本研究為探究鄉村型生態社區實踐及推動的關鍵因素，綜合質化研究與量化研究，以「文獻分析」、「個案研究」及「專家問卷」為本研究之研究方法。首先以「文獻分析」透過社區總體營造及生態社區相關文獻的經驗與借鏡，彙整過去學術研究的寶貴經驗，探討推動生態社區的關鍵因素；再以「個案研究」釐清鄉村型生態社區的基礎資源及資源運用於永續功能實踐情況，探究社區轉化為永續經營的重要關鍵，並彙整推動生態社區之關鍵因素；再運用層級分析法之理論，歸納「文獻分析」及「個案研究」之研究成果，設計「專家問卷」，以社區的內部條件及外部支援資源為組成構面，建置推動鄉村型生態社區的關鍵因素指標架構第一階層為「A.政府」、「B.夥伴」、「C.社區團隊」、「D.社區環境」等四個層面，並歸納第二階層有「A1.生態社區人才培訓年齡」等二十個因素指標，並針對業界、政府部門、學界、社區等領域中之專家進行問卷調查，將回收之23份有效問卷利用專家決策分析軟體（Expert Choice 2000）進行統計之分析。 專家問卷調查分析結果得知推動鄉村型生態社區之層面首重「C.社區團隊」，權重為50.1﹪；關鍵因素整層級權重排序前五名為「C1.領導人」(17.5%)、「C2.組織團隊」(11.8%)、「D1.自然環境」(10.6%)、「C3.社區意識」(9.4%) 、「D2.人文環境」(7.7%)，表示專家認為社區領導者擁有積極態度與能力及社區內民眾參與度高以建立組織健全的架構，為最重要之成功因素，若再能凝聚社區意識與聚合社區居民的行動，實為推動生態社區之最主要關鍵，而鄉村中豐富的自然環境或社區內珍貴人文環境為推廣生態社區之重要條件，於生態社區發展之初，社區必須自我檢視以確立社區生態發展之項目。 根據文獻分析、個案研究及關鍵因素權重分析結果，本研究建議在推動鄉村型生態社區時是由社區自發性開始，策略應由下而上形成，社區能自我成長，並考量外部因素，本研究分別提出社區、政府、夥伴等不同角色下之實踐與推動策略建議，供不同角色在推動生態社區時能參考並靈活且彈性的運用。 / Aimed at researching key factors for rural ecological community development, this study integrates qualitative research and quantitative research and uses “Literature Analysis”, “Case Research” and “Expert Surveys” research methods. Firstly, through “literature analysis”, the study analyzes previous records of community development and ecological community to learn from valuable experiences and organize the findings of previous academic researches for the discussion of key factors for ecological community development. Then, through “case research”, the study attempts to understand the implementation status of the use of rural ecological community basic resources in sustainable development, investigate the key factors for sustainable community development and archive the key factors for ecological community development. Next, using the concepts of Analytic Hierarchy Process, the research results of the “literature analysis” and “case research” are inducted in the design of “Expert Survey”. Using the internal factors and external support resources of the community to form the hierarchy, the key factor indicator framework for rural ecological community development is established with the first level comprising of four factors, “A. Government”, “B. Partner”, “C. Community Team”, and “D. Community Environment” while the second layer inducted over 20 factor indicators such as “A1. Ecological Community Talent Development Age”. Targeted at experts from industries, government departments and academic institutions and communities, 23 sets of effective surveys were collected and statistically analyzed using expert decision analysis software, Expert Choice 2000. From the survey analysis findings, “C. Community Team” has the greatest weight of 50.1%. The top 5 factors in the key factor hierarchy weight are “C1. Leader (17.5%)”, “C2. Organization Team (11.8%)”, “D1. Natural Environment (10.6%)”, “C3. Community Awareness (9.4%)”, and “D2. Cultural Environment (7.7%)”. This finding shows that experts believe that the most important successful factors should be a community leader with active attitudes and competency, and a community with high public participation levels in building an organized structure. If community awareness can be raised and actions of the community coordinated, these will become the main factors in developing ecological communities. As critical factors of ecological community development, the community should perform self-reviews on the rich natural environment or valuable cultural environment of the rural community during the beginning to establish objectives for the ecological development. According to the results from literature analysis, case studies and key factor weight analysis, this study proposes that in the development of rural ecological community, the development should be spontaneous, strategies should be formed from the bottom-up approach, allow for the growth of the community and take external factors into consideration. This study also proposes implementation and promote strategies and suggestions for the different roles such as community, government and partners, providing reference for the different roles in the development of the ecological community and allow flexible application of the information.

