近年來溫室氣體的排放造成全球暖化越加嚴重，進而對經濟與社會環境產生影響。而氣候變遷對企業組織的潛在影響並非只發生在實體方面，也並非在長時間下才會展現。因此對於企業永續經營政策之訂定並非遙遠的議題，然而在過去較少以企業決策者角度考量多目標進行永續方案選擇。在2015年，由國際金融穩定委員會成立氣候相關財務揭露小組擬定一套具一致性的自願性氣候相關財務揭露建議(TCFD)，此建議可適用於各類組織包含金融機構等，目的為收集有助於決策及具前瞻性的財務影響資訊，其中更高度專注組織邁向低碳經濟轉型的風險與機會。然而現今大多數企業多注重在TCFD建議之數據如何進行量化與收集，卻忽略先揭露或評估哪些範疇對企業較為重要，亦即如何先選擇對企業影響較重要的方案進行執行。就目前為止還欠缺應用TCFD架構協助企業選擇對自身有幫助的永續經營方案的相關研究。
因此本研究以TCFD針對氣候對組織產生的財務影響為架構建立一多目標背包模式，以追求最大化氣候相關機會面方案效益與最小化受到氣候相關風險面方案影響為目標，藉由所提出之決策支援架構提供企業為達永續經營之投入方案組合上的建議。本研究是第一個基於TCFD建立模型的研究，並通過實證研究驗證了提出的MOKM模型和決策支持系統，以公司企業社會責任報告中所提供之公開數據進行分析，提供該企業決策者在所考慮之永續經營方案中進行評估與選擇之建議。同時透過決策者偏好分析提供在不同的偏好權重對目標值的影響，並藉由敏感度與穩健性分析給予企業在不同的情境下不同的投入方案組合之建議。協助企業在邁向永續發展時有一套系統性的方法進行投資方案之選擇決策支援系統。

In 2015, the International Financial Stability Board established the Climate-related Financial Disclosure Group to formulate a set of consistent voluntary Climate-related Financial Disclosure Recommendations (TCFD), which can be applied to various organizations, including financial institutions. Therefore, the formulation of corporate sustainable management policies is an urgent issue. However, most of corporate are focus on how to measurement the TCFD recommendation’s metrics. And decision-makers rarely realized the selection of major sustainable projects for its corporate is more important. There is still a lack of research utilize TCFD to help corporate decide which sustainable projects is more valuable for itself.
This study establishes a Multi-Objective Knapsack Model (MOKM) based on the TCFD's framework to select the climate-related projects such that the financial benefits from the opportunity will be maximized and the impact on finance from the risk can be minimized. The proposed decision support framework will provide suggestions on combining investment solutions for enterprises to achieve sustainable operation. With an empirical example to verify the feasibility of the proposed MOKM model. Given the possible projects considered from the corporate social responsibility report, the proposed model provides the decision-makers of the enterprise with consideration for the sustainable management project recommendations for evaluation and selection. At the same time, it provides the impact on the objective values through the analysis of decision makers' preferences and provides suggestions on different investment projects combinations for enterprises in different situations through sensitivity and robustness analysis. This study is the first study to establishes a model based on TCFD, and help enterprise select the most effective sustainable projects when moving towards sustainable development achieve win-win situation.

摘要 i
Abstract ii
誌謝 iii
目錄 iv
圖目錄 v
表目錄 vi
1 緒論 1
2 文獻探討 3
2.1 氣候相關財務接露建議 (Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, TCFD) 3
2.2 多目標決策方法 6
2.3 背包問題 8
3 研究方法 10
3.1 多目標背包模式 11
3.1.1 模式初步資訊與假設條件 12
3.1.2 模式符號說明 13
3.1.3 MOKM模式 14
3.2 MOMK模式驗證與分析的流程 21
4 案例實證 23
4.1 案例研究 24
4.2 MOKM驗證與分析 26
4.2.1 決策者偏好分析 28
4.2.2 敏感度分析 32
4.2.3 穩健性分析 33
4.3 決策支援建議 35
4.4 結果討論 36
4.4.1 MOKM優點與與研究限制 37
4.4.2 與相關研究的比較 37
5 結論 39
6 參考文獻 41
7 附錄A 49

1. Anderson, S. R., Kadirkamanathan, V., Chipperfield, A., Sharifi, V., &Swithenbank, J. (2005). Multi-objective optimization of operational variables in a waste incineration plant. Computers and Chemical Engineering, 29(5), 1121–1130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2004.12.001.
