當今各先進國家均正經歷人口結構老化的社會變遷課題，我國已於1993年邁入高齡化社會，政府面對人口老化所需解決的便是建構適合老人安居之住宅與居住環境。惟政府總體預算以及人力資源均屬有限，因此如何引進民間投資來減少政府財政負擔及提昇整體老人福利服務之績效與品質，已成為一大課題。本文以老人住宅及老人福利機構為研究對象，探討民間參與高齡者住宅設施的關鍵因素，並參照日本PFI事業模式的發展經驗後，提供後續執行之建議。 本研究主要目的有以下三點，一、我國現況分析：老人住宅及老人福利機構相關法規分析、民間參與老人住宅及老人福利機構推動現況分析；二、日本現況分析：老人住宅及老人福利機構相關法規分析、民間參與老人住宅及老人福利機構推動現況分析；三、民間參與老人住宅及老人福利機構之課題研析，並擬定其建議對策。 在民間參與老人住宅方面，原為依老人福利法設置之社會福利設施，得依促參法辦理，現已納入住宅法中社會住宅之一環，住宅法甫於2011年底公告，並將於2012年底施行，惟相關子法尚未制定，故整體配套措施及後續推動仍有待觀察。 在民間參與老人福利機構方面，除於老人福利法中即有獎勵民間興辦之相關配套措施外，亦得在經中央目的事業主管機關認定後適用促參法辦理之。惟因老人福利機構之興辦較不具自償性，故在民間參與之推動上較為困難。 本文就我國民間參與老人住宅及老人福利機構方面提出相關課題分析，並參酌日本之相關法規及案例，研擬建議對策，以供參考。

2013年聯合國於兩公約人權報告中揭示，「居住權」為重要的基本人權之一，然而，根據行政院研考會於2010年的網路民調，「房價高漲」為十大民怨之首，受到外在政治經濟環境影響，政府放任投資客自由進出房地產市場炒房的結果，使得一般市井小民欲在臺北都會區買房，得不吃不喝15.73年才得以買到一處安身立命的處所，由此可知，我國居住權人權狀況與國際人權標準尚有一段差距。 　　本研究目的在於以政策分析途徑界定政策問題，接著從「政策變遷」（policy change）的角度切入，比較臺灣住宅政策的主要政策方案，包括「只租不售」的社會住宅、「出售式」的合宜住宅，進而探討在多項政策方案供選擇的政策決策過程中（policy making process），政策行動者所採取的互動策略如何影響政策變遷的結果，並透過深度訪談了解不同行動者對這些變化過程的解釋為何、如何看待那些變化，並依據個案的合適性選擇莊文忠（2003）提出的整合性分析架構，從外在環境因素、政策本身特性、結構因素、政策網絡等面向，分析社會住宅與合宜住宅相互變遷的政策過程，歸納影響政策變遷的因素有哪些，進而提出政策建議。 　　基於文獻分析與訪談結果，本研究發現，政府推動社會住宅相較於合宜住宅面臨較大的困難，包括缺乏整體的社會住宅政策、心理上的抗拒、法規制度的限制等，《住宅法》於2011年底通過與地方政府重要政策轉變構築變遷的政策過程，然而，從2010年到2014年短短4年的時間，社會住宅卻取代合宜住宅成為中央政府或地方政府積極推動的住宅政策。 從社會住宅與合宜住宅相互變遷的政策過程來看，影響兩項政策變遷的因素有許多：在政策外在環境因素的部分，包含高房價民怨促使政府回應、2014年底九合一選舉的影響、政策學習不應照單全收、社會共識逐漸形成、葉世文行賄弊案的衝擊；在政策屬性因素的部分，包含從國宅政策思維到社會價值的展現、焦點事件促成民眾政策偏好的改變、民間參與並非住宅政策的萬靈丹、合宜住宅的無形政策成本超載；在結構因素的部分，包含政策選擇與政治績效形塑決策者的政策思維、決策者的意識型態會影響其住宅政策決策、中央與地方各有本位主義、中央住宅部門層級過低等等，再加上政策網絡中行動者互動的交互影響，使得複雜性、不確定性如此高的社會住宅成為目前的政策主流，許多政府單位因為首長選舉的政見承諾紛紛開始重視社會住宅這樣的政策，而政策不會一成不變，相反地，它們會受到政治結構變遷及決策者政策思維改變而持續不斷地演化，因此，社會住宅政策未來是否能維持主導地位，仍有待吾人持續關注後續的政策變遷。 / In 2013, the human rights reports in two International Covenants both disclosed that “right of residence“ as one of the most important fundamental human rights. However, according to an on-line poll conducted by Research Development and Evaluation Commission of Executive Yuan in 2010 showed that “rising house prices“ issue was top one grievances among others. Affected by political and economic environment externally, the result of letting free access of investors unlimited entering and exiting real estate market has made it very difficult for civilians to buy house around urban Taipei. In order to buy a new house around unban Taipei, a civilian has to live without drinking or eating for 15.73 years. Therefore, it clearly shows that there is still a big gap between the right of residence in Taiwan and international standard. The purpose of this study is to define policy issues through policy analysis approach. Furthermore, the study tries to compare major policy programs of housing policy in Taiwan from the perspective of policy change, including "only for rent not for sale" social housing and "sale type" affordable housing, so as to discuss how interactive strategies that policy actors adopted affect the result of policy changes in the policy making process. The study adopts in-depth interview method to understand how different actors explain and interpret the changes, along with specific case study based on the integrated analysis framework proposed by Wen-Jong Juang in 2003. Through the integrated analysis framework, from external environment factors, policy features, structural factors and policy networks, the study analyzes the policy changing process between social housing and affordable housing, concluding which factors affect the changes in policy. Additionally, hope to come up with some policy suggestions. By reviewing related literatures and conducting interviews, the study shows that government faces greater difficulties when promoting social housing rather than promoting affordable housing. The reasons include lack of comprehensive social housing policy, mental resistance, and restrictions on laws as well as institutions and so on. The passing of Housing Act in the end of 2011 and the significant policy changes in local governments have created the policy change process. However, from 2010 to 2014, instead of promoting affordable housing policy, both central and local governments promote strongly on social housing policy. By observing the policy changing process between social housing and affordable housing, the study shows that many factors affect policy changes. First, the external environmental factors, including the high housing price issue, influence of local election in the end of 2014, policy learning, social consensus, and bribery scandal of Shi-Wen Ye all have impacts externally. Second, the factors of policy features, including past public housing policy to social value; focus events led to changes of public preferences; private participation in housing policy is not a panacea; the intangible cost of affordable housing overloaded are all possible factors. Third, the structural factors, including policy thinking formed by policy chose and political performance; ideologies of decision makers; centralism and localism; hierarchy of residential department in central government and so on, all have different effects. Last but not least, the interactions among policy network actors cause interaction effects. Hence, factors above make social housing as mainly policy, even though it is still highly uncertain and complex. Many government agencies have begun to pay attention to social housing policy due to the promises made by local officials. On the other hand, policies change, continually evolve affected by changes in the political structure and the policy thinking of decision makers. Therefore, whether the social housing policy will maintain the dominant position still remains question, and we will keep follow up with what might change in future policies.