許多學者認為開放市場、降低管制是提升電視產業競爭力的不二法門，然而，國家介入與電視產業績效之間的實證研究仍相當缺乏，因此本研究的目的旨在討論國家干涉程度和節目產製能力間的關係。本研究採用歷史制度途徑的分析，解釋同樣被歸類為發展型國家的台灣與韓國，為何在1997年金融風暴後選擇不同的轉型路徑。研究結果顯示，台灣電視產業因國家干涉程度低，放任市場過度競爭而導致產製能力下滑，另一方面，韓國電視產業則受惠於國家高度干預，因寡佔結構而有效維持產製能力和經營績效。總結而言，本研究證明韓國在發展型國家的基礎上成功轉型升級，而台灣則是揚棄原本的發展模式，向新自由主義靠近。 / Many researchers have often suggested that the best way to improve broadcast industry growth is always through deregulation and opening up to competition. However, research which has empirically documented the link between state intervention in market and performance of broadcast industry is scant. Therefore, the aim of this research attempts to explore how state intervention and program productivity are related. Historical institutionalism has been used to explain the different transformation paths that Taiwan and Korean, the typical examples of the developmental states, have taken after financial crisis in 1997. Results of this study showed competitive market structure shaped by weak state intervention had contributed to productivity decline in Taiwan. And, strong state intervention in Korea did lead to stable program productivity and better industry performance. To conclude, the Korean developmental state is successfully transformed, on the other hand, Taiwan has transformed developmental state into neoliberal state.