多孔隙瀝青混凝土（Porous Asphalt Concrete, PAC）及石膠泥瀝青混凝土（Stone Mastic Asphalt, SMA）在國內道路主管機關已有豐富的使用經驗，雖有其優點，工程性質、績效與其效益存有值得探討的議題。本研究主要探討PAC與SMA鋪面之工程性質及績效評估，同時以生命週期成本分析（Life Cycle Cost Analysis, LCCA）方式評估不同鋪面方案之機關成本（Agency Cost）及用路人成本（User Cost）。鋪面績效主要以國道1號、國道3號及國道6號PAC及SMA路段之現地鋪面檢測數據進行評估，研究結果顯示PAC及SMA鋪面在功能性、耐久性及安全性之相關檢測數據提供良好長期績效；在鋪面生命週期成本分析主要以國道3號、國道6號SMA方案進行分析，在SMA鋪面方案中，PAC/SMA鋪面最具經濟效益。

Porous Asphalt Concrete (PAC) and Stone Mastic Asphalt Concrete (SMA) have been implemented in use by domestic road authorities. Although they have their advantages, there are issues with project properties, performance and benefits that deserve discussion. issues. This study mainly explores the engineering properties and performance evaluation of PAC and SMA pavements, and uses Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) to evaluate the Agency Cost and User Cost of different pavement alternatives. Pavement performance is mainly evaluated based on on-site pavement testing data on the PAC and SMA sections of National freeway #1, National freeway #3 and National freeway #6. The research results show that PAC and SMA pavements provide good Long-term performance on functionality, durability and safety. The pavement life cycle cost analysis mainly uses the SMA sections of National freeway# 3 and National freeway #6. Among the SMA alternatives, PAC/SMA pavement has the most economic benefits.

行政院經濟建設委員會（2008）公共建設計畫經濟效益評估及財務計畫作業手冊，行政院經濟建設委員會，台北。
行政院主計總處（2022）薪資與生產力統計年報，行政院主計總處，台北。
行政院主計總處（2023），111年8月事業人力僱用狀況調查統計結果，www.stat.gov.tw/News.aspx?n=2835&sms=11109，行政院主計總處，2023年7月2日瀏覽。
交通部高速公路局（2020）108年國道事故檢討分析報告，交通部高速公路局，台北。
交通部高速公路局（2004）景觀道路相關設施設計及施工參考手冊研訂，交通部高速公路局，台北。
交通部運輸研究所（2019）道路交通事故成本推估之研究，交通部運輸研究所，台北。
多孔隙瀝青混凝土（PAC）設計施工及養護技術手冊 （2013），交通部國道高速公路局，台北。
孟繁萱（2017）柔性鋪面承載力與生命週期成本分析，國立成功大學土木工程研究所碩士論文，台南。
周翊嫺（2023）2050淨零排放：以鋪面為例，國立高雄科技大學營建工程系碩士論文，高雄。
郎勝富（2011）多孔隙瀝青混凝土破壞及養護，國立成功大學土木工程研究所碩士論文，台南。
孫揚洲（2018）多孔隙瀝青鋪面成本效益分析，國立成功大學土木工程研究所博士論文，台南。
陳吉榮（2020）高速公路SMA和PAC鋪面之績效，國立成功大學土木工程研究所碩士論文，台南。
楊允祺（2010）多孔隙混凝土之工程性質，國立成功大學土木工程研究所碩士論文，台南。
Alvarez, A. E., A. E. Martin, C. Estakhri, and R. Izzo (2010) Evaluation of durability tests for permeable friction course mixtures. International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 11(1): 49-60.
Al-Rubaei, A. M., A.L. Stenglein, M. Viklander, and G.T. Blecken(2013) Long-term hydraulic performance of porous asphalt pavements in Northern Sweden. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 139(6):499-505.
Asphalt Pavement Alliance(2010).Pavement Type Selection. IM-45.
Braham, A., (2016). Comparing life-cycle cost analysis of full-depth reclamation versus traditional pavement maintenance and rehabilitation strategies. Transportation Research Record, 2573:49-59.
Brown, E.R., and L.A. Cooley (1999) Designing Stone Matrix Asphalt Mixtures for Rut-Resistant Pavement, NCHRP Report 425.
Brown, E.R.,P.S. Kandhal, F.L. Roberts, Y.R. Kim, D.Y.Lee, and T.W.Kennedy (2009) Hot Mix Asphalt Materials, Mixture Design, and Construction Method. NAPA Research and Education Foundation Lanham, 3nd edition, Maryland.
Chen, J.S., C.H. Yang and C.T. Lee (2019) Field evaluation of porous asphalt course for life-cycle cost analysis. Construction and Building Materials, 221:20-26.