台灣筆記型電腦代工廠商從1990年代開始，經過多年努力已經成為全球最重要的筆記型電腦代工業者，掌握超過90%的市場。然而近年代工廠商卻面臨低毛利，以及蘋果替代品和歐美市場景氣衝擊而腹背受敵以致出貨大幅下滑的困境。本研究希望藉由某個案A公司的立場，探討台灣筆記型電腦轉型平板電腦，如何在總體及產業環境下，藉由本身優劣勢的分析，配合環境的各種機會與威脅，建立一個創新而本身可以掌控的雲端運算生態體系，同時帶來相對獲利較佳的營運模式。 本研究透過檢視總體環境的雲端運算趨勢與全球英語的發展，以及分析筆記型電腦、平板電腦、印度軟體代工產業、以及蘋果iPad的商業模式等產業環境因素，整理出台灣筆記型電腦代工廠所面對的環境機會與威脅。透過對個案公司的各種內在優劣勢分析，作出以下對台灣筆記型電腦代工業者的策略建議： 1. 降低筆記型電腦代工比重，尤其是適度減少Ultrabook投入，以挪出資源給新產品。 2. 增加伺服器等相關產品線的投入，轉型為雲端硬體供應商。 3. 發展在雲端運算與相關生態體系業者的合作夥伴關係，包括與印度軟體代工業者的合作。 4. 選擇平板電腦適合的行業用產業，先從小範圍的行業用雲端運算，例如雲端英語教學，作為培養實力與經驗的起點，藉以熟悉雲端運算的商業模式，同時尋求保持良好的營運利潤水準。 / After 20 years of endeavor, Taiwanese notebook PC, or Laptop, ODMs have gained more than 90% of world share in terms of annual notebook PC shipment. However, these ODMs have been facing detrimental challenges which the profit margin is getting slimmer, and even worse is their customers have been losing markets due to both the world economy downturn, and severe challenges from Apple’s so-called “iDevice” since 2010. Through the approach the case study of a notebook PC ODM who is diversifing from notebook PC to tablet PC industry, and through SWOT analysis, I hope to figure out some feasible solution to bail the ODMs out with some innovative and profitable business models. By scrutinizing the trends of Cloud Computing and Global English under the macro environment, and the current industry status of notebook PC, tablet PC, Indian software ODMs, Apple’s iPad and its business model, we intend to figure out the overall opportunities and threats from the macro environment for the notebook PC ODMs who are keen to diversify into tablet PC field. Also, through the research to identify the internal strengths and weakness of the case company, the summary and suggestion to Taiwanese notebook PC ODMs are as follows: 1. Lower the percentage of notebook PC lines among their products portfolio. Ultrabook is not suggested to have heavy investment on. 2. Allocate sufficient resources to develop cloud-related equipments such as servers and tablet PCs. 3. Develop the crirical compentence set which are necessary for Cloud Computing, through the close partnership with major ecosystem participating companies. The cooperation between Taiwanese hardware ODMs and Indian software ODMs are highly recommended. 4. Start with one small but manageable ecosystem, such as English teaching through cloud, and get familiar with the business model and ways of sustaining profits.

在後數位化時代，有無數的數位服務生態圈在爭奪著有限的市場。而要贏得這場競爭最好的方式就是遵照服務設計的理論來滿足顧客的渴望。本研究期望運用科技化的輔助方式來幫助服務設計者建立一個以顧客主導邏輯為基礎的區塊鏈服務生態系統。在這個方法裡面，我們必須要解譯服務設計者的服務價值主張，並且找出與之相關的價值活動來作為之後服務設計的樣本。最後透過服務渴望度、創新度以及利害關係人認可程度三個面向來衡量整個價值結構設計是否可行並有發展潛力。 / In the post-digital era, there are countless digital ecosystems to fight for the limited market share. Using service design theory to fulfill customers’ desire is the best way to win the competence. This paper proposes a technology facilitating approach to help service designers configure their blockchain-based service ecosystem with customer-dominate logic. We rephrase the service value proposition inputted by service designers and filtering related value activities as the model of designed ecosystem. To make the decentralized ecosystem become a destination, we have to examine the value configuration from three different perspectives which are desirability, disruption, and consensus. These three dimensions provide service designers with a method that can help assess if a configuration is making sense or not. After all, this paper is aimed to support service designers to create a digital destination ecosystem by recommending activities and evaluating score of ecosystem configuration.