2. Alyamani, R., & Long, S. (2020). The application of fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process in sustainable project selection. Sustainability, 12(20), 8314.
3. Assi, M., & Haraty, R. A. (2018, November). A survey of the knapsack problem. In 2018 International Arab Conference on Information Technology (ACIT) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
4. Arbolino, R., Boffardi, R., De Simone, L., & Ioppolo, G. (2021). Multi-objective optimization technique: A novel approach in tourism sustainability planning. Journal of Environmental Management, 285, 112016.
5. Awasthi, A., & Omrani, H. (2019). A goal-oriented approach based on fuzzy axiomatic design for sustainable mobility project selection. International Journal of Systems Science: Operations & Logistics, 6(1), 86-98.
6. Bakirli, B. B., Gencer, C., & Aydoğan, E. K. (2014). A combined approach for fuzzy multi-objective multiple knapsack problems for defence project selection. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 65(7), 1001-1016.
7. Baqeri, K., Mohammadi, E., & Gilani, M. (2019). Multi objective project portfolio selection. Journal of Project Management, 4(4), 249-256.
8. Beaujon, G. J., Marin, S. P., &McDonald, G. C. (2001). Balancing and optimizing a portfolio of R&D projects. Naval Research Logistics, 48(1), 18–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6750(200102)48:1<18::AID-NAV2>3.0.CO;2-7.
9. Bibliography Baysan, C., Burke, M., González, F., Hsiang, S., & Miguel, E. (2019). Non-economic factors in violence: Evidence from organized crime, suicides and climate in Mexico. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 168, 434-452.
10. Calbert, G., Weir, T., Garanovich, I. L., & N Kuhn, C. C. (2022). A Temporal Knapsack Approach to Defence Portfolio Selection. In Evolutionary and Memetic Computing for Project Portfolio Selection and Scheduling (pp. 159-191). Springer, Cham.
11. Chang, P. T., & Lee, J. H. (2012). A fuzzy DEA and knapsack formulation integrated model for project selection. Computers & Operations Research, 39(1), 112-125.
12. Chen, H., Li, X. Y., Lu, X. R., Sheng, N., Zhou, W., Geng, H. P., & Yu, S. (2021). A multi-objective optimization approach for the selection of overseas oil projects. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 151, 106977.
13. Christian, B., &Cremaschi, S. (2018). A branch and bound algorithm to solve large-scale multistage stochastic programs with endogenous uncertainty. AIChE Journal, 64(4), 1262–1271. https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.16019.
14. Çoban, V. (2020). Solar energy plant project selection with AHP decision-making method based on hesitant fuzzy linguistic evaluation. Complex & Intelligent Systems, 6(3), 507-529.
15. Cummings, B. (2022). Can TCFD Solve the Tragedy of the Commons?. Journal of Financial Planning, 35(1), 22-22.
16. David, B., & Giordano-Spring, S. (2021). Climate Reporting Related to the TCFD Framework: An Exploration of the Air Transport Sector. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, 1-20.
17. Dey, P. K. (2006). Integrated project evaluation and selection using multiple-attribute decision-making technique. International Journal of Production Economics, 103(1), 90-103.
18. Eccles, R. G., &Krzus, M. P. (2018). Why companies should report financial risks from climate change. MIT Sloan Management Review, 59(3).
19. Eccles, R. G., & Krzus, M. P. (2019). Implementing the task force on climate-related financial disclosures recommendations: An assessment of corporate readiness. Schmalenbach Business Review, 71(2), 287-293.
20. Farbotko, C. (2019). Global financial stability, rapid transition to a low-carbon economy and social justice: can climate-related financial risk disclosure do it all?. Australian Geographer, 50(3), 273-278.
21. Fréville, A. (2004). The multidimensional 0–1 knapsack problem: An overview. European Journal of Operational Research, 155(1), 1-21.
