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.

本論文探討智庫的定義及起源，並依其性質與功能將美國的智庫做分類，另介紹著名的美國外交智庫。本論文亦說明美國外交政策的決策環境，探討為何智庫得以參與美國外交政策，以及參與決策過程的方式，並討論智庫在決策過程中所扮演的角色以及智庫在美國興盛的原因。最後分析智庫在發展上可能受到的限制，及探討智庫如何因應未來的挑戰。 / This paper explores the definition and origin of think tanks, classifies American think tanks according to their nature and functions, and introduces some famous think tanks on US foreign policy. This paper also explains the decision-making environment of US foreign policy, discusses why think tanks can participate in the making of US foreign policy, and examines the roles of think tanks in the decision-making process and the reasons why think tanks flourish in the United States. This paper also tries to find out the development restrictions of American think tanks and explores how they meet future challenges.

智庫在美國外交政策之功能，包括：扮演政府和公眾之間的中介功能；對當前或是即將形成的議題、問題或提議進行認定和評估；將理念和問題轉換為政策議題；在政策辯論時發揮咨詢和獨立自主意見；在政策形成過程中提供相關人士交換意見和訊息的建設性論壇。 隨著網際網路的發達，美國主要智庫的研究成果均披露於網站上，不但其研究成果更廣為人知，影響力更為擴大，在美國之外隨時可透過各智庫網站獲得該智庫的最新政策建議。尤其在1990年代末，美國重要智庫開始增設有關中國研究或亞太研究之項目，使外界可以透過網路同步得知美國智庫對中國政策、亞太政策、兩岸關係之最新訊息。美國智庫研究成果方資訊化已成為研判美國對華政策時，不可或缺的主要來源。 本研究透過大量英文一手資料的分析，希望能達成本研究的意義，即更全面、更準確地了解美國智庫對華政策，以及對美國政府外交思維之影響，並提供台灣政軍決策者在研判美國和北京對台政策時之參考。

本論文以我國對美外交工作中的對美智庫工作為標的，以政策評估之角度，對此項工作之有效性進行評估。 針對我國對智庫工作進行政策評估，其主要核心即在於討論我國影響美國智庫的能力，及美國智庫影響美國政府之能力等兩者，以求瞭解對智庫進行工作，是否最後能產生實現特定之國家目標的結果。整個影響過程，包括了我國□美國智庫□美國政府等三個主體，其中箭頭代表「影響」，整個三主體兩階段過程能夠順利建立，則代表美國政府之友我政策產出，我國的特定國家目標得以實現。為對上述兩階段進行檢視，在研究架構上本論文採取了政策評估研究為整體研究脈絡，並以決策研究及統計研究進行各次級項目的細部討論，以逐一檢視三主體兩階段過程中，每一段是否能夠成立。 首先，本研究則針對台美關係之歷史脈絡及美國目前重要智庫分佈情形進行彙整，並針對傳統上將學者及智庫分為紅隊及藍隊之恰當性進行討論。之後，則先由各項理論及影響管道等兩方面，針對智庫影響政府政策之能力（三主體兩階段架構之後段）進行探討。在論證此階段之影響力確實存在後，緊接著則針對國家影響智庫之能力（三主體兩階段架構之前段）進行研究。透過學理及統計分析等兩方面之研究結果均顯示，我國對美國智庫之工作，確實已對該智庫之言論取向及活動內容，發揮明確之影響力。吾人可稱三主體兩階段之影響架構確實存在，我國對智庫之工作確實可達成影響美國政策之政策目的，就本研究而言，在政策有效性之評估上，應已合乎要求。 在確認三主體兩階段之影響力均存在後，本研究彙整各階段研究之結果，並據以擬定智庫工作之模式：「台灣模式（Taiwan Model）」。 / This is a policy evaluation which takes Taiwan’s U.S. policy as it is enacted through U.S. think tanks as the subject for evaluation. The purpose is to evaluate the effectiveness of this policy in practice In evaluating Taiwan’s work on American think tanks, the core aim is to evaluate Taiwan’s ability to effect U.S. think tanks and, in turn, the ability of U.S. think tanks to influence the U.S. government. Through this study observers will gain a sense of whether Taiwan’s work on U.S. think tanks is effective in terms if achieving specific national goals. For the purpose described above, this study firstly introduces the historical background to Taiwan-U.S. relations and makes a general survey in the current situation of U.S. think tanks. It also discusses the appropriateness of the classifications “red team” and “blue team”. In the following chapters, I examine the ability of U.S. think tanks to influence the U.S. government through both theoretical and channel-observing approaches. I also examine the Taiwan government’s ability to influence U.S. think tanks through both theoretical and statistical approaches. I conclude that this effectiveness exists, and that Taiwan’s work on U.S. think tanks can survive policy evaluations in terms of effectiveness. In the last chapter, I collate the results from each stage of this study, and frame a model for work on think tanks. I call this the “Taiwan Model”.

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。