區塊鏈是一種高可行性的基礎建設技術，不僅能提高效率、降低建設成本，其交易透明化和避免篡改等特性更使之得以被廣泛應用。由於資訊科技蓬勃發展，互聯網革命伴隨著客戶主導邏輯的興起，平台思維對於服務設計而言早已不敷使用。因此，區塊鏈數位生態系統將成為下一代服務設計的解決方案，強調生態系統中利益相關者的價值共創欲目標追求。 以現況而言，仍有許多服務無法在現實中發展或得以維持，網路效應的影響在數位環境中是極為強大且不容忽視的。我們的研究旨在由此出發衡量區塊鏈數位生態系統的成敗。我們提出的方法能使設計師基於理解關鍵多數的實現和網絡效應水平的大小，來瞭解其設計的可適應性與競爭力，這是一個數位生態系統能否突破真空的關鍵。此方法還提供如何提升設計的指南，使服務設計能更有機會地進入網路效應的爆炸階段。 / Blockchain is an infrastructure technology not only restricted to the financial industry, but also feasible and affordable to facilitating the operation of service provision with efficiency, lower construction cost, information transparency and non-falsified characteristics. By virtue of the information technology booms swiftly, the revolution which Internet brings about, accompanies with the rise of customer-dominant logic, platform thinking is no longer sufficient for the service design. Consequently, blockchain-based digital ecosystem becomes a solution of the next generation’s service design aspect which stresses on value co-creation among all the stakeholders of the ecosystem and proceeds to the same proposition. However, there are many service provisions unable to launch or sustain in reality. The network externality of the Internet is the most powerful, indispensable and un-negligible effect in the digital environment. Our study aims to estimate and measure the success or failure of blockchain-based digital ecosystems from this perspective. We propose a method which enables blockchain-based digital ecosystem designers to comprehend with the adaptability and competitiveness of the fulfillment of the critical mass and the examination of network effect level. They are crucial to pass through the vacuum stage of ecosystem lifetime. The method also provides guides about how to improve the designs in order to have a greater opportunity to get into the explosion stage of ecosystem lifetime.

京都大学 / 0048 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(地域研究) / 甲第22558号 / 地博第261号 / 新制||地||99(附属図書館) / 京都大学大学院アジア・アフリカ地域研究研究科東南アジア地域研究専攻 / (主査)教授 岩田 明久, 教授 竹田 晋也, 教授 山越 言, Prachya Musikasinthorn / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Area Studies / Kyoto University / DGAM

京都大学 / 0048 / 新制・論文博士 / 博士(地域研究) / 乙第12824号 / 論地博第16号 / 新制||地||57(附属図書館) / 31311 / 京都大学大学院理学研究科生物科学専攻 / (主査)教授 木村 大治, 教授 池野 旬, 准教授 山越 言 / 学位規則第4条第2項該当 / Doctor of Area Studies / Kyoto University / DFAM

京都大学 / 0048 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(経済学) / 甲第21288号 / 経博第576号 / 新制||経||286(附属図書館) / 京都大学大学院経済学研究科経済学専攻 / (主査)教授 諸富 徹, 教授 岡田 知弘, 准教授 長谷川 誠 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Economics / Kyoto University / DFAM

本研究採用「商業生態系統」觀點，以「利基者」的角度出發，來探討利基型軟體公司經營模式的變遷。研究對象為屬於「利基者」的資訊安全軟體公司，以及其所處的環境。研究分為「歷史分析」與「探索性個案研究」兩大部分。首先，本研究以「歷史分析」作為前導研究，探討資訊安全軟體由1986年至2007年的發展沿革，並釐清防毒軟體廠商、防火牆軟體廠商，以及入侵偵測/防禦軟體廠商所處的商業生態系統，以及廠商在其中的角色。此外，在歷史分析中，本研究也探討了主要商業生態系統之間的關係。而「探索性個案研究」，則選擇了五個成功的資訊安全軟體公司，以及五個失敗的資訊安全軟體公司，探討這些廠商在1986年至2000年之間經營模式的變遷，以了解成功及失敗的因素為何。此外，也描述繼續存活的成功廠商，如何在2001年之後，因應環境「擾動」而動態調整其經營模式。 在「歷史分析」的部份，本研究首先發現，資訊安全軟體自1986年開始出現，此時的資訊安全軟體廠商，主要為防毒軟體廠商，而廠商在「個人電腦商業生態系統」以及「區域網路商業生態系統」中扮演「利基者」的角色。在1994年後，「Internet商業生態系統」蓬勃發展，除了防毒軟體廠商之外，防火牆軟體廠商以及入侵偵測軟體廠商開始出現。而資安軟體廠商在「Internet商業生態系統」中扮演「利基者」的角色。之後，資訊安全軟體廠商逐漸形成了一個「邊界安全商業生態次系統」。在這個「次系統」中，不同的廠商分別扮演了次系統中的「關鍵者」、「支配者」，以及「利基者」。另一方面，三個「主系統」之間，存在「演替」的現象，後者的重要性，逐漸超越前者。而到了2001年之後，由於環境中的劇烈「擾動」，產生了新的生存空間，也改變了既有「物種」的「種間關係」。