全球化的浪潮已經席捲世界各個角落，特別自80年代以後，隨著經濟全球化的迅速發展和國際競爭的日趨激烈，國際產業轉移技術之路徑亦發生重要的變化，由原來著重在母國研發以對外進行技術投資的組織形式，慢慢轉變為直接在地主國從事研發。而中國長期以來一直為台商單一地區投資比例最高的區域，根據相關研究顯示，台商早期進去中國多以傳統製造業為主，屬於勞力密集高之產業，而後期則逐漸以資本及技術密集產業為主，顯示在不同時期，台商對中國投資特性之改變。 本文從研發全球化及研發區位選擇相關理論作延伸，同時以創新系統的觀點切入，並輔以問卷調查結果，探討台灣企業研發部門投資兩岸區位選擇。因此，在第一階段將研發區位選擇地區廣泛地分為中國大陸和台灣；其後，第二階段則針對台灣部分進行更深入的探討，將台灣分為北部、中部以及南部地區。而在實證變數方面主要分為兩個部分：第一部包含廠商基本屬性以及區位選擇原因、第二部分為創新系統相關變數。實證結果顯示就兩岸而言，兩部分的變數皆會影響台灣企業研發部門的區位選擇，而若就台灣地區而言，則屬創新系統相關變數影響最為深刻。 最後，根據本研究之結論，從宏觀面向來看，建議台灣未來宜加強其所有權優勢、內部化優勢的部分，以增進其海外研發能力；就微觀層面則建議未來應強化中部與南部的創新環境、建構完善的三螺旋合作網絡、並進一步強化廠商研發意願。

近幾十年來，受到全球化與資訊化的影響，知識的創新能力表現成為競爭力優劣的重要指標，國家或地區經濟發展競爭力高低，與其全球化優勢息息相關，而全球化競爭優勢能力又取決於其創新成效表現高低。台灣在全球化的浪潮及大陸開放競爭下，地方傳統產業在此衝擊下面臨倒閉或出走。在這充滿變數與挑戰的階段，本文從區域創新系統角度探討地方創新環境與其創新能力表現對競爭力的影響。 本研究藉文獻探討及台灣地區鄉鎮市之基礎數據資料分析研究，以創新系統觀點探討影響地方創新成效的關鍵因素，並據此選定衡量創新成效指標，再針對台灣區域地方環境、產業發展及國內創新環境現況，探討目前地方創新活動的狀況與設施，建構台灣地區地方創新系統指標。再利用多變量分析方法進行實證分析，利用因子分析取得代表地方創新環境與區域發展特徵之因素，並將其萃取出創新能力因子，作為劃分創新能力集群之根據，分為高、低創新成效地區；最後印證創新成效表現優異地區，其所具有創新能力之特質與創新成效表現優劣間之相關性。 本研究實證結果如下：一、影響創新成效主要因素為製造業產業群聚與支援性服務設施；二、高度創新成效地區皆坐落於新竹以北地區；三、創新能力因子指數與專利數產出量不一定成正相關，創新能力因子指數高僅代表該地區環境具有利於產業間分享知識技術交流的能力與潛力，但此種能力不一定表現在專利數產出量多寡，而須倚賴觀察該地區的各項創新活動狀況；四、創新能力因子指數高地區，近3年（93-95）來的專利數產出遠超過過去10年(83-92)，推論地區內產業及創新設施已成熟，再加上智慧財產權保護觀念普及，促使專利數量大增；五、鄰近創新成效較高之地區，使其創新成效表現低卻屬於高度創新成效地區，推論其因位置直接毗鄰高度創新成效地區，受地理鄰近性影響甚大。 最後建議政府應協助各地區地方政府鼓勵產業投資發展，提高地方創新研發動能，並積極輔導大學與育成中心提高其育成與輔導的效率，未來更應建立媒合大學及育成中心與產業界之合作機制，以推動產、官、學、研各種人才流通，提高研發創新能力。 / In the past few decades, the influence of globalization and informationization has made the ability to generate innovations in knowledge a key benchmark in competitiveness. The competitiveness of a country or region's economy is now closely linked to its global advantage. This global competitiveness, in turn, hinges on its ability to innovate. In Taiwan, the impact of globalization and China's market liberalization has seen local traditional industries either shut down or move elsewhere. In a time filled with uncertainties and challenges, this study seeks to examine the effect of a regional innovation environment and its innovation capability on competitiveness from a regional innovation system perspective. In this study, we review and analyze the basic data from Taiwan's regional areas and examine the key factors influencing the effectiveness of regional innovation. This was then used to select the indicators for evaluating innovation performance. Taiwan's regional environment, industry development and the current state of the domestic innovation environment were then examined to determine the current state and infrastructure of regional innovation activities to construct a set of regional innovation system indicators for Taiwan. Empirical analysis was performed utilizing multivariate analysis. First, factory analysis was used to extract the factors that represent the regional innovation environment and regional development characteristics. From these, we determine the innovation capability factors, and use these to define the innovation capability clusters. These clusters were then separated into high and low innovation effectiveness regions. Finally, we examine the areas with high innovation effectiveness and determine the correspondence between their innovation characteristics and their innovation performance. The empirical results from this study were as follow: 1. The main factors influencing innovation effectiveness were industry clustering and support services & infrastructure; 2. The regions with high innovation effectiveness were all located north of Hsinchu; 3. The innovation capability factor index may not correspond directly to patent output. A high innovation capability factor index only indicates that a region possesses the capability and potential to facilitate the sharing of knowledge and technology between industries. This capability may