主管機關於發照機制之選擇及其執照核發決定，不僅是滲透到無線廣電產業管制架構的每一處縫隙，也反映出社會價值之優先序位。 從上個世紀以來，解除管制、數位科技與匯流現象高度衝擊了過去以執照為核心的無線廣電管制體系，也引發了一波管制革新之需求。形式上，無線廣電服務與電台執照是一系列權利義務與一套法律程序之化身，但從其功能面來看，執照之核發寓含至少有「註冊登記，分類管理」、「資源分配」、「限制市場參進與競爭」、「費用徵納」及「行為監管」等多元之目標功能。在英美，無線廣電執照之核發反映出該國無線廣電體系之社會角色定位，也反應出不同廣電體系下執照釋出及其頻率核配方式與結果之影響；管制革新也同樣令其重新認知了傳統執照制度中課予廣電業者公益義務之價格問題。 拍賣法在廣電頻譜及經營特許之應用上，除有先例可循外，亦被認為將可以矯正過去傳統以命令與控制模式支配下之執照核發制度之缺失，並將因此增加頻譜使用效率、提升全體福祉。本文因此透過英美等國之制度規範與經驗之分析，來檢驗此一說法。期待藉由瞭解拍賣法及其相關特殊背景下運作之優劣得失，及晚近崛起之相關替選方案，能提供未來政策制訂者在商業廣電執照管理之改革議題上有更豐富的視野。 儘管拍賣法在無線通訊領域應用上，現階段看來有相當誘人的成果，但本文認為，無線廣電事業有其特殊性，傳統頻率指配結合營業特許之執照體系，在使用拍賣法上，將可能產生近用、市場競爭、使用效率、內容多元等目標上無一討好之結果。再者，要達成自由市場或市場模式追求之效率目標，也並非單純使用拍賣法即可；相關配套措施之施行，同樣不可或缺。再者，我國無線廣電體制與英美更有不同，因此如何避免出現主管機關缺乏落實政策目標之能力，至關重要。 目前我國無線商業廣電執照核發制度之問題，可說在頻譜與內容管制雙重目標間迷失；問題焦點並不在於拍賣或審議制的二選一習題上，而應是致力於明確化分配標準、公開透明的競爭程序。此外，在引入市場機制於執照制度、期能促進效率與效能之同時，如何平衡執照管理中的私益與公益問題，仍是數位匯流時代無線廣電執照管理議題之核心。 / The authority's choice of a licensing mechanism and decisions thereof not only permeate nearly the entire regulatory fabric of our broadcast industries, but reflect our society's priorities. Licensing, nominally, is a mutual promise by the legal procedure; moreover, it is also about the registration, limited competition, distribution of resourses, charges, and the code of conduct. Since last century, broadcast laws and regulations have been bombarded with deregulation, digitization, and convergence, and that is conglomerated to push the reform of broadcast licensing. Simultaneously, the communications revolution, like U.K. or U.S., has thrown into question the value of imposing public interest obligations on radio and television broadcasters. Broadcast licensing seems to be so daunting that some people anoint a few constituencies with very pressing appeals, give them special leverage, and throw everything else back on the market. The auction apologists would argue that the government should set clear and definite standards and tough performance requirements to ensure that good systems and service will result, whoever is the highest bidder. In a pure auction era, where dollars are equated with public worth and maximizing dollars will be the most important criterion, there will be strong pressure to also base allocation and allotment decisions on this standard. The merit of auctions in wireless communications licensing may be conspicuous, but the broadcast industry is unique and more complicated so that the change of a licensing mechanism, from the marketplace approach, could be made that a revised public interest standard and obligations failed to address the fundamental challenge--to reassess the power of the regulator when implementing the public interest obligations. Auctions of radio spectrum or broadcasting concession, in other words, will generate their own serious problems that should not be underestimated or denied. On broadcast licensing of Taiwan, auctions will not be the life buoy to predicaments of broadcast industries; on the contrary, a top priority is to enhance the clearness and definition, transparency, and fair competition, whether the authority prefers imitating an auction to innovating the traditional selection procedure, beauty contest, through a more competitive approach or not. Besides, we shall inspecting the key point of whether or not competition and the public interest are compatible in the ongoing dialectic still, continuing to struggle toward a balance between private initiative and public oversight.