Chen, J.S., M.S. Shiah and H.J. Chen (2001) Quantification of. Coarse Aggregate Shape and Its Effect on Engineering Properties of Hot-Mix Asphalt Mixtures .Journal of Testing and Evaluation,29(6):513-519.
Cooley, L. A., J. Brumfield, R. M. Wogawer, M. Partl, L. Poulikakos, and G. Hicks (2009) Construction and Maintenance Practices for Permeable Friction Courses. National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 640. Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
Delucchi, M., and S. Hsu (1988) The external damage cost of noise emitted from motor vehicles. Journal of Transportation and Statistics, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 96-3 (14).
Elvik R., and P. Greibe (2005) Road safety effects of porous asphalt: a systematic review of evaluation studies, Accident Analysis and Prevention, 37:515-522.
European Asphalt Pavement Association (EAPA) (2018) Heavy Duty Surfaces：The arguments for SMA. Heavy Duty Surfaces, Netherlands.
Federal Highway Administration (1998). Life-Cycle Cost Analysis in Pavement Design U.S Department of Transportation. FHWA-SA-98-079.
Federal Highway Administration (2018). Crash Costs for Highway Safety Analysis. FHWA-SA-17-071.
Federal Highway Administration (2011). Work Zone Road Users Costs. FHWA-HOP-12-005.
Fletcher, E., and A.J. Theron (2011) Performance of Open Graded. Porous Asphalt in New Zealand. NZ Transport Agency Research Report 455, New Zealand.
Gu,F., D. Watson, J.Moore and N. Tran (2018) Evaluation of the benefits of open graded friction course:Case study. Construction and Building Materials, 189:131-143.
Harvey, J. T., A. Rezaei, and C. Lee.(2012) Probabilistic approach to life-cycle cost analysis of preventive maintenance strategies on flexible pavements. Transportation Research Record, 2292: 61-72.
Hicks, R., and J. Epps(1999) Life Cycle Costs of Asphalt-Rubber Paving Materials. Rubber Pavements Association, Jan. 1999.
Hughes, C.S. (1999) Designing and Constructing SMA Mixtures:State-of-the-Practice. National Asphalt Pavement Association, Maryland.
Huber, G.(2000) Performance survey on open-graded friction course. mixes. Synthesis of Highway Practice, National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) 284, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
Imaninasab, R., B. Bakhshi, and B. Shirini (2016) Rutting performance of rubberized porous asphalt using Finite Element Method (FEM). Construction and Building Materials, 106:382-391.
Isenring, T., H. Koster, and I. Scazziga (1990) Experiences with porous asphalt in Switzerland. Transportation Research Record 1265:41-53, Washington, D.C.
Kossoy, A., and G. Peszko (2015) States and Trends of Carbon Pricing, World Bank Group, Washington, D.C.
King, D.,and P. Taylor (2023) Concrete Overlay Strategies for Improving Pavement Resilience, Transportation Research Board, 2677(8):259-269.
Linster, M (1990) Background facts and figures. Transport Policy. and the Environment, ECMT Ministerial Session, Paris, 9-45.
McDaniel, R. S., K. J. Kowalski, A. Shah, J. Olek, and R.J. Bernhard (2010) Long-term performance of a porous friction course. Joint Transportation Research Program, FHWA/IN/JTRP-2009/22, SPR-2939, West Lafayette, Indiana.
Noureldin, A.S., and R.S. MacDaniel (1990). Evaluation of surface mixtures of steel slag and asphalt. Transportation Research Record, 1269:133-149.
Okamoto, N., F. Tai, and Y. Arao (2010) Study on drainage performance of porous asphalt pavements by rainfall simulation testing. 11th International Conference on Asphalt Pavements,2:965-974,1-6 August, Nagoya, Japan.
Okte, E., I.A-Qadi and H.Ozer (2019) Effects of pavement condition on LCCA. Transportation Research Record, 2673(5):339-350.
Tayfur, S., H. Ozen, and A. Aksoy (2007) Investigation of rutting performance of asphalt mixtures containing polymer modifiers, Construction and Building Materials,21:328-337.
Ullman, G.L., M.D. Finley, J.E. Bryden, and R. Srinivasan (2008) Traffic Safety Evaluation of Nighttime and Daytime Work Zones, National Cooperative Highway Research Program(NCHRP) Report 627, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
United Nations.Sustainable Development Goals. www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/. UN SDG 2023 Summit.
Woodward, D., P. Millar, C. Lantieri, C. Sangiorgi, and V. Vignali (2016). The wear of stone mastic asphalt due to slow speed high stress simulated laboratory trafficking. Construction and Building Materials, 110:270-277.
Yin, F., and R. West (2018) Performance and life-cycle cost benefits of stone matrix asphalt. Advances in the Design, Production and Construction of Stone Matrix (Mastic) Asphalt. NAPA,5-23.