not necessarily be reflected in the patent output, but is instead, depends on the innovation activities being conducted in the region; 4. In regions with high innovation capability factor indices, their patent output in the past 3 years (2004~2006) far exceed the preceding decade (1994~2003). We hypothesize that the maturity of their local industries & innovation infrastructure, as well as widespread understanding of intellectual property rights, encouraged the rapid increase in the number of patents; 5. Some regions near highly innovative regions perform less effectively even though they are part of the same area. We hypothesize that this is directly caused by their geographical proximity to highly innovative regions. Finally, we recommend that the government provide assistance for regional governments to encourage investment in industrial developments and boost local innovative R&D capabilities. Assistance should also be provided to universities and incubation centers to improve their incubation & assistance effectiveness. In the future, a cooperative mechanism for linking universities, incubation centers and the industry should be set up as well to boost the capability for innovative R&D by encouraging the free flow of expertise between the industry, government, academic and research sectors.

科技競爭力是經濟持續成長的動力，而政府、企業與國家之整體科技能量為發展科技經濟的重要支柱。於全球科技經濟的持續發展之下，研發（R&D）的投入、創新（Innovation）的擴散，並逐漸在以知識（Knowledge）作為競爭基礎的全球化社會與網際網路時代中日益重要，而在此趨勢之下，企業除了應積極規劃產業轉型，政府創新政策（Innovation Policy）的支持更是不可或缺的條件，各國家莫不體認到「創新能力」是現代國家競爭力的重要關鍵。 美國在甘乃迪總統時代，便將「創新政策（Innovation Policy）」視為政府產業科技政策中非常重要的一環，其目的在獎勵新興產業中之科技創新，因其能符合國家的需求及達到改善經濟情勢的目標，但由於私人企業的資源有限，無法在有限的時間及預算內開發出符合社會大眾需求的產品。所以，甘乃迪主張政府應負責主導產業科技創新發展的方向，同時政府應提供企業界財力及其它資源上的補助。 創新相關的概念逐步發展，到晚近十多年，西歐幾個國家包括丹麥、瑞典和英國的產業經濟與政策研究學者，開始提倡「國家創新系統（National Innovation System）」的概念。過去，人們直接將科學系統（Science system）視為唯一的創新指標（Innovation indicator），科學投入（Science input，如R&D預算）的增加直接助長創新及科技的發展。這個以科技推力為主的簡單線性關係模型的觀念已被「系統式模式（Systemic approaches）」所取代。 亦即創新為研究、發展、行銷、擴散（Research, development, marketing, diffusion）每一階段交互作用的成果，而非單單是R&D的投入面而已，也就是說創新活動來自創新系統（Innovation system）中每一成員（如政府、大學、私人企業）及每一步驟（研究、發展、行銷、擴散）的交互作用等，而不只是學術界與R&D的事而已。 歐州近年來針對創新政策相關議題多所著墨，而自2000年開始，荷蘭、比利時是歐洲中於國家競爭力上有卓越表現的國家，而基於版圖規模和經濟特質，在科技產業之推動與創新政策之發展上，以上各國顯然有許多值得臺灣借鏡與學習的地方，本研究期望對荷蘭、比利時二國創新政策做深入淺出的剖析，並以國家創新系統為依歸，歸納出對正努力邁向知識密集、附加價值的臺灣一個值得參考之啟示與學習典範。 / Technological competitive strength is the power for the continuous growth of the economy. And the technological power of the government, enterprises and the country is the critical mainstay of the development of technological economy. Under the continuous development of the world economy, the investment on R&D and the spread of innovation become more important in the competition with the knowledge base in the global world and internet era. Under this trend, besides planning the transform of the products, the enterprise needs the government's Innovation Policy as a necessary factor. All the countries realize that Innovation is the key to the modern nations' competitive strength. During the Kennedy period, the U.S. regards Innovation Policy as a most important part of the government's high-technology industry. The aim is to encourage the technological innovation in the new industry, because it conforms to the country's needs and may improve the economic condition. However, as the private enterprises have limited power and cannot produce the products conforming with people's needs during a time limit. Therefore, Kennedy advocates that government should be responsible to lead the industrial technology, and provides some monetary and other aids. Concepts relating to innovation are gradually developing. In the recent ten years, theory studying scholars from western European countries, including Denmark, Sweden and U.K., begin to advocate National Innovation System. In