近年來，資訊社會的典型現象紛紛浮現，資訊量爆炸對於人類在經濟、政治與文化等生活各層面上的重大影響性，皆促使人類對於網路頻寬和傳輸速度的渴求程度越來越強烈。於是，窄頻網路已無法再滿足龐大且多元的資訊傳輸，取而代之的是寬頻網路的應用。在許多國家陸續推動寬頻網路建置與接取政策的同時，也重新關注普及服務的定位以及其所能發揮的功能，開始思考是否可運用普及服務機制以達到寬頻網路普及接取的目標。OECD早在2003年就曾探討將寬頻網路接取制定為普及服務義務的先決條件。歐盟自2005年起也開始正式討論是否要修改普及服務指令以將寬頻網路的接取納入普及服務的義務當中。瑞士、芬蘭、英國和美國則已經陸續開始推行寬頻普及服務的相關政策。而我國國家通訊傳播委員會則於2007年開始相繼推動「村村有寬頻」與「部落(鄰)有寬頻」政策，要求普及服務提供者提供偏遠地區居民2 Mbps的寬頻網路接取服務。 然而，將寬頻接取定義為普及服務目前卻受到廣泛探討與爭論，最關鍵的問題就是寬頻網路究竟是不是資訊社會中的基本電信服務。因此，本研究旨在探討普及服務機制在各國推動寬頻網路建置與接取政策上的定位，以及目前寬頻普及服務的相關推動方式。這其中牽涉的範圍廣泛，包含寬頻普及服務接取速率的認定、政策推動單位、業者的範圍界定、經費來源的規劃與調整等，在在都牽動著國家寬頻網路的發展。 本研究歸納我國目前數據普及服務與寬頻政策之間的關係，並依據國外推動寬頻普及接取政策的綜合經驗，對於我國未來推動寬頻普及服務的政策提出以下研究建議：（一）確立我國寬頻普及服務的政策目標，政府應該將寬頻普及接取的目標納入「數位匯流發展方案」，確立在2012年之前可以讓我國所有家庭都能接取基本的寬頻網路服務；（二）整合各部會資源，由NICI負責統籌與協調各部會的力量與資源，最重要的是要求各部會配合以達到資源整合的效果；（三）政府與業者合力推動寬頻普及服務，數據普及服務提供者負責建置寬頻網路，政府則負責電腦設備或是網路教育訓練等的後續補助；（四）整合有線與無線技術達成目標；（五）考量是否挹注公共經費以促進寬頻建置的目標。 / With the advent of information society, people become eager for the greatest degree of bandwidth and highest transmission rate on the Internet. Obviously since narrow bandwidth can neither meet the service demands of the masses, nor transmit all data efficiently, broadband has taken on ever greater importance. When implementing policies in regard to broadband infrastructure and access, many countries start to pay their attention again to the role and function of universal service and the feasibility of promoting universal broadband access by universal service mechanism. Starting in 2003, OECD has debated the preconditions for widening the scope of universal service obligation to include broadband. The EU also began in 2005 the formal public consultation to discuss the possibility of revising Universal Service Directive to include broadband as part of universal service obligation. However, redefinition of the scope of universal service to include broadband now faces many challenges. Among them, whether broadband is an essential telecommunications service necessary for information society has become the most crucial issue. Therefore, this study aims to explore the role of universal service in policies of promoting broadband infrastructure and access, as well as current approaches to accelerate implementation of universal broadband access in different countries. Relevant issues include determination of data transmission rate, involvement of government and service providers, sources of funding, among other issues yet to be resolved. By comparison of the approaches among foreign governments with that of Taiwan, this study suggests the following: (1) The Government should include the goal of universal broadband access into its “Digital Convergence Development Plan,” providing every household in Taiwan access to basic broadband service by 2012. (2) NICI should take charge of coordinating resources among Governmental Departments so as to make effective use of all resources. (3) The Government and telecommunications operators should cooperate closely and strive to deliver broadband universal service. (4) Both wireline and wireless technologies should be fully utilized. (5) The role of public funding for this goal should be highly considered.

