臺灣的兩家國際航空公司因「兩岸三通」的政策遲遲未能落實，意識到進入該市場的機會正逐漸在流失之中，於是分別展開間接進入上海貨運市場的佈局。而兩家個案公司所選擇的合作對象及進入該市場的方式並不相同，各有其策略上的考量。本研究除藉兩家個案公司探討臺灣航空業進入大陸市場的策略外，亦對兩家企業的進入策略及其合作對象的選擇做一比較分析，最後並嘗試提出臺灣航空業未來進入大陸貨運市場策略的建議。 經本研究對個案的分析及問題的探討，發現台商赴中國的投資已出現結構性的轉變，大陸航空貨運的艙位不足日益嚴重，特別是上海的市場。因此，如臺灣航空業不盡快進入此一快速成長的市場，恐怕會被歐美的大型貨運業者搶得先機。然而在兩岸通航之前，臺灣的航空業者根本無法直接飛進大陸，目前臺灣的航空業者僅能以「策略聯盟」的方式進入大陸市場，因此必須先行規劃進入此一市場的有效策略。 此外，從兩個個案之比較中發現：「策略聯盟」的雙方所投入的資源越多，且複雜度較低者，其聯盟的持續穩定度較高。而且，以「策略聯盟」的成功因素來作比較，亦可分析出不穩定因素的所在。 同時，本研究主張臺灣航空貨運現階段的策略，應該利用其優勢促進盡快達成兩岸「通航」的協議，讓臺灣在全球經濟架構重整之際亦能繼續擁有其競爭優勢。如此，臺灣才能利用其現有兩家航空公司的貨機機隊及貨運方面的技術與知識，再加上中正機場的地理位置的優勢，快速取代香港目前所擔任大陸貨運轉運的地位，讓臺灣成為「亞太的空運中心」。 最後，以兩岸所建立的產業關係為範本，本研究提出未來兩岸通航後在航空貨運進行合作的策略模式，藉由兩地的地理優勢來擴大雙方的服務範圍，在通航後，進一步將臺灣納入大陸貨運網路之中，成為一個美洲、歐洲、中亞與大陸之間的貨運轉運中心。 Due to politic reasons, the Cross-Strait airline business between Mainland China and Taiwan has been delayed, and the carriers of Taiwan have found they might gradually lose their opportunity to enter and expand their business in China’s booming cargo market. However, both of the Taiwanese international carriers have found their way entering the Shanghai Air Cargo market, at least indirectly. Two different strategies were selected by the two carriers to enter the Shanghai market. Through the comparison of the strategies adopted by the two carriers, this study tried to understand the suitable strategy for Taiwanese carriers to enter the China market. Future possible strategies for entering the China market were proposed. In this study, we found the new-invested industry from Taiwan to Mainland China was structurally changed. Specifically, the firms making new investments in China from Taiwan were changed from small- and medium-sized companies to large public companies, and the location also moved from the Pearl River Triangle Area to the Yangtze River Triangle Area. As a result, the shortage of Air Cargo space in Shanghai area has become the most critical problem for the industries in the area. Also, China gradually allowed the foreign carriers to have the Fifth Freedom to operate in the China Cargo market. Taiwan’s carriers therefore must enter this market before the direct link agreement between the two sides. Currently, the only way to enter the China Market was to establish strategic alliance with one of the China’s carriers. Comparing the types of strategic alliance selected by the two studied carriers, we applied the stability matrix of airline alliance study and the key success factors to check the stability of both alliances and their dynamic characteristics. The general conclusion is that higher resource input and lower complexity involvement tend to provide relatively higher stability for airline alliances. The finding and the suggestion of the study are as follows. Complete the cross-strait agreement between the two sides as soon as possible. Taiwan-based carriers could use their large capacity and experienced operational skills to enter the China market to provide good service to match its strong demand for air cargo. Chinese carriers prefer to have partnership with Taiwanese carriers so as to learn the know-how and skill of air cargo business. Strategic alliance is the best way for Chinese carriers to easily learn the core know-how and skill to operate in the air cargo market. Taiwan government has to reconsider the competition between Hong Kong CLK airport and Taiwan CKS airport. The Cross-strait service could let CKS easily replace CLK’s position to be the cargo transfer center between China and USA. In the future, the logistic services for global supply chains will be more important due to the industrial position of China. Taiwanese carriers could enter China quickly and link with their existing cargo service net. Based on the geographical advantage of Taiwan, Taiwan government could consider improving the air cargo service at the CKS airport in order to replace Hong Kong and link directly with the three major gateways in China. Strategically, Taiwan could maintain its competitiveness in the transportation business and be a large cargo hub in Asia.
