傳統大眾運輸系統在偏鄉地區時常面臨運輸資源稀少問題，因此在交通不發達之地區，公共運輸普遍不受歡迎。觀察臺灣偏鄉地區公共運輸可以發現許多偏鄉公車路線班次服務對於當地生活品質無顯著之改善，使得當地居民無法方便地利用公共運輸出行。為了解決這些問題，並提升偏鄉地區民眾乘坐大眾運輸意願，客運業者計畫在臺東鹿野地區引入需求反應式服務(Demand Responsive Transport Service, DRTS)，目標是可以讓偏鄉地區民眾方便地使用DRTS由鹿野往返臺東市區，並且將偏鄉地區有限資源整合利用，減少資源擱置浪費。本研究旨在探討該計畫之可行性，同時尋找地方生活圈的潛在使用者，分析何種族群更願意乘坐DRTS外出活動。透過實地訪談主管機關和結合整合科技接受模型理論(Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology, UTAUT)設計問卷，並使用結構方程模式(Structural Equation Modeling, SEM)分析受訪者搭乘意願。
最後由實地訪談結果得知政府機關對於鹿野地區引進DRTS皆給予極大肯定，也指出由專業客運業者來處理偏鄉公共運輸問題會是較佳模式。問卷分析共取得358份有效樣本，發現多數人對於DRTS呈現良好的觀感。後續假設檢驗分析顯示「預期績效」、「社會影響」構面能對受訪者使用DRTS之行為意圖產生正向顯著影響。而藉由多群組比較分析得出，性別、年齡、月所得等分群間對於使用DRTS之行為意圖具有顯著差異，對此客運業者能夠針對較具搭乘潛力族群發展相對應偏好之特點，促進偏鄉公共運輸使用率。研究最終以多元利害關係人角度歸納出各方注重之關鍵要素，表明鹿野鄉設立DRTS若能滿足各方利害關係人所需，則其勢必具備較高可行性，同時最終結果亦可作為推動相關公共運輸規劃者進行可行性評估與研擬運輸策略之參考與建議。

Conventional public transportation systems often faced the lack of transport resources in rural areas. Public transports are unpopular in inaccessibility areas. There are many bus routes in rural areas which can't improve of living in Taiwan. Residents can't use public transport conveniently. To resolve these problems, public transport operator decided to introduce Demand Responsive Transport Service (DRTS) in Luye, Taitung. The objective of this project is to utilize effectively resource effectively and reduce waste of resource, also facilitate the accessibility from Luye to Taitung City. This study aims to explore the feasibility of project and find out the potential users who have more willing to take DRTS.
Finally, it's found that according to on-site interviews, government agencies are optimistic about the introduction of DRTS in Luye. Then the questionnaire is designed by using Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model. There are 358 questionnaires were collected, it's found that many people had a positive impression of DRTS. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is also utilized to analyze interviewer's behavioral intention of DRTS in this study. The result of the hypothesis test shows that “Effort Expectancy” and “Social Influence” have positive significantly influence of behavioral intention in DRTS. It is found that gender, age and monthly income have significantly difference in behavioral intention of DRTS by Multi-Group Analysis (MGA).
The key factors of stakeholders' value are found in this study. It is indicated that if the stakeholders' needs can be met by DRTS, then DRTS will become much more feasibility. The results of this study can be regarded as references or suggestions of related issues in evaluating feasibility and planning transportation strategy.

Ambrosino, G., Nelson, J.D., & Romanazzo, M. (2004). Demand responsive transport services: Towards the flexible mobility agency. ENEA, 2004 pp.328 ISBN 88-8286-043-4, Italy.
Avermann, N., & Schlüter, J. (2019). Determinants of customer satisfaction with a true door-to-door DRT service in rural Germany. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 32, 100420.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 16, 74-94.
Bakker, P. (1999). Large scale demand responsive transit systems-a local suburban transport solution for the next millennium. In public transport planning and management. Proceedings of seminar E held at the AET European Transport Conference, Robinson College, Cambridge, UK.
Bamberg, S., Ajzen, I., & Schmidt, P. (2010). Choice of Travel Mode in the Theory of Planned Behavior: The Roles of Past Behavior, Habit, and Reasoned Action. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 25(3), 175-187.
Benekohal, R. F., Michaels, R. M., Shim, E., & Resende, P. T. (1994). Effects of aging on older drivers' travel characteristics. Transportation Research Record, 1438, 91-98.