隨著電信自由化發展，我國電信市場已由公營獨佔變為競爭的局面，但高山、離島或偏遠地區，由於營收偏低或建設費用較高，電信業者在一般商業條件下，較無經營意願，極易造成偏遠地區通信建設落後及數位落差；即使業者正常經營，勢必大幅提高電信服務費用。如此，必然影響該偏遠地區之國民基本通信權益，故須輔以「電信普及服務制度」的政策，以照顧偏遠地區的弱勢族群。 我國電信普及服務制度自2001年6月實施迄今已屆5 年，本研究將從電信普及服務制度之理論基礎研析開始，以新公共服務之觀點針對我國電信普及服務制度提出探討研析，並經由文獻分析、參與觀察及深度訪談等研究方法，評估近年來我國電信普及服務之實施成效及衍生之相關問題，而進行理論及實務的分析和探討。 最後，針對我國電信普及服務制度之綜合研析，以作者的認知，試圖拋磚引玉，提出以下政策建議，以期使我國電信普及服務制度更趨完善周延，並作為我國電信普及服務制度未來規劃方向之參考： 一、 電信普及服務制度 應為我國電信自由化過程中，追求「效率與公平」的配套機制。 二、 以新公共服務觀點，電信普及服務應是政府及業者共同應該分攤的責任。 三、 電信普及服務之合理分攤原則，應以提供「電信服務」所創造的「公共利益」為共享主體，不宜將早期屬國營公司之海岸電台通信、教育推廣數據及社會福利補助等業務納入。 四、 歷年電信普及服務的實施成果及實施計畫之查核機制，僅有例行性的服務品質查核與成本稽核機制，未來應有更積極周延的獎勵誘因及激勵措施。 五、 檢討電信普及服務的實施範圍，應避免衝擊過大，宜採漸進方式調整為宜。 （一）不經濟公用電話宜採限縮於偏遠地區。 （二）應排除海岸電臺船舶遇險及安全通信服務為普及服務提供範圍，而改由政府部門編列預算負責推動。 （三）全國中小學校、公立圖書館之數據通信普及服務，宜採漸進方式限縮於偏遠地區。 （四）提高偏遠地區電信數據普及服務補助金額比例，初期可以寬頻未達之偏遠地區村里作為建設試辦點。 六、 應整合政府各單位有效資源，以建立更公平周延的電信普及服務制度。

過去電信事業強調無論任何一端用戶透過電話機、傳輸線路、交換機等網路連接至另一端用戶，進行點對點(end to end)語音或數據之通信時，基於網路不可分割之特性，進行整體固定網路設備投資相當龐大，且因具規模經濟特性而形成自然獨占；加以其多屬民生攸關之公用事業，又須具備一定之服務品質及可負擔之合理價格，始能提供不論居住何處之全國民眾使用，故大多由政府主導經營。 　　然隨著電信自由化來臨，民國八十五年七月一日電信解制，分為監理電信業務之電信總局及國營事業之中華電信公司，確立監管架構及電信業務開放以引進競爭市場。惟為避免新進業者會對更多需求及更可獲利的城市地區首先提供服務，而忽略了鄉村偏遠地區，形成吸脂作用(Cream skimming)。故顯然電信自由化後，儘管商業利益的考量是競爭市場存續的重要因素之一，然而為避免關切公共服務的精神隨之而消失，那麼政府如何適度藉入以求得其間的平衡性，這應屬必要的。 　　基本上，應以國民基本通信之概念考量普及服務之範圍，同時應基於公平及合理的原則下，以負擔得起且日常生活中有必要的電信服務；然由於在公平的、合理的、負擔得起、有必要性等充分條件下，仍須加上一定的「服務品質」為必要條件，才能使普及服務的精神顯露，特別在隨著電信科技發展、社會環境變遷及民眾需求，仍須作階段性不同之定義，才能符合普及服務的真正目的。 　　因此，本論文採用文獻探討、政策德菲法(Delphi method)及實例探討，從管制理論的基礎，說明管制因環境之所需，尤其當電信自由化之初，引入市場競爭之同時，適時的管制對於公平的競爭是有需要的；另再參酌美國、英國、澳洲、香港及法國等先進國家之電信普及服務機制，透過美國、英國、澳洲及香港等國家之電信監理機構之網站，及相關電信自由化之文獻，蒐集到各國對普及服務相關之管理方式與法規規定，歸納出各國對普及服務目標之界定，普及服務之提供者，成本計算方式，分攤普及服務之義務者及分攤方式等，再進行整理、分析與比較，嚐試提出一個適合國情的普及服務制度，並對實務執行所面對的問題提出建議，以供主管機關參考。 　　本論文結論重點為，除建立一套含理論及實務運作的電信普及服務機制外，為發現整理出相關問題如：(1)「電信事業普及服務基金」非為政府基金之管理，是否須要編列年度業務計畫及預算書，值得商榷。(2)就商業利益考量，固網業者收取申裝市內電話之「界外工料費」應無不可，然是否能適用普及服務補助的問題。(3)易將普及服務基金視為另一個社會安全或防災救助的課題，扭曲其設立之精神。(4)提供普及服務所產生之無形利益是否應納入棄置營收之計算。(5)海岸電台船舶遇險及安全通信服務是否納入普及服務之考量。 　　其政策建議重點則為：(1)為消彌外界之疑慮，並兼顧效率運作之原則，除必要之管理費用應撙節使用外，相關之收支帳目宜經由會計師簽證予以公開透明化。(2)為維護消費者之權利，裝置材料費用應有下降趨勢，應重新檢討並提出合理成本，訂定合理之收費方式。(3)社會安全或急難救助所經費，應由社會福利安全政策編列預算支應，以免增加電信業者之成本負擔，並轉價至最終消費者。(4)無形利益應可加以計算納入棄置營收項目內，可利用每一家或前五大業者平均的廣告效果估算；或利用消費者行為之抽樣問卷調查，求出潛在消費者及平均消費之貢獻，做為無形利益的推估。(5)可成立專案小組，針對海岸電台設備及維運費用等訂定效率化之衡量標準；或以公開招標方式，徵求自願投入之電信業者；或協調海巡暑整編至該單位。(6)必須建立一套成本資料管理及稽核制度，以增加核算資料的明確性。(7)考慮修法開放可以行動電話做為普及服務之提供，公開徵詢有興趣之行動電話業者，並於北、中、南區各找一處以行動電話提供普及服務之實驗。(8)第一類電信事業部分，可由普及服務管理委員會就經營效率性、虧損之持續性等相關因素，予以審核後得免予繳交；第二類電信事業部分，以經營語音單純轉售及網路電話兩項從事語音電話服務為主，衡酌經營差異程度，排除一定營業額以下者可免予繳交。 / In the past, in order to provide seamless end-to-end communications services for the end users, telecom enterprises that required cost-sunk expenditure, economies of scale and operated an indivisible network had been regarded as a naturally monopolistic business. Moreover, telecommunications as one of public services relevant to the people’s livelihood has to be provided for all nationals at an affordable price and a reasonable level of service quality. As a result, most telecom enterprises worldwide were operated and conducted by the Government. 　　Nevertheless, along with the global trend of telecom liberalization, on July 1 1996 our government reorganized the DGT into a sole telecom regulator and established the state-own holding company, CHT, to provide telecom services, with a view to build up a regulatory regime and to open the telecom market further. To avoid newcomers in a competitive environment tending to focus on high revenue growth telecommunication markets, such as metropolitan areas, resulting in the phenomenon of ‘cream skimming’ and in the impediment to the spirit of public services, there is a need for government intervention in the provision of telecom services. 　　Basically, the concept of universal telecommunications service shall be confined to the basic telecommunication services which are indispensable to every citizens and should be provided on reasonable request at an affordable price and a reasonable level of quality. However, universal telecommunications service might has different definitions over time so as to fulfill its policy objectives in each phase given the development of technologies and the changes in social environment. 　　