22. Gabriel, S. A., Ordóñez, J. F., & Faria, J. A. (e). No Title. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 12(2), 112–120. (2006).
23. Galar, D., Darbari, J. D., Agarwal, V., Yadavalli, V. S., & Jha, P. C. (2017). A multi-objective fuzzy mathematical approach for sustainable reverse supply chain configuration. Journal of Transport and Supply Chain Management, 11(1), 1-12.
24. Ghorbani, S., & Rabbani, M. (2009). A new multi-objective algorithm for a project selection problem. Advances in Engineering Software, 40(1), 9-14.
25. Han, B., Zhang, X. X., & Yi, Y. (2019, June). Multi-criteria project selection using fuzzy preference relations based AHP and TOPSIS. In 2019 Chinese Control and Decision Conference (CCDC) (pp. 3809-3816). IEEE.
26. Ilhan, E., Krueger, P., Sautner, Z., & Starks, L. T. (2019). Institutional Investors' Views and Preferences on Climate Risk Disclosure (No. 19-66). Swiss Finance Institute.
27. Janssen, R., Van Herwijnen, M., Stewart, T. J., & Aerts, J. C. (2008). Multiobjective decision support for land-use planning. Environment and planning B: Planning and design, 35(4), 740-756.
28. Jian, J., Guo, Y., Jiang, L., An, Y., & Su, J. (2019). A multi-objective optimization model for green supply chain considering environmental benefits. Sustainability, 11(21), 5911.
29. Kalashnikov, V., Benita, F., López-Ramos, F., & Hernández-Luna, A. (2017). Bi-objective project portfolio selection in Lean Six Sigma. International Journal of Production Economics, 186, 81-88.
30. Khalili-Damghani, K., & Sadi-Nezhad, S. (2013). A decision support system for fuzzy multi-objective multi-period sustainable project selection. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 64(4), 1045-1060.
31. Khalili-Damghani, K., & Sadi-Nezhad, S. (2013). A hybrid fuzzy multiple criteria group decision making approach for sustainable project selection. Applied Soft Computing, 13(1), 339-352.
32. Khalilzadeh, M., & Salehi, K. (2017). A multi-objective fuzzy project selection problem considering social responsibility and risk. Procedia computer science, 121, 646-655.
33. Kudratova, S., Huang, X., & Zhou, X. (2018). Sustainable project selection: Optimal project selection considering sustainability under reinvestment strategy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 203, 469-481.
34. Kudratova, S., Huang, X., Kudratov, K., & Qudratov, S. (2020). Corporate sustainability and stakeholder value trade‐offs in project selection through optimization modeling: Application of investment banking. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(2), 815-824.
35. Lee, H. (2019). Project selection problems for production-inventory-distribution scheduling in manufacturing plants. Optimization Methods for Manufacturing, CRC Press, 3–1.
36. Li, A., Michaelides, M., Rose, M., & Garg, M. (2019). Climate‐related Risk and Financial Statements: Implications for Regulators, Preparers, Auditors and Users. Australian Accounting Review, 29(3), 599-605.
37. Liu, F., Chen, Y. W., Yang, J. B., Xu, D. L., & Liu, W. (2019). Solving multiple-criteria R&D project selection problems with a data-driven evidential reasoning rule. International Journal of Project Management, 37(1), 87-97.
38. Ma, J., Harstvedt, J. D., Jaradat, R., & Smith, B. (2020). Sustainability driven multi-criteria project portfolio selection under uncertain decision-making environment. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 140, 106236.
39. Maji, S. G., & Kalita, N. (2022). Climate change financial disclosure and firm performance: empirical evidence from Indian energy sector based on TCFD recommendations. Society and Business Review.
40. Mansouri, S. A., Lee, H., & Aluko, O. (2015). Multi-objective decision support to enhance environmental sustainability in maritime shipping: A review and future directions. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 78, 3-18.
41. Mahmoudi, A., Deng, X., Javed, S. A., & Yuan, J. (2021). Large-scale multiple criteria decision-making with missing values: project selection through TOPSIS-OPA. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 12(10), 9341-9362.
42. McMillan Jr, C., & Plane, D. R. (1973). EDUCATION: RESOURCE ALLOCATION DECISIONS VIA 0, 1 PROGRAMMING. Decision Sciences, 4(1), 119-132.
