走在汽車革命的路上論文書籍站
Define costly的問題，透過圖書和論文來找解法和答案更準確安心。 我們找到下列包括價格和評價等資訊懶人包
Define costly的問題，我們搜遍了碩博士論文和台灣出版的書籍，推薦Turley, J.寫的 The Simple Truth: Bp’s Macondo Blowout 和Nivola, Pietro S.的 Tense Commandments: Federal Prescriptions and City Problems都 可以從中找到所需的評價。
這兩本書分別來自 和所出版 。
國立臺灣大學 財務金融學研究所 陳彥行所指導 黃國睿的 銀行資本與流動性創造之交互關係——資本適足性是否重要？ （2021），提出Define costly關鍵因素是什麼，來自於流動性創造、資本適足性、金融脆弱性／排擠假說、風險吸收假說、流動性不足風險效果、資本緩衝成本效果。
而第二篇論文東吳大學 法律學系 熊誦梅所指導 范勝傑的 台灣隱形冠軍專利訴訟風險管理之研究 （2021），提出因為有 隱形冠軍、專利訴訟、迴避設計、專利無效、專利組合的重點而找出了 Define costly的解答。
The Simple Truth: Bp’s Macondo Blowout
為了解決Define costly 的問題，作者Turley, J. 這樣論述：
On a quiet Tuesday evening in April 2010, experienced leaders aboard Transocean's DEEPWATER HORIZON drilling rig ran pressure tests and declared BP's deep oil-and-gas well to be secure. They were wrong. Hours later the well blew out, followed by explosions and fire that killed 11, sank the rig in th
e mile-deep Gulf of Mexico, and left behind mourning families, a disastrous environmental oil spill, and questions without answers. Questions like: Who, how, what caused BP's blowout? THE SIMPLE TRUTH is narrative nonfiction, often called a nonfiction novel (fact-based fiction). The story dramatizes
the drilling and demise of BP's 3-1/2-mile-deep Macondo exploration well, albeit at the hands of fictional characters, surrogates for survivors and the eleven perfect witnesses who died that terrible night. Readers are invited to join the crew aboard the rig and share their lives as they drill ever
deeper and make the costly decisions that define the business. And when just one of several such decisions goes wrong and the clock ticks down, readers, too, will better understand the simple rule: Zero tolerance for failure, because offshore there's nowhere to run. J.A. Turley leans on his decades
-long industry career as an offshore-drilling expert to unravel investigative findings about the catastrophe. As a degreed petroleum engineer, ocean engineer, and professor of petroleum engineering, he narrates the story as if he and the reader are on the rig, immersed in the character-rich world of
offshore drilling. His detailed and extensively referenced Epilogue documents the simple truth about the CAUSE of BP's Macondo blowout. Readers who are also interested in the EFFECTS of BP's blowout (the oil spill, company culture, energy independence) are encouraged to read published nonfiction ti
tles on the topic by renowned authors and journalists, including: Joel Achenbach; Bob Cavnar; John Conrad & Tom Shroder; William R. Freudenburg & Robert Gramling; Peter Lehner & Bob Deans; Stanley Reed & Alison Fitzgerald; Carl Safina; Loren C. Steffy; and others. J. A. (John) Turley grew up in Sa
n Diego, California. Advanced degrees in petroleum engineering and ocean engineering from the Colorado School of Mines and the University of Miami and a three-year petroleum-engineering professorship at Marietta College preceded his oil-and-gas-industry career. His two decades of offshore drilling-
and project-management responsibilities with a major U.S. energy company began with the Gulf of Mexico, evolved to the North Sea, were bolstered by executive education at Harvard Business School, and led him to be named manager of worldwide drilling. After a number of years as the company’s senior t
echnical officer, he elected to retire early to focus on writing. THE SIMPLE TRUTH, narrative nonfiction, is Turley’s debut publication. Others will follow.