the past, people regard Science system as the only Innovation indicator, thinking that the growth of Science input will directly foster innovation and the development of technology. This simple linar model has already been replaced by Systemic approaches; that is, innovation is not the result by R&D but the result of the co-operation of research, development, marketing, diffusion. It can also be interpreted that innovation comes from every single member (such as the government, university, private enterprise) and every step, not just the academic circles and R&D. In the recent years, Europe has a lot of works on innovation policy. Since 2000, Netherlands and Belgium are marvelous countries. As for the domain size and the economy quality, Taiwan needs to learn from the above countries on the development of technology industry and innovation policy. The research expects deep analysis on the innovation policies of this three countries; in the meantime, arranges a valuable example for Taiwan on the way to knowledge-intensive and value added.

Taedok Science Town(TST) has long history. Almost twenty years had been spent from its planning on 1973 to completion of its physical form on 1992. By 1998, TST tenants are government-supported institutes, private industry research laboratories, government-invested institutes, government agencies, and high educational institutes, total 63. However, contrary to its long history, only little information concerning TST has been introduced to outside of TST. It’s because TST was designed only for R&D without industrial production and also because in the initial stage, TST was purposed to support chaebols scientifically and technically, even the research results belonged to chaebols. Therefore, even within Korea TST was not studied by many entities, but mainly by policy makers. This unique situation of TST is very deeply related to Korean national innovation system. In other words, without understanding Korean national innovation system, it’s meaningless to view TST alone. When Korean created record-breaking fast economic development in 1960s, Korean government focused on technology but what Korea had was only human resources. Government as a center of its innovation system reared up strategic industries and intensively supported. Especially Korean government did it by fostering some chaebols, so Korean economy was built by them and also heavily depended on them. At that time, TST as designed for supporting those chaebols. Naturally, government-supported institutes in TST took pivotal role in R&D and in other peripheral activities . However, TST system was not static but dynamic. From 1980s, government started supporting small and medium enterprises and to catch up with the world economic changes, government promoted corporate researches to create synergy in TST. When KAIST moved to TST on 1990, it activated corporate researches with many institutes, and created collaborative research culture in TST. Especially, in early 1990s, when Business Incubators introduced into Korea, TBI/TIC/HTVC programs were launched in KAIST under government’s intensive support. Even this BI program is expanding to nationwide. Many young technopreneurs are heading to TST to start their own business with expecting TST’s scientific and technological support. Now TST in-town institutes are changed new way. Many students and researchers started their own technology-based businesses and creating new culture in TST. In many clubs they made they exchange business opportunities, technical know-how, etc. This new move creates new atmosphere in TST. However, close community of TST and in-town institutes’ networks is still pretty rare. That’s because the industries in community are not matured yet so that they are not ready to absorb technical pool in TST.