Brake, J., Mulley, C., Nelson, J. D., & Wright, S. (2007). Key lessons learned from recent experience with Flexible Transport Services. Transport policy, 14(6), 458-466.
Byrne, B. M. (2013). Structural equation modeling with Mplus: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Routledge.
Campbell, D. T. (1960). Recommendations for APA test standards regarding construct, trait, or discriminant validity. American psychologist, 15(8), 546-553.
Campisi, T., Cocuzza, E., Ignaccolo, M., Inturri, G., Tesoriere, G., & Canale, A. (2023). Detailing DRT users in Europe over the last twenty years: A literature overview. Transportation Research Procedia, 69, 727-734.
Chatterjee, K., Goodwin, P., Schwanen, T., Clark, B., Jain, J., Melia, S., Middleton, J., Plyushteva, A., Ricci, M., Santos, G., & Stokes, G. (2018). Young people’s travel: what’s changed and why? Review and analysis. The Centre for Transport & Society, UWE Bristol & Transport Studies Unit, University of Oxford, 1-4.
Chen, C.-F., & Chao, W.-H. (2011). Habitual or reasoned? Using the theory of planned behavior, technology acceptance model, and habit to examine switching intentions toward public transit. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 14(2), 128-137.
Chen, H.-K., & Yan, D.-W. (2018). Interrelationships between influential factors and behavioral intention with regard to autonomous vehicles. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 13(7), 511-527.
Chen, J. Y. (2017). Thrown under the bus and outrunning it! The logic of Didi and taxi drivers’ labour and activism in the on-demand economy. New Media & Society, 20(8), 2691-2711.
Chen, W.-H. (2010). Exploring Travel Characteristics and Factors Affecting the Degree of Willingness of Seniors in Taiwan to Use an Alternative Service Bus. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2182(1), 71-78.
Chen, W.-H., Lin, W.-I., Chang, S.-H., & Mak, L.-C. (2015). Exploring Relationships between Physiological and Psychological Condition of Seniors and Their Mobility and Social Activity. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2537(1), 103-110.
Cheng, L., Chen, X., Yang, S., Cao, Z., De Vos, J., & Witlox, F. (2019). Active travel for active ageing in China: The role of built environment. Journal of Transport Geography, 76, 142-152.
Choi, S. Y. (2020). Analyzing driving risk self-perception characteristics of elderly drivers. Convergence for Information Technology, 10(7), 223-231.
Cook, T., Kappeler, E., Ellis, R., Kominski, R., Cooper, A., Smith, E., Donoghue, B., Whitestone, Y., Snyder, T., & Aud, S. (2014). America's Young Adults: Special Issue. Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics, US Government Printing Office, Washington DC.
Costa, P. M., Fontes, T., Nunes, A. A., Ferreira, M. C., Costa, V., Dias, T. G., Borges, J. L., & Cunha, J. F. e. (2016). Application of Collaborative Information Exchange in Urban Public Transport: The Seamless Mobility Solution. Transportation Research Procedia, 14, 1201-1210.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.
Currie, G., & Fournier, N. (2020). Why most DRT/Micro-Transits fail – What the survivors tell us about progress. Research in Transportation Economics, 83, 100895.
Cutler, D. M., & Landrum, M. B. (2011). Dimensions of health in the elderly population. National Bureau of Economic Research., w17148.
Davison, L., Enoch, M., Ryley, T., Quddus, M., & Wang, C. (2012). Identifying potential market niches for Demand Responsive Transport. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 3, 50-61.
Davison, L., Enoch, M., Ryley, T., Quddus, M., & Wang, C. (2014). A survey of Demand Responsive Transport in Great Britain. Transport policy, 31, 47-54.
de Jong, W., Vogels, J., van Wijk, K., & Cazemier, O. (2011). The key factors for providing successful public transport in low-density areas in The Netherlands. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 2, 65-73.
Demos. (2012, January). The state of young America. Demos.org.
Dzisi, E. K., Ackaah, W., Aprimah, B. A., & Adjei, E. (2020). Understanding demographics of ride-sourcing and the factors that underlie its use among young people. Scientific African, 7, e00288.
Engels, D., Ambrosino, G., & Boero, M. (2004). Service typologies and scenarios. Demand responsive transport services: Towards the flexible mobility agency, 55-73.
Enoch, M., Potter, S., Parkhurst, G., & Smith, M. (2006). Why do demand responsive transport systems fail? Transportation Research Board 85th Annual Meeting, Washington DC.
Feng, J. (2017). The influence of built environment on travel behavior of the elderly in urban China. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 52, 619-633.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 18(1), 39-50.
