機坪安全一直是重要的航空議題，發生於機坪之地面傷損事件(Ground Damage Incidents，簡稱GDI事件)未像其餘重大意外事故那麼受重視，然而，GDI事件之發生率較於其他類型之意外事件卻高出許多，使航空公司每年所花費之成本可高達40億美元。
不只是航空公司著重於機坪安全之相關地面損傷事件，國際航空運輸協會((International Air Transport Association，曾稱IATA)於2012建立地面損傷資料庫(Ground Damage Database，簡稱GDDB)，藉由統計GDI事件來進行各類之分析資料，以作為改善機坪安全之策略方向。
本研究依據IATA五大肇事因素為研究構面，再經由國內外GDI事件之肇事因素篩選其風險因素，建立影響機坪安全之風險因素之完整架構，後續採用決策實驗分析法(Decision Making Trail and Evaluation, DEMATEL)和分析網路程序法(Analytical Network Process, ANP)將各項風險因素進行分析，探討其相互因果關係及求得各風險因素之相對重要值，最終透過改善可行性分析得知其重要度高且優先改善之風險因素。
綜整分析結果，本研究建議航空公司應優先改善之項目分別為「未遵守標準作業程序」、「未遵守安全規定」、「未遵守個人防護裝備規定」、「作業經驗不足」、「不安全之作業裝備」、「欠缺標準作業程序」以及「未確實督導」，依此七項風險因素作為擬訂機坪安全管理策略的方向。另外，本研究也提出具體實務與理論上之建議及未來研究方向，供航空公司和後續研究作為參考。
關鍵詞：地面損傷事件(Ground Damage Incident)、機坪安全、風險因素、決策實驗分析法、分析網路程序法

Ground damage incidents (GDI) continue to be the major concern in the ramp safety. GDI not only cause huge financial cost, but also damage airlines’ reputation, such as repair costs, lost revenue, passenger inconvenience, increased maintenance workload. According to IATA 2015 annual review, ground damage costs airlines an estimated $4 billion per year. Therefore, airlines expect to reduce costs related to ground damages.
The purpose of this study is to identify the main risk factors involved in ground damage incidents. First, 117 ground damage incidents from a major airline and reports of causal factors from IATA Ground Damage Database were reviewed to establish an applicable ramp safety framework. Furthermore, to find out the leading incident casual factors, Decision Making Trail and Evaluation (DEMATEL) method combined with the Analytical Network Process (ANP) method are adopted to analyze the influence relationship of risk factors and the relative importance of these 20 risk factors via expert questionnaire surveys.
The result suggested that the seven risk factors allocated in the top priority implementation zone are “standard operating procedures”, “safety regulations”, “personal protective equipment”, “lack of practice in the task”, “unsafe for task”, “lack of standard procedures” and “inadequate supervision”, which are ranked nigh both in importance and improvement-achievability. The paper contributes to provide the main risk factors for airlines, ground handling agencies and Civil Aeronautics Administration (CAA). These risk factors can help them improve ramp safety and efficiency under the limited resource to avoid the accurence of GDI.
Key words: Ground damage incidents (GDI), Safety ramp, Risk factors, Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL), Analytic Network Process (ANP)

參考文獻-中文
1. 交通部民用航空局，航空站空側作業管理手冊，2016年
2. 交通部民用航空局，航空站地勤業管理規則，2016年
3. 交通部民用航空局，航空站空側設施及作業認證辦法，2008年
4. 交通部民用航空局，民用機場空側作業應注意事項，2003年。
5. 交通部民用航空局，民用機場設計暨運作規範，2016年。
6. 交通部桃園國際機場股份有限公司，安全管理系統手冊，2016年。
7. 交通部桃園國際機場股份有限公司，臺灣桃園國際機場停機坪作業與管理規定，2016年。
8. 交通部民用航空局臺北國際航空站，松山機場停機坪安全管理規定，2015年。
9. 張有恆，「飛航安全管理」，華泰文化事業股份有限公司，臺北市，2016年。
10. 彭斯民，「機坪危害與人為因素之關聯」，航空安全及管理季刊，第二卷第二期，129-58，2015年
11. 葉文健、羅永祥，「從地勤人員認知角度探討機坪作業之威脅與疏失」， 運輸學刊，第二十四卷第一期，1-24，2012年
12. 劉毓珊，「機坪勤務人員人為風險因素評估與驗證」，高雄餐旅大學旅遊管理研究所學位論文，2011年。
13. 鄭鴻銘，「機坪地勤作業安全管理」，交通大學管理學院運輸物流學程學位論文，2015年。
14. 鄭恆理，「機坪作業安全模式研究」，交通大學管理學院運輸物流學程學位論文，2006年。
15. 林玠廷，「機坪作業風險之評量」，交通大學管理學院運輸物流學程學位論文，2007年。
16. 胡雪琴，「企業問題複雜度之探討及量化研究--以DEMATEL 為分析工具」，中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文，2003年。
17. 嚴永舜，「台灣高速鐵路場站特定區對區域地方發展影響之多評準決策」，開南大學企業與創業管理學系碩士論文，2008年。
18. 劉建哲、林春良「后里泰安村休閒農業發展之研究—以DEMATEL法之應用」，國立中興大學農業暨自然資源學院農林學報，第五十四卷第四期，263-282，2005年
參考文獻-英文
1. Andersson, K., Carr, F., Feron, E., & Hall, W.D. (2000). Analysis and modeling of ground operations at hub airports. In Proceedings of Air Traffic Management R&D Seminar, June 13–16, Naples, Italy.
