標題: | 兩岸再生能源政策之比較分析研究 A Cross-Strait Policy Analysis Of The Renewable Industry |
作者: | 黃建翰 Huang, Chien-Han 徐作聖 Shyu, Z. Joseph 管理學院科技管理學程 |
關鍵字: | 再生能源;可再生能源政策;政策分析模式;產業創新需求要素;Renewable Energy;Policy Analysis;Innovation Policy;Industrial Innovation Requirements;Policy Instruments |
公開日期: | 2010 |
摘要: | 本研究使用政策分析模式作為主要架構,以台灣、中國的兩岸再生能源政策為研究對象,建構兩岸再生能源產業政策比較分析模型。首先,以蒐集兩岸再生能源產業政策的次級資料來歸納出發展脈絡,將資料分類整理至Rothwell及Zegveld的創新政策工具。再利用再生能源專家問卷分析產業創新需求要素,並對應出產業發展所需的創新政策工具。最後,將現有政策與產業創新所需的政策工具作分析比較,希望提供台灣制訂再生能源產業發展政策的相關建議。 根據分析結果,兩岸再生能源產業創新政策工具傾向,在「政策性措施」和「科學與技術開發」有較高的比例。台灣現有以環境面政策為重,在「財務金融」與「公營事業」主;中國在「公營事業」和「政府採購」有獨自的政策傾向。其次,兩岸再生能源產業創新需求要素所需的政策皆以「科學與技術開發」、「教育與訓練」、「政策性措施」、「公營事業」以及「資訊服務」等五項比重相對的重要性較高。台灣則在「租稅優惠」有顯著的影響性。 在上述兩項政策工具比較發現,台灣現行政策中較欠缺的是海外聯絡推廣的「海外機構」措施及產業訊息交流的「資訊服務」。中國需要加強的政策應該朝向「教育訓練」、「海外機構」和「資訊服務」等方向實施。建議台灣未來可朝「科學與技術開發」、「教育訓練」、「政策性措施」、「公營事業」、「租稅優惠」以及「資訊服務」等方向制定政策。 This research discusses innovation policies in renewable energy of the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan. Using Rothwell and Zegveld’s model of industrial innovation policy as a starting point, this research compares innovation policy across the two nations. Then, using the expert questionare and interview find out the Industrial Innovation Requirements and Policy Tools. Finally, comparing with both types of policy instruments, we have several suggestions for development of Taiwan’s renewable energy. The results show that national preferences for innovation policy differ from renewable energy of different countries.China and Taiwan prefer to “Public Enterprise” and “Scientific and Technical”. What’s more, evaluating the Industrial Innovation Requirements and Policy Tools leads to a conclusion that the most critical categories of policy instruments are “Scientific and Technical”, “Education”, “Political”, “Public Enterprise”, “Taxation” and “Information”. The work suggests that the government propose renewable energy roadmap, and the utility is responsible for planning and construction. Furthermore, the government should put more emphasis on the following policy instruments- “Scientific and Technical”, “Education”, “Political”, “Public Enterprise”, “Taxation” and “Information”. More specifically, the corresponding policy instruments in support of developing IIRs are provided in the conclusion of this thesis. |
URI: | http://140.113.39.130/cdrfb3/record/nctu/#GT079865510 http://hdl.handle.net/11536/48646 |
Appears in Collections: | Thesis |