Gangadharaiah, R., Brooks, J. O., Rosopa, P. J., Su, H., Boor, L., Edgar, A., Kolodge, K., & Jia, Y. (2023). The Development of the Pooled Rideshare Acceptance Model (PRAM). Safety, 9(3), 61-92.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1987). Multivariate data analysis with readings. New York: McMillan.
Inturri, G., Giuffrida, N., Ignaccolo, M., Le Pira, M., Pluchino, A., Rapisarda, A., & D'Angelo, R. (2021). Taxi vs. demand responsive shared transport systems: An agent-based simulation approach. Transport policy, 103, 116-126.
Jahanshahi, D., Kharazmi, O. A., & Ajza Shokouhi, M. (2018). How barriers and motivators can affect Mashhad citizens' usage of bicycle sharing system: A qualitative approach. SAUES Journal, 1(1), 29-38.
Jahanshahi, D., Tabibi, Z., & van Wee, B. (2020). Factors influencing the acceptance and use of a bicycle sharing system: Applying an extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). Case Studies on Transport Policy, 8(4), 1212-1223.
Javid, M. A., Ali, N., Hussain Shah, S. A., & Abdullah, M. (2021). Travelers’ attitudes toward mobile application–based public transport services in Lahore. Sage Open, 11(1), 2158244020988709.
Jeong, S. H., Kim, E. Y., Lee, S. J., Choi, W. J., Oh, C., Sung, H. J., & Kim, J. (2023). Health Status and Activity Discomfort among Elderly Drivers: Reality of Health Awareness. Healthcare (Basel), 11(4), 563-576.
Jiang, S., Guan, W., Yang, L., & Zhang, W. (2020). Feeder Bus Accessibility Modeling and Evaluation. Sustainability, 12(21), 8942-8958.
Jokinen, J. P., Sihvola, T., Hyytiä, E., & Sulonen, R. (2011). Why urban mass demand responsive transport? In 2011 IEEE Forum on Integrated and Sustainable Transportation Systems, 317-322.
König, A., & Grippenkoven, J. (2020). The actual demand behind demand-responsive transport: Assessing behavioral intention to use DRT systems in two rural areas in Germany. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 8(3), 954-962.
Kersting, M., Kallbach, F., & Schlüter, J. C. (2021). For the young and old alike – An analysis of the determinants of seniors’ satisfaction with the true door-to-door DRT system EcoBus in rural Germany. Journal of Transport Geography, 96, 103173.
Kim, J. (2020). Assessment of the DRT System Based on an Optimal Routing Strategy. Sustainability, 12(2), 714-722.
Kim, S., & Ulfarsson, G. F. (2004). Travel mode choice of the elderly: effects of personal, household, neighborhood, and trip characteristics. Transportation Research Record, 1894(1), 117-126.
Kline, P. (2014). An easy guide to factor analysis. London, England: Routledge.
Kopplin, C. S., Brand, B. M., & Reichenberger, Y. (2021). Consumer acceptance of shared e-scooters for urban and short-distance mobility. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 91, 102680.
Laa, B., & Leth, U. (2020). Survey of E-scooter users in Vienna: Who they are and how they ride. Journal of Transport Geography, 89, 102874.
Lakatos, A., Tóth, J., & Mándoki, P. (2020). Demand Responsive Transport Service of ‘Dead-End Villages’ in Interurban Traffic. Sustainability, 12(9), 3820-3836.
Laković, S., Tollazzi, T., & Gruden, C. (2023). Elderly Pedestrians and Road Safety: Findings from the Slovenian Accident Database and Measures for Improving Their Safety. Sustainability, 15(2), 1631-1648.
Laws, R., Enoch, M., Ison, S., & Potter, S. (2009). Demand responsive transport: a review of schemes in England and Wales. Journal of Public Transportation, 12(1), 19-37.
Leiren, M. D., & Skollerud, K. (2015). Public Transport Provision in Rural and Sparsely Populated Areas in Norway. International Transport Forum Discussion Paper.
Li, H., Jin, Z., Cui, H., & Tu, H. (2023). An exploration of the preferences and mode choice behavior between autonomous demand-responsive transit and traditional buses. International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology.
Madigan, R., Louw, T., Dziennus, M., Graindorge, T., Ortega, E., Graindorge, M., & Merat, N. (2016). Acceptance of Automated Road Transport Systems (ARTS): An Adaptation of the UTAUT Model. Transportation Research Procedia, 14, 2217-2226.