銀行資本與流動性創造之交互關係——資本適足性是否重要？
為了解決Define costly 的問題，作者黃國睿 這樣論述：
流動性創造（liquidity creation，以下簡稱LC）是銀行其中一項最重要的功能，透過將短期、流動性高的負債，轉換為長期、流動性低的資產，可向經濟體系的其它非銀行部門提供流動性。由於資本與流動性為確保銀行穩健度之關鍵因素，故此二者除在巴塞爾資本協定三（Basel III）中受到高度管制，它們之間的關係在2008年金融危機後的文獻中也受到廣泛討論。然而，目前的研究仍未對哪些影響資本與LC的因素達成一致的共識，因此也無法建立出一個兩者之間合理的連結，此議題提供本文研究動機。我們提出：在多數文獻中被忽略的資本適足性可能為影響資本與LC交互關係的一個重要因素。由於資本與LC實際上是密切相關
的，故本文將從兩個相反方向來剖析此一議題。本文第一章探討資本適足性是否會影響由資本向LC的連結。透過考慮符合巴塞爾資本協定三架構之總資本適足率（total capital adequacy ratio，以下簡稱CAR）以及槓桿比率（leverage ratio，以下簡稱LR）的嶄新方式，定義出我們的「資本適足性」以及兩類銀行。我們提出：弱資本適足（weak capital adequate）銀行的風險意識較為不足，為符合文獻上之「金融脆弱性／排擠假說」（financial fragility/crowding-out hypothesis）；強資本適足（strong capital adequ
ate）銀行的風險意識則較為審慎，為符合文獻上之「風險吸收假說」（risk-absorption hypothesis）。前類銀行會傾向創造更多流動性、且具有負向的資本與LC 關係；後者則恰好相反。第二章檢驗資本適足性如何影響LC向資本變動的連結。結合CAR以及LR兩個比率，我們定義：若某銀行的兩個比率均滿足，則視為資本充足（sufficient-capital，以下簡稱SC）銀行；若某銀行的兩個比率有任一者不滿足，則歸類為兩類資本不足（deficient-capital，以下簡稱DC）銀行。我們提出：SC銀行符合「資本緩衝成本效果」（buffer cost effect），且在創造超額流動性
之後會降低其資本；DC銀行則符合「流動性不足風險效果」（illiquidity risk effect），且在創造超額流動性後將提高其資本。利用1996至2016年36個經濟合作暨發展組織（Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development，以下簡稱OECD）國的18,247家商業銀行為樣本，本文證實資本適足性確實會影響資本與LC之間的交互關係。對於由資本向LC的連結而言，我們發現：弱（強）資本適足銀行的風險意識較不足（充足）、會創造較多（較少）流動性、且顯示負向（正向）的資本與LC關係。對於由LC向資本變動的連結，我們發現：SC銀行比較
在乎由較高資本緩衝所帶來的成本，也因此在創造超額流動性之後會降低其資本；DC銀行則將避免流動性不足的風險視為其優先目標，因此在創造超額流動性之後會提高其資本。此外，為顯著提高其資本比率，SC與DC銀行會分別增加第二類（Tier 2）與第一類（Tier 1）資本，以因應超額的流動性創造。本文的發現不僅證實資本適足性會透過影響銀行的風險意識與資本決策，進而影響資本與LC的交互關係，也同時呼應了巴塞爾資本協定三的精神。藉由引進與傳統CAR互補的簡單LR，巴塞爾資本協定三可降低諸如流動性錯配（liquidity mismatch）等超額風險行為，以有效確保銀行的穩健度以及金融穩定。
Tense Commandments: Federal Prescriptions and City Problems
為了解決Define costly 的問題，作者Nivola, Pietro S. 這樣論述：
During the past decade, dozens of large cities lost population as jobs and people kept moving to the suburbs. Despite widespread urban revitalization and renewal, one fact remains unmistakable: when choosing where to live and work, Americans prefer the suburbs to the cities. Many underlying cause
s of the urban predicament are familiar: disproportionate poverty, stiff city tax rates, and certain unsatisfactory municipal services (most notably, public schools). Less recognized is the distinct possibility that sometimes the regulatory policies of the federal government--the rules and rulings i
mposed by its judges, bureaucrats, and lawmakers--further disadvantage the cities, ultimately burdening their ability to attract residents and businesses. In Tense Commandments, Pietro S. Nivola encourages renewed reflection on the suitable balance between national and local domains. He examines an