中國在經歷了改革開放後, 經濟實力突飛猛進, 成為世界經濟的主要成長動 力之一, 有別於歐美的資本主義體系, 中國的計畫經濟體系使政府的角色遠比歐美來的關鍵, 引起了許多學者探討其體制隨著經濟成長時產生的各種議題, 本篇論文著重在研究創新系統, 有別於之前的文獻著重在創新系統的技術效率表現,和其可能降低其技術效率的原因探討, 本文引用了Chang-Tai Hsieh 資源配置不當的模型概念, 從資源分配是否恰當的觀點重新審視中國創新系統的表現, 結果顯示中國資源配置的整體效率逐年上升, 並未因為東部沿海地區和中西部的經濟條件差異而惡化。

長江三角洲的迅速發展已經成為改革開放之後中國大陸經濟發展的主要表徵，然而在面對全球化的挑戰下，長江三角洲整合的問題也成為各方關注長江三角洲能否持續發展的關鍵。 本文以區域創新系統理論解析改革開放以來的長江三角洲區域經濟發展變遷，並提出對長江三角洲區域整合議題的看法。 第一章為緒論─本文簡介，介紹本文之研究動機、目的，研究方法，研究範圍及研究流程安排。 第二章為新區域主義理論及文獻評述─本文的主要理論基礎為區域創新系統，而區域創新系統屬於新區域主義的重要流派。因此針對新區域主義的源流、相關理論基礎以及發展做一評述，並歸結出新區域主義重要的三個特色：在地化的地域空間與產業組織─地理空間；產業群聚與生產網絡的形成─網絡；區域發展的絕對優勢─創新。 第三章為區域創新系統理論─區域創新系統是新區域主義理論當中，結合空間、網絡、創新的重要流派，本章從創新理論到創新如何影響地理空間與產業的轉型，歸納出區域創新系統的立論基礎、結構、以及在方法論上的重要意義。 第四章為長江三角洲區域發展─應用區域創新系統理論作為分析框架，對於長江三角洲自改革開放以後的發展進行分析。 長江三角洲區域創新系統主要的特色在於地方政府治理性格上的差異性，以及地方廠商與產業的發展模式與專業市場，這些現象的產生都與地方背景與環境有關。研究建議，長江三角洲整合的目標應該是市場化、促進區域內網絡的交流以及持續產業群聚的發展。 / The rapidly development of Yanzi River Delta has become one of the main characteristics of China economic reform. Under the trend of globalization, the regional integration issues about this area has also become a main perspective whether Yanzi River Delta could ever continually develop. In this article, we use “Regional innovation system” to analyse the economic development and evolution of Yanzi River Delta, thus providing some perspectives of regional integration of Yanzi River Delta under the basis of our analysis. The first chapter is introduction, we introduce our motivation, the main purposes, the research methods and tools, the definitions, the arrangement and the process of the reasearch. The second chapter is concept backgound; we introduce and generalize the theory of New Regionalism. New Regionalism has been recognaized as the oringin of regional innovation system. New Regionalism is also the main stream in nowtime economic geography. We introduce its development, theory basis, and related theories development. We conclude that New Regionalism has three main pillar: localized geographical space, industry networks, and innovation. The third chapter is the introdcution of theory; we sum up the development, the structrue, and the methodology of regional innovation system. The fouth chapter is the analysis; we use regional innovation as framework to analyze the development and evolution of Yanzi River Delta afer the China economic reform began. The fifth chapter is the conclusion; the main characteristics of Yanzi River Delta is the defferent governence of local governments; the clusters, develop patterns and local market of local industries. These developments were highly influenced by local context. And we sujest the main objects of regional integration in this area is common market, the developments of regional networks, and industrial clusters.

從2007年至今，兩個系統產品華碩的Eee PC及蘋果的iPhone震撼市場，Eee PC更被稱做為破壞式創新。這兩個產品的發展及演化是非常值得研究，本研究欲探討： 1.企業如何打破既有傳統硬體製造商思惟，將硬體、軟體及服務整合為一個系統產品； 2.企業如何與使用者成功的共創軟體。 本研究經過次級資料收集、訪談、個案分析後，研究發現: 1.企業開發創新系統產品時，其創新組織特色為： (1)一個跳脫出主流產品獨立之開發組織(團隊)； (2)將團隊獨立在主流外之後，給予跨部門團隊一個利於互動的開放環境； (3)更獲得高層的支持與參與，以助於產品創新。 2.企業在開發創新系統產品過程中： (1)使用者資訊的取得來自於產品開發者，其具有使用者及開發者的雙重身分； (2)先從定義產品才決定功能； (3)必須創造原型才能讓使用者親眼見到、摸到產品，以獲得使用者回饋改善產品。 然而，華碩在Eee PC上對於共創的努力成果不如蘋果豐碩，乃肇因兩個案之使用者社群特性不同，分別為集體協作社群及消費者生產社群。因此企業必須制訂出利於適合使用者社群之回饋模式、必須與開發人員建立良好的溝通並將過程透明。本研究亦發現，若欲成功與使用者共創，企業必須建構出優於既有平台之解決方案，以打破使用者習慣，才能有效共創。 / From the year of 2007 to the present-day, two systematic products, Eee PC of ASUS and iPhone of Apple, appear in the IT market and shock the world as best examples of destructive-innovation. It is thought worthwhile to take advantage of our understanding of the development and evolution of these two products in the past three decades to investigate: 1. How an enterprise is able to break through the old ways of thinking of traditional hardware makers, and able to integrate hardware, software and services into an innovative system-product; 2. How to create a platform for successful user- developer co-creating. The research method of this paper includes literature review, interview, and case analysis. The research results reveal that: 1. In order to develop an innovative system-product, an independent task force comprise staffs of different expertise should be set up outside the mainstream organization of the enterprise; and the independent task force should be given strong support and participation from the top level leadership of the enterprise; 2. In order to create an environment of user-developer co-creating, the function of the innovative system-product should be designed according to the demand of users; and the information of the users’requirement comes from the party of developer in the course of development; 3. In order to obtain feedback from the users for further improvement, a prototype of the innovative system-product should be made for the users to perform a trial run. When Asus unveiled their Eee PC in 2007, they did try very hard to integrate services and software, and to develop software market through user co-creating, just as the way Apple had done it. But the outcome was and is still not as successful as that of Apple. Both Asus and Apple tried user co-creating, but the outcome is different. The difference of outcome stems from the different characteristics of user’s society, i.e. Mass Collaboration Community, and consumers production society. It is therefore that an enterprise should set up a feedback model suitable for user’s society. The research of this paper also reveals that a successful user co-creating should be based upon a platform which is superior to the existing one, and that the habit of users can be modified (changed) in compliance with the new development of the user co-creating environment.