McGuckin, N., & Nakamoto, Y. (2004). Trips, Chains and tours-using an operational definition. In National Household Travel Survey Conference.
McGuckin, N., Zmud, J., & Nakamoto, Y. (2005). Trip-Chaining Trends in the United States: Understanding Travel Behavior for Policy Making. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1917, 199-204.
Mouratidis, K. (2022). Bike-sharing, car-sharing, e-scooters, and Uber: Who are the shared mobility users and where do they live? Sustainable Cities and Society, 86, 104161.
Nelson, J. D., & Phonphitakchai, T. (2012). An evaluation of the user characteristics of an open access DRT service. Research in Transportation Economics, 34(1), 54-65.
Nordhoff, S., Louw, T., Innamaa, S., Lehtonen, E., Beuster, A., Torrao, G., Bjorvatn, A., Kessel, T., Malin, F., Happee, R., & Merat, N. (2020). Using the UTAUT2 model to explain public acceptance of conditionally automated (L3) cars: A questionnaire study among 9,118 car drivers from eight European countries. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 74, 280-297.
Nordhoff, S., Malmsten, V., van Arem, B., Liu, P., & Happee, R. (2021). A structural equation modeling approach for the acceptance of driverless automated shuttles based on constructs from the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology and the Diffusion of Innovation Theory. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 78, 58-73.
Pak, T.-Y., Bae, B., Lee, C., Jung, I., & Jang, B.-J. (2023). Modeling public acceptance of demand-responsive transportation: An integrated UTAUT and ITM framework. Journal of Public Transportation, 25, 100067.
Papanikolaou, A., Basbas, S., Mintsis, G., & Taxiltaris, C. (2017). A methodological framework for assessing the success of Demand Responsive Transport (DRT) services. Transportation Research Procedia, 24, 393-400.
Pernestål Brenden, A., Darwish, R., Susilo, Y., Chee, P. N. E., Jenelius, E., Hatzenbühler, J., & Hafmar, P. (2018). Shared Automated Vehicles-Research & Assessment in a 1st pilot. SARA1 Results report.
Rahman, F., Das, T., Hadiuzzaman, M., & Hossain, S. (2016). Perceived service quality of paratransit in developing countries: A structural equation approach. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 93, 23-38.
Rayle, L., Dai, D., Chan, N., Cervero, R., & Shaheen, S. (2016). Just a better taxi? A survey-based comparison of taxis, transit, and ridesourcing services in San Francisco. Transport policy, 45, 168-178.
Ribeiro, P., & Rocha, V. (2013). Flexible public transport in low density urban areas. In Recent Advances in Engineering Mechanics, Structures and Urban Planning: 6th WSEAS International Conference on Engineering Mechanics, Structures, Engineering Geology. Cambridge, UK.
Rybizki, A., Ihme, K., Nguyen, H. P., Onnasch, L., & Bosch, E. (2022). Acceptance of Automated Shuttles—Application and Extension of the UTAUT-2 Model to Wizard-of-Oz Automated Driving in Real-Life Traffic. Future Transportation, 2(4), 1010-1027.
Ryley, T. J., A. Stanley, P., P. Enoch, M., M. Zanni, A., & A. Quddus, M. (2014). Investigating the contribution of Demand Responsive Transport to a sustainable local public transport system. Research in Transportation Economics, 48, 364-372.
Sörensen, L., Bossert, A., Jokinen, J.-P., & Schlüter, J. (2021). How much flexibility does rural public transport need? – Implications from a fully flexible DRT system. Transport policy, 100, 5-20.
Saxena, A., Choudhury, B., & Das Gupta, P. (2024). Travel Satisfaction of Bus Rapid Transit Users in A Developing Country: The Case of Bhopal City, India. Transportation Research Record, 03611981241230503.
Saxena, N., Rashidi, T., & Rey, D. (2020). Determining the Market Uptake of Demand Responsive Transport Enabled Public Transport Service. Sustainability, 12(12), 4914.
Schasché, S., Wankmüller, C., & Hampl, N. (2022). Applying the Utaut to understand the behavioral intention of the rural population to use demand-responsive transport services. SSRN 4074805.
Schasché, S. E., Sposato, R. G., & Hampl, N. (2021). User acceptance of demand-responsive transport services in rural areas: applying the UTAUT to identify influential latent constructs. Department of Operations, Energy and Environmental Management, University of Klagenfurt.
Shiau, T.-A. (2013). Evaluating sustainable transport strategies for the counties of Taiwan based on their degree of urbanization. Transport policy, 30, 101-108.