而另一方面，主要商業生態系統中「關鍵者」的跨入，也嚴重壓縮了既有「利基者」的生存空間。 「探索性個案研究」中，本研究又分為「規範性個案研究」與「描述性個案研究」兩部分。「規範性個案研究」探討五個成功的資訊安全軟體公司，包括Symantec、Trend Micro、McAfee、Check Point，以及Internet Security Systems(ISS)，在1986年至2000年之間，調整經營模式的動態過程，並與五個失敗的公司，包括ACSI、ESaSS、EliaShim/eSafe、Raptor，以及Axent進行比較。研究首先發現，成功的「利基者」，充分「借助」了「關鍵者」的資源，包括「技術」、「夥伴」、「聲譽」，並透過學習，運用關鍵者的「知識」，提升組織的能力。其次，成功的「利基者」，都能建立以自己為中心的「商業生態次系統」，包括「通路次系統」或是「技術平台次系統」。此外，成功的「利基者」，也都能及時參與新興的商業生態系統，並察覺商業生態系統「演替」(亦即「消長」)的狀況，進而調整參與的重心。而失敗的五個「利基者」，均於2000年之前被其他公司購併，主要因為較欠缺這些作為，或在這些方面未能成功。「描述性個案研究」則描述在2001年之後繼續存活的成功「利基者」，如何因應環境「擾動」與其他廠商行為的改變，動態調整經營模式。這些廠商調整經營模式，以鞏固既有的生存空間，並掌握新的生存空間。同時，也多方參與由不同的「關鍵者」所主導，未來可能成為「主流設計」的技術架構。 綜合來說，成功的利基型軟體公司，由創立開始，隨著成長的過程，「參與」以其他關鍵者為中心的商業生態系統，同時也致力於「建立」以自己為中心的商業生態系統。「參與」及「建立」二者與時並進，並適時調整，利基者才得以維持長久生存。 / This study takes the view of niche players to explore their business model changes in the software business ecosystem. Software firms in the information security software industry and their environments are selected as research context. The research is comprised of two main parts: a historical analysis and an exploratory case study. The historical analysis serves as a pilot study, in which information security software industry’s historical development is scrutinized to clarify which business ecosystems these security software firms, including antivirus software firms, firewall software firms, and intrusion detection/prevention software firms, participate in as they grow, as well as these firms’ roles within the business ecosystems. Relationships between different busines ecosystems are also studied in the historical analysis. In the exploratory case study, five successful security software firms and five failed security software firms are selected as case companies. The case study explores how successful firms and failed firms, from 1986 to 2000, differ in the way they changed their business models, in order to understand why successful firms remain in existence after 2000. The case study also describes how these surviving firms have, responding to “disturbance” in the environments, been adjusting their business models dynamically since 2001. The historical analysis reveals that the “PC business ecosystem”, the “LAN (local area network) business ecosystem”, and the “Internet business ecosystem” are involved as security software firms grow. Information security software firms have participated in the “PC business ecosystem”, when antivirus software was brought to the world in 1986. Antivirus software firms played the role of “niche players” in the “PC business ecosystem” at that time. Later when local area network was getting prevalent, a few antivirus firms participated in the “LAN business ecosystem”, playing the role of “niche players” as well. When the Internet commercialized around 1994, firewall software firms and intrusion detection software firms emerged. All participating information software firms played the role of “niche players” in the “Internet business ecosystem”. In 1996, a “sub-system”—“perimeter security sub-system” —was formed within the “Internet business ecosystem” by various security software firms and hardware companies. This “sub-system” had its own “keystones”, “dominators”, “hub landlords”, and “niche players”. In addition, “ecosystem succession” phenomenon is observed between the three “main