在創新系統中，產、學、研為新技術與知識積蓄的點，創新網絡中節點與節點之間的互動扮演重要的角色。區域內領導性廠商為了取得技術優勢，提供經費購買技術、引進技術等外部資源建立核心能力，在區域內形成產、學、研的技術聯盟組織，形塑區域特殊產業。各單位所交織形成的網絡動態為有助於區域創新活動的決定性因素。 透過這樣的角度來檢視台灣，本研究以區域創新系統的角度出發，觀察「數位遊戲」這項新興產業在技術與知識網絡中，行動者之間彼此的互動連結。將廠商、相關研究機構、產業公協會、人才培育機構、大專院校與育成中心視為區域創新網絡的驅動角色，透過問卷調查與社會學中的網絡分析工具，觀察網絡中技術與知識的互動關係。本研究的主要結論如下： ㄧ、由本研究實證結果發現，台灣北部區域所形塑遊戲產業產官學研合作所環繞的創新氛圍十分強烈。北部區域中，又以台北縣中和「遠東世紀廣場科技園區」與台北市「南港軟體工業園區」分別為遊戲產業高度密集聚點。 二、由於台灣數位遊戲產業各廠商之間的封閉性，各單位間技術與知識的互動關係偏低。廠商之間的網絡活動主要是以垂直性的關係為主，而非水平性的關係。廠商傾向倚賴國際之間網絡技術資源。 三、知識網絡中越是有能力的單位，越可能處於技術網絡的核心位置。也就是原本在遊戲產業中處於優勢地位的單位，基於資訊流通與知識傳遞方便的優勢，技術能力的掌握能力亦強，少數特定單位重複扮演技術與知識互動的重要角色。本研究從網絡結構中證實了技術與知識的高度關係。 四、技術網絡的連結模式呈現環環相扣的環狀結構，彼此交流與技術互動的相當頻繁與快速。知識網絡的星狀連結模式，具有明顯的核心單位，此類結構有利於知識的傳遞，處於散佈節點的單位居處特別重要的地位。 / In the innovation system, firms, schools and research institutes are new technology and knowledge storage places. The interactions between nodes play important roles in the innovation networks. In order to gain technology advantages, leading firms provide expenses to purchase and introduce technology to establish core ability. They form consortia with other firms, schools, and research institutes to build up regional specific industries in the regions. The dynamic network formed from the interaction of units is the main factor to facilitate regional innovative activities. This thesis is on the basis of Regional Innovation System (RIS) in Taiwan and takes “Digital Games” for example. Each actor interacts in the technology and knowledge networks in the RIS. Regarding firms, associate research institutes and industry associations as driving roles in the innovative networks, this thesis applies innovation networks surveys and the methodology of Social network analysis in Sociology to observe technology and knowledge interactions in the innovative networks. The major conclusions are as follows: First, “Far East Century Scientific Square” in Jhonghe City and “ Nan-Gang Software Industrial Park” in Taipei City are surrounded extremely strongly innovation milieu in the north of Taiwan. Secondly, owing to self-contained, digital games firms are deficient in interaction with each other. Activities in the networks are vertical relations almost, not horizontal ones. Firms tend to depending on international technology resources in the networks. The third, many competent actors basing on the advantage of information and knowledge transfer very quickly and conveniently in knowledge networks are located in the core of technology networks. A small number of firms repeatedly play the important role in technology and knowledge networks. From the network structure, this thesis proved technology and knowledge have a close relationship. Finally, technology networks display circular structures which exchange and transfer quite frequently and quickly; knowledge networks display star structure which have apparent core units and which are advantageous to transfer knowledge.

