我國科學工業園區定位、營運模式及設立條件之探討

Abstract

在開發中國家當中，亞洲四小龍在1980年代以史無前例的方式高度的成長。這些國家各有不同的策略來發展其國家的產業。台灣是第一個建立起高科技製造產業的國家。經過這一段時期的成長，政府的政策在這當中扮演著發展基礎建設、促使產業群聚及獲取技術關鍵知識的關鍵的角色。這其中最引人注意的政策即是在新竹設立科學工業園區。其政策不但是給定一塊規劃良好的土地以及由政府成立單一窗口做全部的相關服務，而且提供免稅是服務政策，因此形成區內廠商的群聚效應。自從園區的建立，台灣已發展其在許多的產業成為區域性的製造中心。而科學工業園區的成功經驗也成為開發中國家發展工業的最佳範本。 在高科技產業的連續性的成長後，台灣的政府也建立了許多不同的園區型態，以服務不同產業的需要。但在經過二十年的發展後，在科學工業園區的發展以無法呈現當初開發園區時的本意，產生了模糊不清的現像。因此，促始本研究去探討科學工業園區的策略定位及營運模式等議題來評估不同政策對未來的發展。 研究的結果，本研究建議科學工業園區應該定位成為產品及製程創新為導向的型態，而一般的工業園區應該集中於量產導向方面，在其他的園區的策略定位應為以鼓勵中小型企業進行研究開發，以促使我國的經濟在未來二十年能夠更上一層樓。

Among developing countries, the Asian four tigers have score unprecedented record growth in the 1980s. While these countries employed different strategic approach for their strategic industries, Taiwan was the first nation that established their infrastructure for the high-tech manufacturing sector of its economy. During this period of growth, government policy played a pivotal role in expediting the development of needed infrastructure, industrial clustering, and technology know-how. The most noticeable policy was the establishment of the Science-Based Industrial Parks (SBIP) in Hsinchu in 1980, which allowed not only a fenced park with well-planned infrastructure and a total service center managed by the government, but also tax exemption policies and industrial clusters formed inside the park. Since the establishment of the park, Taiwan has developed herself as a local manufacturing powerhouse for a number of high-tech industries, and the successful experience of SBIP has become a paradigmatic example of industrial development for developing countries. For continual growth in the high-tech industries, Taiwanese government has established a variety of industrial of industrial parks to serve the needs of different sectors of the high-tech industries. However, over the 20 years of development, the distinction in strategic focus among these parks has become blurred. There is, therefore, a need to analyze the strategic positioning and operating characteristics of the industrial parks to assess different policy needs for future development, which is the focus of this research. Research results suggest that SBIP should position itself as a local center for product-innovation, while other general-propose industrial parks should save as consolidated manufacturing sites. Morever, the other type of industrial park, strategic designed for small-and-medium size enterprises (SMES) should also be encouraged to expedite the development of SMES, which have been tole engine for rapid economic growth in the past 20 years.