43. Meng, K., Lou, P., Peng, X., &Prybutok, V. (2017). Multi-objective optimization decision-making of quality dependent product recovery for sustainability. International Journal of Production Economics, 188(October 2016), 72–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.03.017
44. Nordhaus, W. D., & Moffat, A. (2017). A survey of global impacts of climate change: replication, survey methods, and a statistical analysis.
45. Pape, T., Kavadias, S., &Sommer, S. C. (2019). Decision Bias in Project Selection: Experimental Evidence from the Knapsack Problem. Ssrn. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3448676
46. Peihani, M. (2017). Disclosure of Climate-related Financial Information: Time for Canada to Act. 119, 12.
47. Petersen, C. C. (1967). Computational Experience with Variants of the Balas Algorithm Applied to the Selection of R&D Projects. Management Science, 13(9), 736–750. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.13.9.736
48. Siew, R. (2020). Briefing: task force for climate financial disclosures (TCFD) for the property and construction industry. Sustainable Buildings, 5, 3.
49. Siew, R. Y. (2021). Task Force for Climate Financial Disclosures (TCFD): The Malaysian Case Study. Perceptions of Energy Resources Efficiency for Sustainable Development in the Developing Context of Nigeria: Implications for Enterprise Development in the Energy Sector, 69.
50. Singh, M., Rathi, R., Antony, J., & Garza-Reyes, J. A. (2021). Lean six sigma project selection in a manufacturing environment using hybrid methodology based on intuitionistic fuzzy MADM approach. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.
51. Shokrian, M., &High, K. A. (2014). An efficient multi criteria process optimization framework: Sustainable improvement of the Dimethyl Ether Process. Computers and Chemical Engineering, 60, 213–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2013.09.011
52. Sueyoshi, T., & Goto, M. (2019). The intermediate approach to sustainability enhancement and scale-related measures in environmental assessment. European Journal of Operational Research, 276(2), 744-756.
53. Tan, Y. T., Shen, L. Y., Langston, C., & Liu, Y. (2010). Construction project selection using fuzzy TOPSIS approach. Journal of modelling in management.
54. Tankov, P., &Tantet, A. (2019). Climate Data for Physical Risk Assessment in Finance. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3480156.
55. Tung, C. P., Tsao, J. H., Tien, Y. C., Lin, C. Y., &Jhong, B. C. (2019). Development of a novel climate adaptation algorithm for climate risk assessment. Water (Switzerland), 11(3), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11030497.
56. Uuganbayar, G., Yautsiukhin, A., Martinelli, F., & Massacci, F. (2021). Optimisation of cyber insurance coverage with selection of cost effective security controls. Computers & Security, 101, 102121.
57. Wang, W., Chen, J., Liu, Q., & Guo, Z. (2018). Green project planning with realistic multi-objective consideration in developing sustainable port. Sustainability, 10(7), 2385.
58. Weingartner, H. M. (1967). Mathematical programming and the analysis of capital budgeting problemse. Markham Publishing Company.
59. Xu, C., Kohler, T. A., Lenton, T. M., Svenning, J. C., &Scheffer, M. (2020). Future of the human climate niche. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 117(21). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1910114117.
60. Zarte, M., Pechmann, A., & Nunes, I. L. (2019). Decision support systems for sustainable manufacturing surrounding the product and production life cycle–A literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 219, 336-349.
61. Zenghelis, D., & Stern, N. (2016). The importance of looking forward to manage risks: submission to the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures.
62. Zhou, C. C., Yin, G. F., & Hu, X. B. (2009). Multi-objective optimization of material selection for sustainable products: artificial neural networks and genetic algorithm approach. Materials & Design, 30(4), 1209-1215.
63. 氣候相關財務揭露建議發布日 氣候相關財務揭露建議繁體中文版發布日 2017 年 6 月 2019 年 10 月.
64. 鄭志強, 蔡麗敏, 徐作聖& 曾國雄. (2004). 模糊啟發式演算法則應用於低放射性廢棄物運送路線選擇之研究, 中華管理學報(5(1)), 41–56. 10.30053/CHJM.200403.0003.