近年來我國在高等教育的學校與人數上均有大幅的成長。而這些豐富的研究人力，需要充沛的研究經費予以支援學術研究工作。實務上，我國於開放高等教育機構的設立後，各界所提供的研發經費並未相對應的增加，各校為因應整體環境趨勢的改變，乃積極研議如何強化學術研究成果的擴散，以提升學術聲望並獲得更多的實質效益。本研究在此情境下，試圖從國內大學之知識創新的實務發展，建構一套研究成果擴散效益的運作模式。 大學知識產業化是知識經濟發展的趨勢，尤其基礎研究是技術發展與應用研究的主要來源。大學知識創新過程是科學知識在創新系統內的生產、運用與擴散的過程。而建立有效的成果管理機制，減少外在環境的不確定性並改善知識流動的效率，是創新系統成功的關鍵。 鑑於大學係國家創新系統的重要成員之一，而創新的效率取決於系統內各成員之財務、知識、人力與法規的交流，即所謂的「三螺旋(Triple Helix)」的觀念。因此，為尋求最佳的創新系統，亟須建立有效的衡量項目，並促使創新成果在市場機制的導引下，獲得知識創新與擴散的經濟效益。如美國為因應創新系統失靈，於1980年以後，研訂一連串的相關法令，透過研發經費的補助、智財權下放與鼓勵設置專責技轉單位等措施，刺激大學將豐富的研究產出移轉到產業界，政府的研究資源分配亦更加重視目標導向與產業導向的發展計畫，結果所獲得的回收遠超過預期，其作法吸引世界各國競相仿效。我國亦於近年來透過相關法令的制定以及經費補助等措施，期望將大學的研究產出從知識的創造轉變為知識的加值與運用，以帶動產業知識化，並促進知識產業化之效益。 因此，欲探討大學的成果擴散效益時，不只是依循過去大多數學者從產學合作的觀點，更應考量政府在創新過程中所扮演的角色與功能，以及將衡量國家創新系統績效之方法運用到大學的成果擴散效益的呈現上，以建立適合我國大學創新成效的衡量模式。 本研究架構從教師的「研究人力」、「研究經費」以及「產學關係」等三構念探究對於「研究產出」以及成果推廣所產生的「擴散效益」之關聯，另外，再從學校的研究成果「管理機制」以及「政府措施」等二構念探究對於其他構念所帶來的影響，以瞭解彼此之關聯，並建立適合我國大學研究投入、產出以及擴散的運作模式。 因此，除了收集國內外的文獻以歸納整理美日等國在大學研究成果擴散效益的探討內容與衡量項目外，並透過問卷調查與實地訪問國內大學教師與研究成果推廣中心(或技轉中心)主管，以瞭解國內大學研究成果的實務運作，以獲得本研究的初步架構，繼而從美日以及我國大學的個案研究，探討國家創新系統的角色所帶來的影響，以強化研究架構之各構念的關聯性。 其次，採取初級資料的收集方法，以國內大學校院教師為問卷調查對象，進行敘述統計以計算樣本的各項指標分布狀況，以信效度指標確認問卷的可靠性與有效性，並運用探索性因素分析來萃取出本研究重要之變數，再以線性結構關係模型分析本研究變數之間的關係，以驗證各構念彼此之間的關聯性。 本研究獲得以下的結論： 一、「研究人力」與其他構念之關聯 「研究人力」對「產學關係」有直接的正向影響，對「研究經費」、「研究產出」與「擴散效益」則有間接的正向影響效果，而且整體的影響效果是顯著的。所以，研究人力是成果散效益的基本要素，配合其他構念的運作可以對研發成果之擴散效益產生正向的影響。 二、「研究經費」與其他構念之關聯 「研究經費」對於「研究產出」與「擴散效益」均沒有顯著的正向影響。顯示一味強調大學研究經費投入的作法無法帶來實質的成效，反而浪費有限的資源，因此，研究經費投入前，宜先制定一套評估機制，充分考量學校的研究人力、以往的研究產出與擴散效益之表現，以有效地配置研究經費。 三、「研究產出」與其他構念之關聯 「研究產出」對於「擴散效益」有直接的正向影響，表示大學教師所創造出來的成果越多，則相對地促使成果擴散的效益越大。此外，研究產出的增加亦可影響其他構念對「擴散效益」的關聯性。因此，為提高擴散效益，學校宜積極鼓勵教師增加研究成果的產出。 四、「產學關係」與其他構念之關聯 「產學關係」除了對「研究產出」與「研究經費」產生直接的正向影響外，亦間接影響「研究經費」與「研究產出」分別對「擴散效益」的關聯性。顯示產學關係可彌補大學與企業的技術落差，提高產業對學校研究成果之需求，促使教師研究產出的擴散效益更佳。 五、「管理機制」與其他構念之關聯 「管理機制」對「產學關係」與「擴散效益」均有直接的正向影響，顯示學校在成果管理與運用的積極作為(如技轉單位的設置、技轉人員的規模與培訓、獎勵措施的制定等)以及促進產學之間的關係可提高研究成果推廣所帶來的效益。 六、政府措施與其他構念之關聯 「政府措施」不但對「擴散效益」有直接的正向影響，亦對「產學關係」有直接的正向影響，此外，對「研究經費」與「研究產出」亦有間接的正向影響。因此，未來應加強我國政府的角色，充分發揮驅動與強化的功能，解決大學研究成果擴散的管制與障礙、營造產學研發資源共享環境以提高大學研究產出的擴散效益。 / After the government lifted the restriction on the number of higher education institutes, in the past two decades the number of university in Taiwan has increased dramatically (16 in 1986, and 102 in 2008). The government apparently could not match up this increase, with its slow pace of education budget increase. The shortage of development funds from governmental agency in charge is no doubt obvious for all universities. Therefore, to receive an ample share of governmental education budget has become competitive and even difficult. As the global economy weighs more on the generation and dissemination of knowledge nowadays, universities seems to see themselves clearer in the business picture for their role on the economic market. University officials and the government both also understand that a productive conversion of university intellectual assets, referring to knowledge-based creation or innovation, to innovation-derived benefit can be crucial for future university development. Thus, not only the university finance will be improved, its academic performance shall also be expected to enhance when this conversion is being well performed productively. An innovation management system here refers to a university system to manage its intellectual capital, such as support and process infrastructures, in facilitating the conversion process that enable the university to convert its intellectual assets into commercially viable properties. An important aspect of this study is to analyze national and international innovation management systems currently practiced in universities for greatest innovation-derived benefit. In the current of knowledge–based economic development, the knowledge-based innovations owned by universities is inevitably weighed more than ever in value. Many Universities may fall in a dilemma about how to weigh market–oriented research in comparison with fundamental scientific knowledge, since the latter never the less could lead to market–oriented innovation in the future. Furthermore, to maximize the value of