在民國50年代興建的臺北市整建住宅社區（簡稱整宅）歷經近50年的超值使用及增建、違建的超負荷累贅，已使整宅更新改建議題，成為都市統理者與追求社會公平正義的都市計畫研究學者關注的焦點，自民國70年代就取得整宅更新迫切需求的共識，為何又歷經近30年的整宅更新研究與推動，遲遲不見整宅更新的明顯成效，令無數關心社會邊緣弱勢族群整宅住戶的研究學者苦研其癥結，思謀對策提供都市統理者發揮統合公權力，展現整宅更新決策執行的有效方法。 本研究鑑於整宅更新議題的學術研究，有從公私協力方向做實施思考者，有從容積獎勵的提高思考者，有從政府強制公權力排除整宅更新障礙思考者，其思考方向都在以整宅之外部因素做思量，欠缺由整宅住戶社會網絡結構思考者。而本研究除了關注整宅更新的外部因素，更注重整宅住戶的內部因素，也就是摒棄外部與內部的區隔，融洽內外部的更新因素，統合思考整宅更新的全面因素。 本研究就臺北市整建住宅社區全體23處做研究母體，以臺北市信義區吳興街二期整建住宅社區為研究樣本，做社區個案全體住戶普查，以住戶基本社經資料、社區內外部統合社會網絡互動關係，社區住戶關注的影響更新關鍵因素為問卷調查內容，加上對整宅更新研究學者、更新主管機關承辦人員、更新實施建築業者、更新規劃諮詢推展機構、不動產估價師、建築師及稅務、法律等整宅更新有深入鑽研的相關產、經、學界做全面深度訪談，探尋整宅更新現階段的法令規範，實施推展狀況，研究成果與心得，求出整宅更新現階段的阻礙難行癥結，藉資本研究主題的深入瞭解，使整宅更新的困境較清晰浮現，俾以謀求解決對策。 本研究結論：一、整建住宅社區更新有集體行動困境 二、關鍵行動者有信任危機與道德風險 三、不確定風險的承擔機制薄弱 四、選配房屋意願不容易滿足 五、建築融資責任主體有爭議 六、期待利益超越現實 七、政府對整宅社區更新輔導態度消極 本研究提出建議：一、政府依法展現公權力，強制排除非理性反對更新者，積極參與更新推展過程 二、建立社區強聯結管道，透明更新作業系統，爭取社區認同與支持 三、建立風險管控機制 / The Taipei Resettled Tenement Communities were formed in the early years, However; Resettled projects are stalled mostly by reasons of － over usage, increasing buildings and buildings constructed without licenses. Those reasons make resettled tenement communities become to be a new issue to a lot of researchers and scholars. Renewal and /or reconstruction are urgent needed in these communities nowadays. According to academic researches of renewal issue, there are thinking points from public and private interests and bonus regulation, but there is no taking point from the social network of reconstruction. Not only the renewal elements of resettled tenement, but also the residents are the focus of my research. Through those elements deliberate the impacts of renewal. The research takes 21 resettled tenement communities of Taipei city as a population. During the communities the second period of the resettled tenement community in Wu-Xing St as a research sample carries out a census. From those residential backgrounds, interaction of social network in communities and the impacts of renewal as the questionnaire and makes an in-depth interview from people of industry, economy and academy. The key of the questionnaire consists of residential background, interaction of social network in communities, the impacts of renewal and the interview of specialists in industry, economy and academy. Finally, we can understand the bottleneck of renewal and the strategy for solution. It concluded in seven points: (1) the dilemma of collective actor. (2) the crisis from key actor. (3) the weak mechanism to uncertainly risk. (4) the unsatisfied willing of chosen house. (5) the debt in reconstructed finance. (6) the overtaking interests. (7) the passive attitude from government. It provided several suggestions that one is government should exclude irrational against in forced and positively to participate the process of renewal. The other is to build up connection in community, to purify the work of renewal, and to strive for support and identification in community. Thirdly is to build up mechanism to carry on risk.