有關空間價格的研究指出，在固定市場範圍下，需求型態可以充分地決定兩類型單一定價策略的經濟效益優劣情形。為了重新檢視，需求型態與兩類型單一定價之間的一般性結果。本文將以受限制市場規模，以及一般化買者分佈的觀念作比較分析。
結果發現，若在地理條件限制的市場規模下，除了利潤會受到需求型態的影響外；當需求函數為凸向(或凹向)原點時，FOB定價策略的經濟效益皆會優於CIF定價之產出、消費者剩餘以及社會福利。其次，放寬買者分佈的條件，對於兩類型單一定價策略所造成的影響仍屬有限。換言之，分析兩類型單一定價策略的優劣時，經濟空間扮演著極具重要的角色，而需求型態並非為主要的影響因素。

According to related studies about simple monopoly spatial price theory, one of main conclusions is that the shape of the demand function can fully determine the relative economic advantages between two simple spatial pricing policies in a world with fixed market area, that is, the market area is exogenously determined. The purpose of this paper is to reexamine this general context between the shape of the demand function and two simple pricing policies. Specially, the analysis begins with two basic assumptions, (1) a market size which is restricted geographically, and (2) the consumer density is allowed to be of any type. The result show that some conclusions drawn by prior studies on the relative economic benefit of two simple pricing policies cannot hold in a world with market sizes restricted geographically. Furthermore, the assumption of a general consumer density only influences the relative economic benefits of two simple pricing policies finitely. In other words, when we compare the relative economic benefits between two simple spatial pricing policies, the economic space plays an important role, and perhaps the shape of the demand function is not the main factor.

目錄................Ⅰ
圖目次..............Ⅱ
表目次..............Ⅲ
第一章 緒論..........................1
第一節 研究動機與目的................1
第二章 基本模型與假設................4
第三章 固定買者分佈密度分析..........9
第一節 最適價格......................9
第二節 經濟效益：產出、利潤、消費者剩餘和社會福利........12
第四章 一般化買者分佈的分析..............................20
第一節 最適價格..........................................20
第二節 經濟效益：產出、利潤、消費者剩餘和社會福利........23
參考文獻.................................................29

圖目次
圖2-1 變動市場範圍比較圖.............................8
圖3-1 對應不同市場規模的總產量比較圖(v=0.5).........13
圖3-2 對應不同市場規模的總產量比較圖(v=1.5)........ 14
圖3-3 對應不同市場規模的利潤比較圖(v=0.5)...........16
圖3-4 對應不同市場規模的利潤比較圖(v=1).............16
圖3-5 對應不同市場規模的消費者剩餘比較圖(v=0.5).....17
圖3-6 對應不同市場規模的消費者剩餘比較圖(v=1.5).....18
圖3-7 對應不同市場規模的社會福利比較圖(v=0.5).......19
圖3-8 對應不同市場規模的社會福利比較圖(v=1.5).......19

表目次
表1-1 固定買者分佈密度文獻比較........................31
表1-2 一般化買者分佈比較：當需求型態為凸向原點........31
表1-3 一般化買者分佈比較：當需求型態為凹向原點........32
表2-1 固定買者密度下：最適變動市場範圍表..............32
表3-1 凸向原點(v=0.5)需求型態，對應不同市場規模的最適數值比較表.........33
表3-2 凹向原點(v=1.5)需求型態，對應不同市場規模的最適數值比較表.........34
表4-1 非線性買者密度：凸向原點需求型態的變動市場範圍表(v=0.5)......35
表4-2 非線性買者密度：凹向原點需求型態的變動市場範圍表(v=1.5)......35
表4-3 凸向原點需求型態和凸向原點買者密度，對應不同市場規模的最適數值比較表：(令v = 0.5，β = 1.5)..............35
表4-4 凸向原點需求型態和凸向原點買者密度，對應不同市場規模的最適數值比較表：(令v = 0.5，β = -0.5).............36
表4-5 凸向原點需求型態和凹向原點買者密度，對應不同市場規模的最適數值比較表：(令v = 0.5，β = 0.5)..............37
表4-6 凹向原點需求型態和凸向原點買者密度，對應不同市場規模的最適數值比較表：(令v = 1.5，β = 1.6)..............38
表4-7 凹向原點需求型態和凸向原點買者密度，對應不同市場規模的最適數值比較表：(令v = 1.5，β = -0.5).............39
表4-8 凹向原點需求型態和凹向原點買者密度，對應不同市場規模的最適數值比較表：(令v = 1.5，β = 0.5)..............40

參考文獻
一、英文部分
1.Beckmann, M. J. (1968), Location Theory. New Year：Random House.
2._____________ (1976), “Spatial price policies Revisited,” Bell Journal of Economics, 7, 619-629.
3.Cheung, F. K. and X. Wang (1996), “Mill and Uniform Pricing：A Comparison,” Journal of Regional Science, 36, 129-43.
4.Greenhut, M. L. and Hiroshi Ohta (1972), “Monopoly Output under Alternative Spatial Pricing Techniques,” American Economic Review, 62, 705-713.
5.Greenhut, J. (1977), “On the Economic Advantages of Spatially Discriminatory Price Compared with F.O.B. Price,” Southern Economic Journal, 44, 161-165.
6.Heffley, D. R. (1980), “Pricing in an Urban Spatial Monopoly：Some Welfare Implications for Policies which Alter Transport Rates,” Journal of Regional Science, 20, 207-225.
7.Holahan, W. L. (1975), “The Welfare Effect of Spatial Price Discrimination,” American Economic Review 65, 498-503.  
8.Hsu, Song-Ken(1983),“Pricing in an Urban Spatial Monopoly：A General Analysis,” Journal of Regional Science, 23, 165-175.
9.____________ (2006), “Simple Monopoly Price Theory in a Spatial Market.”
10.Kau, James B. and C. F. Lee, “Capital Land Substitution and Urban Land Use,” Journal of Regional Science, 16 (1976a), 83-92.
11.__________ and ________, “Functional Form, Density Gradient and Price Elasticity of Demand for Housing,” Urban Studies, 13 (1976b), 193-200.
12.Ohta, Hiroshi, “Spatial  Price Theory of  Imperfect Competition,” College Station：Texas A&M University Press, 1988.
13.Smithies (1941), “Monopolistic Price Policy in a Spatial Market.”