innovation, it is commonly accepted that a proper management for conversion is almost as important as the producing of it. When it comes to determine the value or the benefit the innovations could bring, other than university’s innovation capability, which tends to have the potential to incubate more research outcomes, the performance of innovation management system is one of the most decisive factors. To achieve a good performance, three conditions are proposed to maintain an efficient innovation management system: an effective management mechanism, reduce adverse influences on incubating innovation assets, and increase knowledge sharing. The maintenance of such a system is then further categorized as seven conceptual indices (CIs) for later evaluation: research manpower, research grant, innovation outcomes, management mechanism, university-industry relations, government policy, and innovation-derived benefit. The first four are regarded as part of intellectual capital, while the other three are considered as strongly linked to the performance of the innovation management system currently being operated in Taiwan’s universities. They will be discussed in connection the first five CIs for their inter-relations. Since universities is under the scheme of National Innovation Systems (NIS), which covers primarily a finance and service system, a technological innovation system, and a knowledge-based innovation system, any management taking place in a university on each of any sub-system under the NIS will affect the NIS to some extent. By the same token, considering those mentioned above several conceptual indices are proposed to elucidate the results of the evaluation model applied in this study to examine similar management systems in different universities for comparison. This evaluation model is expected to help optimize the current managerial models to best meet the knowledge-based economic development needs and enlarge the innovation-derived benefit from university innovation assets. Prior to 1980s, the promotion on innovation in the U.S. was generally considered failed. To save the failing systems, the U.S. government announced a series of new regulations to promote the capitalization of academic innovations by universities. Those policy measures mainly included governmental subsidy to research grants, less constraints on intellectual property (IP) licensing, and start-ups for IP transfer. Furthermore, the government diverted more its research support into market-oriented development projects. Since such moves later resulted in a positive outcome beyond expectation, Taiwan as well as some other countries began to replicate those measures in their own countries. As the sources of future development increasingly depend on the derived benefit from innovation, the success of NSI originated by the U.S. government has indicated a new approach different from previously predominated models of solely university-industry cooperation. The involvement of government role in the NSI has been proved essential for its success. Similarly, the innovation management system being operated with the university intellectual capital to enhance the conversion to innovation-derived benefit is defined as the innovation assets management system (IAMS). It can be considered as a sub-system of the NSI, and the use of the evaluation model to examine the IAMSs can properly shows the difference among all the IAMSs by university. Furthermore, the evaluation model proposed takes account of surveys including interviews with IP transfer professionals and research professors. Cases of universities practicing the IAMS along with others published in literature are also studied to help access the relations among index items in the model. The model is constructed with several measures, including Structural Equation Model (SEM), Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), to evaluate the performance of the IAMS on successful conversion from intellectual assets into benefit. The model results are depicted with CIs as the conclusions. A qualitative survey is carried out on the