system” —the “PC business ecosystem”, the “LAN business ecosystem”, and the “Internet business ecosystem”. Importance of the latter gradually surpassed the former. Furthermore, “disturbance” has emerged since 2001, creating new living space, but at the same time altered the “inter-species relationship” between existing species. Some “keystones” in the main ecosystems turned into “dominators”, highly decreased existing niche players’ living space. The exploratory case study is divided into a “normative case study” and a “descriptive case study”. In the “normative case study”, five successful security software firms, including Symantec, Trend Micro, McAfee, Check Point, and Internet Security Systems (ISS) are compared with five failed firms—ACSI, ESaSS, EliaShim/eSafe, Raptor, and Axent in the way they adjusted their business models from 1986 to 2000. Evidences revealed that successful niche players sufficiently leveraged resources provided by keystones. Resources include technologies, partners, and reputation. Successful niche players also learn from keystones to acquire knowledge, which further improves niche players’ organization capabilities. In addition, successful niche players are capable of building up their own “sub-systems,” which can be “channel sub-systems” or “technological platform sub-systems.” Furthermore, successful niche players, in time, participate in every promising business ecosystems, and sense the “ecosystem succession” phenomenon when it takes place to adjust their efforts on different business ecosystems. Five unsuccessful case companies fail to achieve similar accomplishments. Consequently, all of them have been acquired or merged by other firms by 2000. Meanwhile, in the “descriptive case study,” I describe how five successful firms keep surviving after 2001, adjusting their business models to secure existing living space and seize emerging opportunities. These successful niche players also participated in all information security architectures proposed by different keystones, expecting that one of these architectures will turn out to be the “dominant design” in the future. Overall, successful niche players, as they grow, participate in business ecosystems led by other keystones, and build up their own business ecosystem as well. They advance and adjust both their “participating” and “builing up” activities to secure long-term survival.

今 (2008) 年，全球規模排名前三大的電腦展，從1月開始美國拉斯維加斯的CES展、3月的德國漢諾威的CeBiT展，到6月在台北的Computex展，數千家之參展廠商，數十萬之買主與參觀人士，不約而同，大家的主訴求都是「綠色」與「節能」。向來，三大電腦展都是未來產品的風向球，加上從美國前副總統高爾的紀錄片「不願面對的真相」看到地球暖化現象日益嚴重，石油價格也不斷再創歷史新高，的確讓人感到這個世界將變得更為綠色，當人們愈來愈重視自己居住的這個環境與資源，也宣告「綠色產品、綠色消費」的時代正式來臨。 近年來一波波的綠色浪潮，如同過去十餘年間的網路興起，所產生巨大的改變一般。全球環保意識覺醒，尤以歐盟一向以高環保標準為最，陸續在2005年8月起推行的三大環保指令：WEEE(回收化)、RoHS(無毒化)、EuP(節能化)，超過80％的環境衝擊都跟產品設計有緊密關聯；是故，整合環境考量因素而成綠色產品的生態化設計作法，將會是企業最有效的方法。 上述WEEE 及RoHS兩項已於2006 年7月1日後，正式對輸出到歐盟各國的產品中全面實施管制，而日本、韓國、中國等國及美國(部分州)等，亦在2007年初立法通過並已實施，此股全球化之綠潮，已是勢不可擋；第三項的EuP (Energe using Product)「耗能使用產品之生態化設計指令」，歐盟各國已大多立法制定完成，部分國家還一併通過違規罰則，預計在2009年第一季起開始啟用，屆時勢必又將再度啟動第三回合的環保大挑戰。 我國對歐盟之貿易額佔了總體的比重極大，於2007年，我國出口到歐盟各國之電機、電子產品等金額超過逾NT$3,000億，企業也決不容忽視這廣大的市場商機。本研究的個案公司向來對環保意識相當重視，亦積極地關注在永續發展與環保議題上，所設計製造的綠色產品也行銷全球；現今的設計趨勢都以綠色、節能為導向，身處電子、電機產業的一員，面臨這項嚴峻之挑戰，更需即早因應，通過這些環保規範檢測，才能確保產品順利銷往歐盟。 