array of directive or supervisory methods by which federal policymakers narrow local autonomy and complicate the work urban governments are supposed to do. Urban taxpayers finance many costly projects that are prescribed by federal law. A handful of national rules bore down on local governments befo
re 1965. Today these governments labor under hundreds of so-called unfunded mandates. Federal aid to large cities has lagged behind a profusion of mandated expenditures, at times straining municipal budgets. Apart from their fiscal impacts, Nivola argues, various federal prescriptions impinge on loc
al administration of routine services, tying the hands of managers and complicating city improvements. Nivola includes case studies of six cities: Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. He describes the "politics of paternalism," the political pressures that fede
ral regulations place on governance. Then he offers comparisons with various political systems abroad, including Germany, the U.K., France, and Italy. As the nation and its cities brace for a long and arduous effort to combat terrorism, Nivola recommends that federal mandates be evaluated with a sta
ndard question: are they socially beneficial, or do they deprive localities of discretion, distort legitimate local priorities, and perhaps misallocate resources? In today's intricate federal system, the unencumbered capacity of governments at all levels to define their roles and concentrate on thei
r core functions and responsibilities seems urgent.
台灣隱形冠軍專利訴訟風險管理之研究
為了解決Define costly 的問題，作者范勝傑 這樣論述：
台灣在全球供應鏈具有關鍵的地位，台積電與鴻海等大型企業都是成功的案例，惟中小企業的就業人數約占八成，亦是穩定經濟的重要基石，其中市佔率達前三大的隱形冠軍企業，具有國際競爭力，毛利率也不輸大型企業，在台灣的整體產業中亦扮演不可或缺的角色。惟專利訴訟已成為強而有力的商業競爭利器，台灣隱形冠軍對國外大廠威脅日增，遭遇跨國專利訴訟的機會也大增。尤其，美國的專利訴訟程序複雜、費用高、賠償額也高，對於資源較不足的隱形冠軍影響甚鉅，因此，如何預防專利訴訟風險，乃是台灣隱形冠軍面對市場競爭的重要關鍵策略。本文先透過介紹美國的專利法制，以期對美國專利訴訟的遊戲規則有梗概的認識。接著，藉由分析川湖、喬山、億豐與
松騰等四個台灣隱形冠軍的案例背景、美國專利訴訟案件以及專利申請概況，以歸納並探討台灣隱形冠軍的專利訴訟風險管理策略。透過前述的研究可觀察到，台灣隱形冠軍要做好專利訴訟風險管理，第一步就是要具備專利風險意識並落實專利調查；第二、找出具有潛在侵權風險的目標專利之後，即要針對此目標專利做風險評估，盤點潛在侵權產品，若風險高，即進行專利訴訟風險控制；第三、進行專利訴訟風險控制，包含：迴避設計、專利無效、取得專利授權、強化專利組合以及策略聯盟。雖然已採取上述的專利訴訟風險預防措施，但仍然無法完全避免風險的發生，所以還要做最壞的打算，萬一還是被告怎麼辦？故應事先規劃專利訴訟因應機制，預先擬定因應措施，明確
定義公司各部門的角色與功能，並針對假想敵研擬訴訟方針、對策方案並設立停損點。此外，要做到上述的工作，要有足夠的資源，最主要的是「人」和「錢」，前者，需要有專職的人員或部門擔當，也需要專業的外部專利或法律團隊支援；後者，有賴管理階層的支持，同時也需對費用做有效控管。最後，為了公司的永續經營，應將專利訴訟風險管理提升至公司治理的高度，並配合公司的經營策略才能走的長遠。