evaluation of inter-relations among the seven CIs described above with Taiwan’s university educators as respondents. Confidence interval is applied to assure data reliability and validity. Significant model variables are identified using the explorative factor analysis. Finally the linear regression is applied to examine the relations among those CIs. The results of this study can be concluded as the following: 1.Research manpower It has positive influence directly towards university-industry cooperation when affecting positively towards research grant, innovation outcomes and innovation-derived benefit. The result suggests that it be the fundamental CI responsible to innovation-derived benefit. And along with other CIs, this CI could result in a comprehensive enhancement on the innovation-derived benefit. 2.Research grant It shows less significant effect over innovation outcomes and innovation-derived benefit. This conclusion indicates that the scale of innovation outcomes will not necessarily in proportion to the financial investment on research. It is suggested that a comprehensive evaluation on research manpower, innovation capability, and research capacity, etc. should be conducted prior to market-oriented investment on research. 3.Innovation outcomes This term shows a positive relation with the innovation-derived benefit. It is easy to understand that university educators with more innovation outcomes tend to receive more innovation-derived benefit. Furthermore, increase in innovation outcomes will also help induce stronger links among the other CIs towards the innovation-derived benefit. Thus, encouraging educators for more innovation outcomes is no doubt a good measure for universities. 4.University-industry relations University-industry relations bear positive influence to innovation outcomes and research grant. It also shows its positive effect on the relations between research grant to innovation-derived benefit and between innovation outcomes to innovation-derived benefit. The role of university-industry relations can be depicted as to lessen the technological gap between university and industry, facilitate the industry need for university innovation outcomes, and multiply innovation-derived benefit. 5.Management mechanism The management mechanism shows positive influence on university-industry relations and innovation-derived benefit. An effective management mechanism on innovation outcomes would directly lead to excellent benefit derived from innovation outcomes. 6.Government policy Government policy shows straight links to university-industry relations and innovation-derived benefit. It also indicates an indirect effect on enhancing both research grant and innovation outcomes. In the future, the government should play a key role in promoting universities to practice such a system and help resolve difficulties arisen.

臺灣的太陽能光電產業發展於2000年起發展快速，產值於2008年突破千億新台幣，太陽能光電產業從零到有僅經歷了十幾年的時間，其原因在於臺灣本身擁有良好的半導體技術基礎以及優良的人力素質，也因對於石油煤炭這類能源過度依賴，臺灣缺乏此類資源的情況下，積極發展太陽能光電產業成為了一條尋求替代再生能源的可行之路，本論文將探討臺灣發展太陽光電產業的優勢與發展模式為何，臺灣廠商又如何保持競爭優勢以因應全球化的競爭。 太陽能光電產業在台灣的發展與競爭為本論文研究之核心，在環保意識高漲以及其技術落後於其他先進國家的同時，臺灣太陽能光電產業面對國際競爭，在矽晶片型、薄膜型電池或第三代電池發展中，如何以臺灣原有之產業優勢創造利基；另外，從國家創新系統之發展模式中探討政府、公部門與私部門研究機構在太陽能光電產業發展過程中的位置為何，此一研究不僅討論其在臺灣太陽能光電產業技術升級上是否為推動者，同時檢視在全球化競爭中，政府、研究機構與產業其未來的方向為何。 / The development of photovoltaic industry in Taiwan has grown rapidly since 2000, and the output value surmount 100 billion NT Dollars in 2008. Because of Taiwan has an exceptional semiconductor and TFT-LCD manufacturing technology foundation and an excellent quality of manpower. Photovoltaic industry in Taiwan only takes less than two decades to expand to 5th main manufacturer in the world. Promoting photovoltaic industry is not only a way to solve the excessive dependence on the traditional energy, but also to find an alternative renewable energy for Taiwan. The research explores the advantage and development mode of photovoltaic industry in Taiwan, and researchs how photovoltaic manufacturers maintain the competitive advantage to compete against other foreign manufacturers in the globalization age.