本研究乃透過個案公司於過去三、四年中，利用 6 Sigma 的DMAIC循環改善手法，搭配ISO 9000/14000品質/環境管理系統以有效整合，組成專案團隊運作，成功導入6 Sigma WEEE / RoHS等專案，且比2006年7月1日的法定實施期限日，提早一季的時間完成歐盟WEEE及RoHS所有綠色產品之設計，並在符合法定時程/品質要求/客戶滿意等情況下順利出貨。 爰此，以綠色設計為整體考量因素，建置成一套標準化的流程機制，應用到EuP新環保規範中，進行產品節能、生命週期等多項評估，提升生態化設計能力。EuP雖與RoHS/WEEE的指令訴求內容互異，但本著6 Sigma RoHS過去分析及改善等手法，藉由嫻熟運作之科學管理模式，來縮短研發時程；目標為：提早一季時間完成產品設計，且品質符合環保規範驗證之出貨準備；期間雖會遭遇諸多問題與困難，但以6 Sigma經驗豐富之優秀成員組成的團隊，將採絕佳默契、合作無間的精神，順利於今年底達成任務，也為個案公司大幅提升環保戰力之全球競爭優勢。 關鍵字：限用有害物質指令、耗能使用產品指令、生態設計、國際標準組織、六標準差專案管理。 / In the world’s top three exhibitions of the electronic industry this year - namely CES of Las Vegas in January, CeBIT of Hanover in March, and Computex of Taipei in June, the main theme is the same: Green Technology and Energy Saving Products. Mr. Al Gore’s ‘Inconvenient Truth’ has unfolded future disasters caused by global warming, together with recent oil price hikes over US$140 a barrel, all these environmental and energy crisis have hastily ushered in the ‘Green Product Epoch.’ The European Union led the wave of Green Products by issuing the WEEE (Waste Electrical Electronic Equipment) directives in August 2005 which aimed at reducing E/E waste disposal through reuse, recycle and recovery, followed by the RoHS (Restriction of Hazardous Substance) directives enforced on July 1, 2007. EuP (Energy using Product) is the latest set of directives which will be implemented in 2009. Since more environmental impacts relate to product design, the green product ecological design incorporating environmental factors is most effective method. These regulations will greatly affect members of global E.E product supply. Taiwan had a big trade count with EU in the past time, so it will be caused more impacted as well. Therefore, many countries have regulated new national standards, many Taiwanese firms are making great efforts on the issues of Eco Design for energy saving to meet the trend on environment protection as earlier as possible and to provide operational producers for the business toward green global supply chain. For enterprises to implement environmental management system and to establish green product design and production by ISO9000 / ISO 14000 systems, and there are many procedures, validation and testing need to by 6 Sigma DMAIC improvement methodology. This case study proposes a model to include the RoHS green product into quality system successfully in 2 years ago, next case is provided to verify the model and justify how a firm can efficiently use the proposed model and empirical experience to meet product certification requirement into the system. The findings of this research can support other enterprises to implement appropriate model to integrate green product with framework of ISO9000/14000 quality/environment management system by 6 Sigma process. This is also suitable for a firm to upgrade its management system to meet various green requirements as WEEE, RoHS and EuP. The study is still enphasised many Taiwan manufacturers are tempted by the success of 6 Sigma in the western world and are now in the process of introducing 6 Sigma into their organizations. The push to further reduce costs has urged the firms to use 6 Sigma to regain their competitive positions in the global economy. Keywords: RoHS, EuP, Eco Design, ISO, 6 Sigma Managment

