本文分為五章十七節，合訂為乙冊，共計約四萬字。各章節之內容摘要說明如左： 第壹章，緒論。計三小節。分別說明研究動機、目的、假設、範圍及本文架構。 第貳章，一般概念與理論基礎。計三小節。第一節，社會折現率的定義與由來。第二 節，論社會折現率之功能與地位。第三節，分別以圖解（兩期模型）及數學方式導引 出社會折現率的理論架構。 第參章，文獻回顧之整理與檢討。計三小節。本章將歷年來國內外有關之文獻做一整 理，並分析檢討之。 第肆章，台灣之實證。計四小節。理論上的社會折現率牽涉到效用之評估、世代間福 利之測度及機會成本、……等多項問題，在實際運作上頗有困難。故本章特以實作之 觀點，試著利用台灣已上市公司之財務資料，求算出私經濟部門的資本報酬率及消費 借貨利率，供公共部門做評估之公共投資之用。 第伍章，結論與建議。

近年來，生物技術的快速進步，逐漸被公認為是繼資訊產業之後最具發展潛力的產業。生技產業不同於傳統的製造業或電子產業，前者之進入障礙高、產品研發時程長及研發投入成本高。雖然生技產品開發成功後，投資報酬率高、產品的生命週期長，但由於其研發過程較長，具有相當高的不確定性，加上研發的失敗率高，致使生技產業成為投資風險極高的產業。 生技產業屬於知識密集的知識型產業，其主要價值來自於研發創新的無形資產，而難以傳統的評價方法及標的來估算。因此，探討如何評估生技公司的價值，是本研究之主要目的。 本研究範圍以「生技醫藥產業」為研究重點，生技產業的應用範圍包括醫藥開發、醫療器材、診斷試劑、農業生技、健康食品及生技服務業等領域。醫藥品的開發是生物技術最早應用的領域，目前全球生技產業中，也以生技醫藥領域的市場最大，是目前發展較為成熟且成功的領域。 但因生技醫藥公司之投資的評估考量與傳統評價模式有差異，生技醫藥公司之營運，通常需要先投入數年的研發，開發出具有市場潛力的產品或技術、並取得專利後，再透過授權或合作方式，向有意承接之單位或藥廠收取前期金(up-front payment)或研究經費(research fund)，以及收取各階段的里程金(milestone payment)，待產品成功上市後，生技醫藥公司再依銷售金額，分配到一定比率的授權金。上述的收入或獲利過程，往往長達4到7年，而其收入結構因合作模式的差別而有不同的組合變化。如果依一般公認的會計原則認列損益，將造成公司某一年有一大筆收入，但接下來幾年收入可能都掛零的現象。不但無法反映生技公司的真正營運狀況，亦可能造成投資人或主管單位的誤解，這正是生技公司價值無法依傳統評價模式進行評估的原因。 然而，究竟應該如何對一生技公司進行評價？本研究使用目前最佳的生技公司評價方法：風險調整淨現值法(rNPV)，並以一個案公司為題，探索生技醫藥產業的投資與評價過程。此法的評估結果，對生技公司的現有價值，即使仍在R&D的早期階段，仍能運用於生技公司投資、授權、取得等交易之需要。 關鍵字：生技產業、公司評價、風險調整淨現值、折現率 / Due to the rapid growth of the biotechnology industry, it is now considered the hottest industry after the information technology industry. Unlike the traditional production industry (the labor intensive) or the electronic industry, the biotechnology requires higher R&D costs, and usually the life span of its product lasts longer, which leads to a certain barrier in this particular field. Although the return of investment tends to be profitable if the product succeeds, yet the lengthy R&D process still makes the business highly risky. The innovation of intangible assets is the main value of biotechnology; in other words, this is a knowledge-intensive industry, and it is hard to measure the potential risks and returns through traditional evaluation models. Hence, the main purpose of this study is to evaluate how a biotechnology company is worth. This study will be mainly focus on “Bio-Pharmaceutical”, which includes New Drugs, Medical Devices and Instruments, Diagnostic Reagents and Platforms, Agricultural Biotech, Health Care Products, and Contract Services. A large number of biotechnology companies have viewed pharmaceuticals as their target market since 1997. Cleary, the Bio-Pharmaceutical is regarded as the mainstream of this industry. Owing to the different models of evaluation as mentioned earlier, biotechnology industry is different from the traditional ones. Biotech companies usually need to go through a long-range research process before developing a success product or technique, and they will usually authorize the selling rights to a partner in order to demand the up-front payment, research funds, and the follow up milestone payments. If the product hits the market, the companies will be paid with a certain ratio royalty. The process generally takes about 4 to 7 years, and the revenue varies depending on the partnership. It is possible for a company to have a huge gain in one particular year and then a deficit for the coming years if the financial