing market demand, lifecycles of consumer electronics products have continuously shortened, and numerous diverse products have been developed to replace the old. The availability of many types of products and variations in product information causes consumers to worry about whether the chosen product will be easily replaced or rendered obsolete by new products. This makes it difficult to know the most appropriate time to make a purchase is. On the other hand, after purchasing a product consumers are facing the problem of when to take back the product for recycling. Environmental sustainability awareness has caused many manufacturers to release green products that have more environmentally friendly design concepts. As for how beneficial these environmentally friendly products actually are to the consumer, there has been very little discussion. In view of that, this study proposes a set of methods for consumer value and eco-efficiency evaluation from the perspective of consumers. Three models are also developed with the inclusion of the time factor to determine: the product purchase time, the product take back time and the product purchase time with take back consideration respectively. In the first model, we consider different groups of consumers and different types of products to explore the changes in consumer values and eco-efficiency to determine the optimal purchase time. Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) is used to find the suggested order of purchases at different times. In the second model, we consider different usage modes for various consumer groups and different recycling award schemes (fixed and variable recycling awards) to explore the changes in consumer value in determining the optimal product take back time. Finally, the last model considers different types of products to determine the optimal purchase time taking into consideration the take back time. By incorporating the take back time, more complete and accurate information is acquired in optimizing the product purchase time in this model than in the first model. Numerical examples are included to show the capability of the proposed models in determining the optimum period of product purchasing and take back time in order to give a useful managerial insight for manufacturer, as well as to provide a reference for consumers when making decisions.

1. 19. Guide, V. D. R., Teunter, R. H. & Wassenhove, L. N. V., Matching demand and supply to maximize profits from remanufacturing. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 2003, 5(4), 303-316.
   連結：
2. 23. Jayaraman, V. & Luo, Y., Creating competitive advantages through new value creation: a reverse logistics perspective. Academy of Management 2007, 21(2), 56-73.
   連結：
3. 24. Kondoh, S., Masui, K., Hattori, M., Mishima, N. & Matsumoto, M., Total performance analysis of product life cycle considering the deterioration and obsolescence of product value. International Journal of Product Development 2008, 6, 334-352.
   連結：
4. 25. Kwak, M., Behdad, S., Zhao, Y., Kim, H. & Thurston D., E-waste stream analysis and design implications. Journal of Mechanical Design 2010, 133 (10), 1-8.
   連結：
5. 29. Mishima, K., Mishima, N. & Nakano, M., A study on a system design approach to promote better circular use of Electrical and Electronic Equipment. EcoDesign 2011, 767-771.
   連結：
6. 34. Prahinski, C. & Kocabasoglu, C., Empirical research opportunities in reverse supply chains, OMEGA , 2006, 34(6), 519-532.
   連結：
7. 36. Ray, S., Boyaci, T. & Aras, N., Optimal prices and trade-in rebates for durable, remanufacturable products. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 2005, 7(3), 208-228.
   連結：
8. 37. Sahu, S. & Srinivasan, N., Mobile phone waste: Current initiatives in Asia and the Pacific. Asia-Pacific Tech Monitor, 2008, 32-38.
   連結：
9. 38. Shih, H.S., Shyur, H.J. & Lee, E. S., An extension of TOPSIS for group decision making. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 2007,45(7-8), 801-813
   連結：
10. 41. Teehan, P. & Kandlikar, M., Comparing embodied Greenhouse Gas emissions of modern computing and electronics products. Environ. SciTechnol, 2013, 47 (9), 3997- 4003.
    連結：
11. 48. White, C., Masanet, E., Rosen, C. & Beckman, S., Product recovery with some byte: an overview of management challenges and environmental consequences in reverse manufacturing for the computer industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2003, 11(4), 445-458.
    連結：
12. 49. Zeithaml, V. A., Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 1998, 52(3), 2-22.
    連結：
13. 50. Zhang, Z., Supporting end-of-life product recovery processes in closed loop supply chains. Second International Symposium on Intelligent Information Technology Application (IEEE) 2008, 804-808.