過去的行動通訊產業價值鏈一直是由運營商業者所主導，運營商業者以透過建立專屬開發平台的方式，逐漸形成以其為核心的封閉花園（Walled Garden）生態體系，並控制價值鏈中整體利潤的分配，而產業中包括手機製造商、內容供應商及軟體開發商等其他業者皆只能遵循其所制定之遊戲規則。 然而，隨著應用與內容、終端裝置、平台至行動網路等各種產業之開放趨勢驅使之下，在3G時代之後的行動上網價值鏈中，能夠成功匯集終端用戶與開發者的廠商，才有資格成為價值鏈的新興主導者，而以往運營商業者透過封閉式平台掌握產業價值鏈主導權的方式，更開始面臨來自各方業者的挑戰。 2007年11月由Google及開放式手機聯盟（OHA）所推出的Android開放式平台，更因此造成行動通訊產業生態環境產生重大的改變。從Google 把代表著網際網路自由與開放特性的Android平台及相關配套策略推入行動通訊產業之後，即吸引眾多廠商加入開發，產業中廠商之間的競合關係從此將更為複雜，運營商業者更是首當其衝面臨失去主導權的地位，甚至將淪為僅提供行動網路傳輸數據資料的笨重水管（dumb pipe）角色；然而，由Android所形成的產業開放生態環境一方面亦意味著許多新機會的產生，對於長期處於產業壟斷地位的運營商業者而言，如何因應Android平台並將之轉化為轉型的動力，將是其未來發展所面臨的最大挑戰課題。 本研究認為，運營商業者應以本身擁有的優勢（行動網路、終端用戶資訊、金流機制等）為基礎，並依各自發展利基與市場定位考量選擇利用Android平台發展不同之因應策略，可大致分為建立自有Android-based終端裝置、與Android相容的自有應用服務平台（service platform）以及與Android相容的自有作業系統等。而本研究藉由兩運營商業者之個案研究後發現，運營商業者建立與Android相容的自有應用服務平台及作業系統應為較佳之發展策略，除較能發揮本身的優勢之外，並得以掌握終端用戶使用體驗及開發社群，進而擴大用戶基礎，建立以運營商業者為核心的開放式生態系。 / In the past, mobile operators were predominant in the value chain of mobile communication industry. They created a so-called “Walled Garden” ecosystem in the industry through the development of proprietary platforms and controlled the overall allocation of profits in the value chain. Other players in the industry, including handset manufacturers, content providers and software developers had to comply with the rules set by the mobile operators. However, with the advent of open in applications and contents, user devices, platforms to mobile networks, in the wake of 3G mobile internet value chains, the vendors which are capable of converging end-users and developers, are able to lead the value chain. In the meanwhile, operators who controlled the industry value chain through closed platforms would begin to face challenges from vendors everywhere. In November of 2007, Google and Open Handset Alliance (OHA) introduced Android open platform, which exerted enormous influences in the ecosystem of mobile communication industry. When Google put Android, which stood for freedom and openness of the Internet, and other accompanying strategies into the industry, it attracted many vendors to participate in the development of Android platform. In the same time, collaborations among vendors in the industry became more complicated, and mobile operators were hit the hardest by losing the leader’s role or even relegated to the role of “Dump Pipe”, which only providing their mobile network for data traffic. However, the open industrial circumstances established by Android also created new opportunities, and in the future how mobile operators seize these opportunities and utilize Android platform would be the major challenge for themselves. In this study, the author argued that mobile operators must set their own advantages (including mobile networks, informations of end-users, money flow…etc.) as a foundation to develop their own niche and market positioning. The response strategies stemming from the foundation can be categorized into establishing Android-based devices, Android-based service platforms and Android-based operating systems. And through conducting case studies on two mobile operators, this study found out that to establish Android-based service platoforms and Android-based operating systems would be more suitable for mobile operators to utilize their advantages. In addition, they are able to control the end-user experiences and developer’s communities by these two approaches to enlarge their user base and build open ecosystems that are centered on mobile operators.