Accordingly, by conducting Documentary-type method, Delphi method and Case Studies, this dissertation has illustrated with regulatory theory why regulation shall be based on the requirement of the environment. Particularly, during the early stages of telecom liberalization, regulatory involvement at right moment is required for creating a level-playing field when introducing competition. From the websites of several telecom regulators in advanced countries, e.g. US, UK, Australia, HK, etc., and some literatures on telecom liberalization, this dissertation has collected those countries’ management criteria and legal framework for universal service and summed up their universal service objectives, providers, cost calculation methods and obligation sharing mechanisms. Then through a further analysis and comparison, it has tried to propose a universal service mechanism that might better fit our national conditions and offer the authority concerned some practical recommendations for the implementation issues. 　　In conclusion, this dissertation has built up a universal telecommunications service mechanism based on both theoretical analyses and practical considerations. Besides, it has included some key findings as follows: (1) Given the fact that the universal service fund is not one kind of government funds, shall it still be managed through annual official planning and budgeting? (2) From a viewpoint of profitable undertaking, a fixed network operator might want to charge a remote subscriber outside its service area for some extra facilities fees for service installation. This might be reasonable under commercial terms. But shall we allow such extra fees to be subsidized by the universal service fund? (3) Some people might regard the purpose of the universal service fund as an issue on social security or emergency rescue, and hence distort the spirit of universal service fund. (4) It is questionable whether intangible benefits, resulting form the provision of universal service, could be grouped into revenue forgone. (5) Is it appropriate for an operator to recover its costs of providing coastal radio maritime emergency and safety communication services from the universal service fund? 　　Furthermore, it has given several key policy recommendations as follows: (1) For the sake of dispelling people’s doubts and managing the efficiency in universal service fund, all of the accounts of expenditures shall be open and transparent except that the administrative costs must be kept at minimum. (2) In order to protect consumers’ rights, the equipment installation fee should follow a downward trend and must be cost based. (3) To avoid increasing the burden of telecom operators whose costs are ultimately entailed by consumers, budgets for social security or emergency rescue should be supported by national social welfare policies. (4) Intangible revenue that might be calculable by evaluating average effect of advertisement of each operator or top five operators should be grouped into revenue foregone. Or it may be possible to make a sampling survey of consumers’ behavior, finding the average contribution of each potential customer so as to estimate intangible revenue. (5) Grouping a task force to revise measuring criteria for the facilities and maintenance costs in coastal radio services efficiently. Besides, bids for these services may be opened for volunteers, or be coordinated with and incorporated into the function of Coast Guard Administration, Executive Yuan. (6) It is necessary to build up a mechanism of data management and auditing so as to increase the accountability of re-calculating data. (7) To think over the feasibility that mobile phone can be used for the provision of universal service as well by revising the relevant laws, and then in North, Middle, and South Taiwan, try to conduct a field trial in each area for providing universal service by using mobile phone. (8) For Type I telecommunications businesses, universal service committee can exempt them from universal service obligations with the concerns about their operation efficiency and the duration of losing money, and so on. For Type II telecommunications businesses, only those operating voice communications services, including simple resale and internet phone services, should bear the obligations, but whether they need to make contributions to the universal service fund or not can be decided through the evaluation of their business performance.