condition is viewed from the general accepted accounting principles. Not only does it not reflect the real situation of a biotech company, but also misleads investors and regulatory authorities. This is why the value of a biotech company needs to be reconsidered in different ways, not the traditional ones. How, then, can we put a price tag on biotechnology? The best solution is to evaluate a biotechnology by estimating its risk-adjusted net present value (rNPV). To illustrate the rNPV method, the study has created a hypothetical scenario. Through the case study, we have arrived at a realistic value of a bio-company even at early R&D stages. Using the rNPV, researchers and potential investors can price the bio-company that they are considering selling, investing in or acquiring. Keywords：Biotechnology Industry、Evaluation、rNPV、Discount Rate

企業創造價值的來源由傳統的有形資產如土地、廠房和設備等，轉變為無形的智慧資本，然而一般公認會計原則將創造智慧資本的投入視為費用加以處理，使得企業之帳面價值與市場價值的差距日益增加，公司的管理當局及投資人在評價時面臨重大困難，因而有效的智慧資本評價方式變得十分重要。本研究目的即在探討，採用收益基礎的評價模式下，何種資金成本估計方式所估計之資金成本較能有效反應投資人在考慮企業智慧資本之特性和風險後，所要求的必要報酬率，而使得以該資金成本作為折現率，估計企業智慧資本價值，所估計之結果較能反映企業之市場價值。本研究以Fama and French之三因子模式、益本比法以及市場模式估計企業之資金成本，實證結果發現如下： （1）不同資金成本估計方式所估計之結果存有一定程度的差異，而以不同資金成本估計方式所估計之資金成本作為折現率所計算之企業智慧資本價值亦有一定程度的歧異。 （2）三種估計企業資金成本的方式中，僅有Fama and French之三因子模式企業之Beta值呈正相關，而與公司規模呈負相關，為有效的資金成本估計方式。 （3）複迴歸分析結果發現，以三種方式所估計之資金成本作為折現率計算之智慧資本價值均對企業價值具有價值攸關性，而以三因子模式所估計之資金成本作為折現率計算之結果價值攸關性較高。 （4）若將企業依研發支出密度加以區分，在低研發支出密度公司中，以益本比法所估計之折現率計算之智慧資本價值攸關性最高；而在高研發支出密度以及零研發支出密度公司中均以三因子模式所估計之折現率計算之結果價值攸關性較高。 / Intellectual capital has become the origin of value of a company. But traditional GAAP views investment that is helpful to the value of untellectual capital such as R&D and advertisement as expenses, the gap between the book value and the market value of a business has become larger. This study confer that if we value a business through income-based method, what kind of estimated method of cost of capital should we use to make the estimated value of intellectual capital reflect the value of a business more efficiently. In this study we estimated cost of capital using three estimated method: factor model of Fama and French, earning to price ratio(E/P ratio), and market model, and we find: 1.If we use different kind of estimated methods, the estimated cost of capital can be different from each other. And if we use different kinds of cost of capital as discount rate, the estimated value of intellectual capital can be different from each other too. 2.Only the cost of capital that estimated through three factor model can be a effective method to estimate cost of capital of a company. 3.The value of intellectual capital can reflect the market value of the company when we use the cost of capital estimated through factor model, E/P ratio, and marlet model as the discount rate, and the result of Wald test suggest that using the cost of capital estimated by factor model as the discount rate to calculate the value of intellectual capital can reflect the market value more effeciently than others. 4.If we divide our sample into three group using the density of their R&D expenditure, we find that the cost of capital estimated by factor model can be the most efficient if a company has a higher R&D orzero expenditure.