Shin, J., & Tilahun, N. (2022). The role of residential choice on the travel behavior of young adults. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 158, 62-74.
Streiner, D. L. (2003). Starting at the beginning: an introduction to coefficient alpha and internal consistency. Journal of personality assessment, 80(1), 99-103.
Su, F., & Bell, M. G. H. (2009). Transport for older people: Characteristics and solutions. Research in Transportation Economics, 25(1), 46-55.
Szeto, W. Y., Yang, L., Wong, R. C. P., Li, Y. C., & Wong, S. C. (2017). Spatio-temporal travel characteristics of the elderly in an ageing society. Travel Behaviour and Society, 9, 10-20.
Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in science education, 48, 1273-1296.
Takeuchi, R., Okura, I., Nakamura, F., & Hiraishi, H. (2003). Feasibility study on demand responsive transport systems (DRTS). In Proceedings of the 5th Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies Conference.
Tangphaisankun, A., Nakamura, F., & Okamura, T. (2009). Influences of paratransit as a feeder of mass transit system in developing countries based on commuter satisfaction. Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, 8, 1341-1356.
Tran, Y., Yamamoto, T., Sato, H., Miwa, T., & Morikawa, T. (2020). Attitude toward physical activity as a determinant of bus use intention: A case study in Asuke, Japan. IATSS Research, 44(4), 293-299.
Vanderschuren, M., & Baufeldt, J. (2018). Ride-sharing: A potential means to increase the quality and availability of motorised trips while discouraging private motor ownership in developing cities? Research in Transportation Economics, 69, 607-614.
Vaske JJ. (2008). Survey research and analysis: Applications in parks, recreation and human dimensions. Venture Pub, 23, 635.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS quarterly, 36(1),157-178.
Ye, J., Zheng, J., & Yi, F. (2020). A study on users' willingness to accept mobility as a service based on UTAUT model. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 157, 120066.
Zhang, Y., Farber, S., & Young, M. (2022). Eliminating barriers to nighttime activity participation: the case of on-demand transit in Belleville, Canada. Transportation (Amst), 49(5), 1385-1408.
Zhou, Y., Yuan, Q., Ding, F., Chen, M., Yang, C., & Guo, T. (2022). Demand, mobility, and constraints: Exploring travel behaviors and mode choices of older adults using a facility-based framework. Journal of Transport Geography, 102, 103368.
三維工程顧問股份有限公司（2020）。嘉義市需求反應式運輸服務系統規劃及評估研究案。
尤聰光（2023年7月22日）。扛不過虧損…國光客運年底停駛「台東最後路線」 民眾嘆：真的變成回憶了。聯合新聞網。
交通環境資源處（2023）。偏鄉交通幸福巴士行無礙。取自行政院，交通環境資源處。
交通部統計處（2023）。111 年民眾日常使用運具狀況調查摘要分析。中華民國交通部。
交通部統計處（2023）。交通部統計查詢網。
交通部（2021）。交通部永續發展目標自願檢視報告。
交通部公路總局（2020）。109年度公路公共運輸年報。
交通部公路總局（2022）。公路公共運輸計畫各縣市執行情況。
交通部公路總局（2024）。公車客運即時動態資訊網。
宋威穎、洪嘉聰、彭進德（2021）。屏東春日鄉需求反應式公共運輸服務發展之研究。城市學學刊，11(1)，67-102。
林耿郁（2022年7月22日）。快新聞／桃竹苗75條客運路線將停駛？公路總局回應了。民視新聞網。
孫文臨（2023年6月29日）。偏鄉交通下一步，交通部國發會承諾建整合平台、衛福部鬆綁「長照專車免專用」。願景工程基金會。
張偉豪、鄭時宜（2012）。與結構方程式模型共舞：曙光初現。新北市：前程文化事業有限公司。
黃瑀喬（2024）。主計總處公布2023薪資統計，實質總薪資7年來首度負成長。公視新聞網。
新北市政府交通局（2018）。新北市偏遠地區需求反應式公共運輸服務實施可行性分析。
蔡旻妤（2023年7月22日）。國光客運台東路線年底停駛 民眾：搭「這種車」更方便。中時新聞網。
數位發展部（2023）。112年電信事業普及服務管理辦法規定之偏遠地區定義及範圍。
臺東縣政府主計處（2024）。臺東縣重要統計資料庫查詢系統。
衛生福利部統計處（2023）。身心障礙統計專區。
蘇琦雯、廖彩雲（2022）。長期照顧服務使用意願之研究。商管科技期刊，23(3)，287-389。