中國被稱為是一個已崛起的世界大國已是不爭的事實。然而為何中國會迅速崛起，除了外在因素的配合外，最重要還是要歸功於鄧小平實施「改革開放」以來，社會知識增長，經濟蓬勃發展的緣故，其中中國政府高層對智庫及學者、專家的重視，使各項政策的出臺，在合理性、周延性、可操作性與前瞻性上大為提高應為重要成因。 毛澤東當政時期智庫幾乎不存在（尤其是文革時期）。鄧小平掌權後重建一些舊有研究機構，並陸續成立新的研究機構，是為中國現代智庫發展之濫觴。近30年來，中國官方智庫蓬勃發展，而民間智庫（尤其是政治、外交、軍事方面）卻因受政治環境的影響，出現巨大起伏變化，其後續發展值得觀察。 中國官方智庫扮演的角色頗多，與美國等西方智庫比較，其中擔任政府政策宣傳者的角色，以及作為情報機關的掩護機構，較為特殊，另外部份官方智庫已成為政府與外國「二軌」對話之主要管道。在功能上，由於中國由落後中崛起，故其發揮之功能頗為顯著，至於「旋轉門」及儲備與提供高層官員人才二項功能，由於中國遴選人才制度的關係，目前發揮有限，惟未來可望逐漸提升。 由於政治制度的不同，中國智庫相較於西方，有以下三點差異，第一、高度的壟斷性，面對民間智庫的競爭相對較少；第二、經費來源單一、量少；第三、可透過一種屬於常態卻「非正規」管道直接提供高層政策建議，發揮其影響力。 中國民間智庫因為法律註冊問題及政治信任問題，生存發展遭受挫折，針對中國特有的政治環境，吾人以為中國智庫未來可能出現以下的發展走向：一、續將部份官方研究機構改為民間（或半官方）智庫，二、調整法律註冊方式，開放民眾成立真正民間智庫。 / China, being called a rising world strong power, is an indisputable fact.Why can China rise rapidly? Apart from external factors to support its development, the most important internal factor is the social and economical grows due to the “reform and opening” policy of Deng Xiaoping. With consulting to think tanks, scholars and experts, Chinese government carry out national policy in a more rational, compre- hensive, feasible, far-sighted way. One could hardly find a think tank in Mao’s period (especially during the Cultural Revolution). After Deng came to power, he reconstructed some research institutions and established new ones, which became Chinese modern think tanks later on. China's official think tanks have acted vigorously for nearly 30 years. However, the non-official think tanks (especially in the areas of politics, diplomacy, and military) have gone through huge ups and downs with the changing of political environment. The subsequent development of the think tanks needs to be watched closely. Compared with think tanks in the West, China's official think tanks play multiple roles. They not only serve as media for government propaganda, but also act as fronts for intelligence agencies. Further- more, some of the official think tanks have served as the "dual-track" channels to communicate with foreign governments. Think tanks play important roles for China’s development in recent years. Their func- tions, however, as a “revolving door” and human power providers, are still limited. It is expected that above situation will change gradually. There are at least three differences between Chinese think tanks and the western ones. First, a high degree of monopoly- there is little competition from non-official think tanks. Second, they have a single and limited source of funding. Third, they provide policy suggestions to the government officers through normal, but "informal" channels. It is difficult to register as a “think tank” in China. Even a think tank can register legally; it’s still hard to get political trust from the government. This thesis finds that there are two possibilities for the development of Chinese think tanks in the future. First, Chinese government will transfer the government research institutes to non-official (or semi-official) think tanks. Second, Chinese government will amend the law to allow the public to set up non-official think tanks.

現代社會必須解決的公共問題性質相當複雜，不僅問題難以釐清、問題的範疇難以界定，解決問題的方案難以取捨、政策利害關係人的態度及意見亦不容易整合。基於上述種種原因，政策制訂者在政策制訂過程中除了需要幕僚人員與政府相關部門提供政策資訊外，政府部門外圍的智庫亦是重要的諮詢對象。 本論文首先介紹智庫的意涵、發展歷史與相關組織，界定智庫的定義與範圍。其次，分析美國智庫在政策制訂過程的活動，透過具體個案瞭解美國智庫在政策制訂過程中扮演的角色與發揮的影響力。再其次，探討國內智庫的發展，以「台灣智庫」、「國策研究院」、「國策研究基金會」為個案研究對象，透過訪談智庫執行長，瞭解國內智庫在政策制訂過程中扮演的角色與發揮的影響力。除此之外，國會是國家政策制訂的重心，透過訪談立法委員瞭解其與國內智庫的互動及其對國內智庫扮演角色的看法與發揮影響力之評估。 最後，綜合研究美國智庫的心得、國內智庫執行長與立法委員的看法，為國內智庫未來發展提出建議。 關鍵字：智庫(Think Tanks)、人才庫、旋轉門、影響網絡、議程設定、政策辯論、政策諮詢、策略聯盟。

公務員旋轉門條款依其立法源起及釋字第637號解釋之內容可知，主要是為防範公務員離職後與嗣後任職之民營事業有所利益掛勾，產生不當利益輸送與私相授受之危險。目前系爭條款雖已有明文之刑罰規定，但其立法設計卻不完善，導致實務上各級法院對構成要件的解釋與適用莫衷一是，並無統一標準。探究其原因，本文認為可能是刑事保護法益的定位錯誤所致，故須先就系爭條款之保護法益釐清。雖然司法院大法官解釋已確認其為國家法益之保護，惟本文認為於系爭條款之情形，除行為主體已離職而不具有公務員身分以外，構成要件行為所造成的不正競爭風險，直接而實質侵害到的卻是市場的公平競爭秩序，亦即侵害到市場競爭者在相關經濟資源或公務資訊取得機會之平等，而應為社會法益保護之範疇。 本文主要援引德國學者Hefendehl的集體法益學說，並分別由國家與社會制度信賴法益學說檢驗系爭條款之保護法益。俟法益定位完成，再將實務上主要爭點嘗試以此種社會法益檢視，亦即以侵害市場自由競爭秩序下的機會平等之經濟制度信賴法益角度重新思考，發現與實務見解並不相同，是以，本文最後將針對這些爭點各別釐清並給予建議，期能對未來條文之修法有所幫助。