    連結：
14. 51. Zhao, Y., Pandey, V., Kim, H. & Thurston, D.M, Varying lifecycle lengths within a portfolio for product take-back. Journal of Mechanical Design, 2010, 132 (9) 0910121-09101210.
    連結：
15. 18. Greenpeace, The e-waste Problem,2015. Available online: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/toxics/electronics/the-e-waste-problem/ (accessed on Feb 2015)
16. 20. HP Corporation, 2011. Total cost of ownership, Available online: http://www8.hp.com/tw/zh/hp-financial-services/solutions/tco.html (accessed on Jun 2015)
17. 21. IDA, DOD value engineering program. Available online: http://rtoc.ida.org/ve/ve.html (accessed on Jun 2015)
18. 22. Inderfurth, K. & Langella, I. M., Planning disassembly for remanufacture-to-order systems. Environment Conscious Manufacturing, Boca Raton, 2008, 387-411.
19. 26. Market Intelligence & Consulting Institute (MIC). Investigation of digital living expenses in Taiwan, 2009.
20. 27. Matsushita Group, Factor X. Aiming for Harmonious Coexistence between Lifestyles and the Global Environment, 2003.
21. 28. Miles, Lawrence D. Techniques of Value Analysis and Engineering (third edition), Published by McGraw-Hill Companies 1989, ISBN: 0070419264.
22. 30. Nilsson, J., Lindahl, M. & Jensen, C., The information flow for efficient Design for Environment – Analysis of preconditions and presentation of a new tool, Proceedings of CIRP 5th International Seminar on Life Cycle Engineering,1998, ISSSN 1400-1179.
23. 31. Oikawa, S., Ebisuji, K. & Fuse, K., Fujitsu’s Approach for Eco-efficiency Factor, Fujitsu Science Technology Journal, 2005, 41(2), 236-241.
24. 32. PassMark Software - PC Benchmark and Test Software. Available online: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/ (accessed on Jun 2015)
25. 33. PassMark Software G3D Ratting website: http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php (accessed on Jun 2015)
26. 35. Ramani K., Ramanujan, D., Bernstein, W. Z., Zhao, F., Sutherland, J., Handwerker, C., Choi, J. K., Kim, H. & Thurston, D. Integrated sustainable life cycle design: a review. Journal of Mechanical Design, 2010, 132(9), 0910041-09100415.
27. 39. SquareTrade Company. 1 in 3 Laptops fail over 3 years report, 2009 , Available online: http://www.squaretrade.com/pages/laptop-reliability-1109 (accessed on Jun 2015)
28. 40. Taiwan Power Company, Available online: http://www.taipower.com.tw/indexE.htm (accessed on Jun 2015)
29. 42. Thierry, M. C., Salomon, M., Van Nunen, J. & Van Wassenhove, L., Strategic issues in product recovery management. California Management Review, 1998, 37 (2), 114-135.
30. 43. Toshiba Corporation. Advancing together with Factor T. Available online: http://www.toshiba.co.jp/env/en/report/pdf/factor_t_2009_en.pdf (accessed on Jun 2015)
31. 44. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Electronics waste management in the United States through 2009. Available online: http://www.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/materials/ecycling/docs/fullbaselinereport2011.pdf (accessed Jun 2015)
32. 45. United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), Policy briefs on e-waste what, why and how. Available online: http://www.unep.org/ietc/Portals/136/Other%20documents/PolicyBriefs/13052013_E-Waste%20Policy%20brief.pdf (accessed on Jun 2015)
33. 46. United Nations University (UNU), The Global E-waste Monitor 2014-Quantities, flows and resources, Available online: http://i.unu.edu/media/unu.edu/news/52624/UNU-1stGlobal-E-Waste-Monitor-2014-large-optimized.pdf (accessed on Jun 2017)
34. 47. US EPA, Electronics Waste Management in the United States through 2009. http://www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/materials/ecycling/docs/ fullbaselinereport2011.pdf. (accessed on Jun 2017)
35. 52. 葉佳倫，2009，應用生命週期概念之Factor X產品價值估算方法，國立成功大學碩士論文，台灣台南市。