2. Andreatta, G., De Giovanni, L., & Monaci, M. (2014). A fast heuristic for airport ground-service equipment-and-staff allocation. ProcediaSocial and Behavioral Sciences, in press.
3. Azimi, R., Yazdani-Chamzini, A., Fouladgar, M. M., Zavadskas, E. K., & Basiri, M. H. (2011). Ranking the strategies of mining sector through ANP and TOPSIS in a SWOT framework. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 12(4), 670-689.
4. Beerli, S.(2003). Time to rethink ground handling. Swissport International Ltd, 11, 1.
5. Chang, Y. H., & Wong, K. M. (2012). Human risk factors associated with runway incursions. Journal of Air Transport Management, 24, 25-30.
6. Chiu, Y. J., Chen, H. C., Tzeng, G. H., & Shyu, J. Z. (2006). Marketing strategy based on customer behaviour for the LCD-TV. International Journal and Decision Making, 7(2/3), 143–165.
7. Chung, S. H., Lee, A. H., & Pearn, W. L. (2005). Analytic network process (ANP) approach for product mix planning in semiconductor fabricator. International Journal of Production Economics, 96(1), 15-36.
8. Diepen, G., van den Akker, J. M., & Hoogeveen, J. A. (2009). Integrated gate and bus assignment at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol. In Ahuja, R. K., Mhring, R. H., Zaroliagis, C. D. (Eds.), Robust and Online Large-Scale Optimization, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5868, pp. 338–353. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
9. Fontela, E., & Gabus, A. (1976). The DEMATEL observe. Battelle Geneva Research Centre, Geneva, Switzerland.
10. Gabus, A., & Fontela, E. (1973). Perceptions of the world problematique: Communication procedure, communicating with those bearing collective responsibility. Battelle Geneva Research Centre, Geneva, Switzerland.
11. Horberry, T., Regan, M. A., & Toukhsati, S. R. (2007). Airport ramp safety and intelligent transport systems. Iet Intelligent Transport Systems, 1(4), 234-240.
12. International Air Transport Association (IATA), (2015). Airport Handling Manual, 35th ed.
13. International Air Transport Association (IATA), (2016). Ground Damage Database Winter Report.
14. International Air Transport Association (IATA), (2016). ISAGO Standards Manual, 5th ed.
15. International Civil Avaition Organization (ICAO), 2016 Safety Report.
16. Lacagnina, M. (2007). Defusing the ramp, Aerosafety World, 2, 22-24.
17. Lu, C-t., Wetmore, M., & Przetak, R, (Oct., 2006). A new approach to enhance airline safety: Using system safety techniques. Journal of Air Transportation, 11(2), 113-139.
18. Martilla, J. A., & James, J. C. (1977). Importance-performance analysis. The journal of marketing, 77-79.
19. Roling, P. C., & Visser, H. G. (2009). Optimal airport surface traf- fic planning using mixed integer linear programming. International Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2008.
20. Rowe, R. (2003). Handling under the hammer. Swissport International Ltd, 11, 6-7.
21. Saaty, T.L. (1996). The analytic network process: decision making with dependence and feedback. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh.
22. Saaty, T.L., & Vargas, L.G. (2006). Decision making with the analytic network process. Springer Science+ Business Media, LLC.
23. Saaty, T.L. (2006). Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytic hierarchy/network processes. European Journal of Operational Research, 168(2), 557-570.
24. Saaty, T.L. (2008). Relative measurement and its generalization in decision making why pairwise comparisons are central in mathematics for the measurement of intangible factors the analytic hierarchy/network process.
25. Seyed-Hosseini, S. M., Safaei, N., & Asgharpour, M. J. (2006). Reprioritization of failures in a system failure mode and effects analysis by decision making trial and evaluation laboratory technique. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 91(8), 872–881.
26. Taylor, J.C. (2000). The evolution and effectiveness of Maintenance Resourse Management (MRM). International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 26, 201-215
27. Tseng, M.L. (2009). Application of ANP and DEMATEL to evaluate the decision-making of municipal solid waste management in Metro Manila. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 156(1-4), 181-197.
28. Tzeng, G.H., Chiang, C.H., & Li, C.W. (2007). Evaluating intertwined effects in e-learning programs: A novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL. Expert systems with Applications, 32(4), 1028-1044.
29. Wenner, C.A., & Drury, C.G. (2000). Analyzing human error in aircraft ground damage incidents. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 26, 177–199.
30. Wind, Y., & Saaty, T. L. (1980). Marketing applications of the analytic hierarchy process. Management science, 26(7), 641-658.
31. Wu, W.W., & Lee, Y.T. (2007). Developing global managers’ competencies using the fuzzy DEMATEL method. Expert Systems with Applications, 32(2), 499-507.
32. Yan, P. C., & Chang, C. M. (1998). A network model for gate assignment. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 32(2), 176–189.
33. Zhou, Q., Huang, W., & Zhang, Y. (2011). Identifying critical success factors in emergency management using a fuzzy DEMATEL method. Safety Science, 49, 243-252.
參考文獻-網頁
1. Flight Safety Foundation , https://flightsafety.org
2. International Air Transport Association, http://www.iata.org/Pages/default.aspx
3. International Civil Aviation Organization,
http://www.icao.int/Pages/default.aspx
4. Ground Star: Integrated airport resources management system，http://www.groundstar.aero
5. 交通部民用航空局，http://www.caa.gov.tw/big5/index.asp
6. 飛航安全調查委員會，https://www.asc.gov.tw/main_ch/index.asp