學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 公私協力失靈之政治分析－以阿里山森林鐵路BOT為例 作者 謝崇毅 貢獻者 湯京平
謝崇毅關鍵詞 公私夥伴關係
協力
合產
集體行動
BOT
阿里山森林鐵路
public-private partnership
collaboration
coproduction
collective action
BOT
Alishan Forest Railway日期 2012 上傳時間 6-Aug-2014 11:51:00 (UTC+8) 摘要 我國政府近年來積極的推動吸引民間企業投資公共建設，目的是減少財政支出甚至能夠增加財政收入，但是公部門與私部門先天上追求的目標就不同，公部門與私部門間的協力（collaboration）勢必得要解決這種公私協力夥伴關係（public-private partnerships）內在目標上公益與私利間的衝突。本研究選擇阿里山森林鐵路三合一BOT案作為探討的個案，以合產（coproduction）的理論分析此個案從規劃、執行、到契約終止所面臨的各種挑戰與困難，並分析是什麼因素使得看似對公私部門雙贏的計劃最後變成一場災難。公部門代表林務局的行動不只是基於物質性誘因（materialistic incentives）更是基於社群性（solidary）以及目的性（purposive）的誘因，與此相對的宏都阿里山公司則是評估計劃中有獲利的可能，在這樣的情況下一旦發生重大天災或是其他障礙使得物質性誘因的吸引力減弱，計劃就開始搖搖欲墜，另外該計劃所引起劇烈的反彈，反對勢力由當地居民、原住民團體、以及環保團體各自基於不盡相同的理由組合而成，這些來自不同來源的成員成功克服了集體行動（collective action）的困難而進行有組織性的陳情與抗議行動，影響了阿里山森林鐵路三合一BOT案的發展。
There is a worldwide trend of inviting private sector to provide public infrastructure jointly with the governments. Taiwan has practiced accordingly in the past decade and experienced diverse results that help accumulating valuable lessons regarding the maintenance of accountability in such public-private partnership. This study focuses on the case of privatizing a precious mountain railway system in Taiwan to examine why a theoretically promising policy would eventually turn to a disaster. This research indicates how essential factors in local politics may overwhelm policy arena, more specifically Environmental Impact Assessment, to ruin synergy pursued via cooperation among private capital, agency of central government, and local government.參考文獻 一、英文資料Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4): 543-571.Baiman, S., & Evans, J. H. (1983). Pre-Decision Information and Participative Management Control Systems. Journal of Accounting Research, 21(2): 371-395.Bertelli, A. M., & Smith, C. R. (2010). Relational contracting and network management. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(suppl 1), i21-i40.Bradford, C. (1983). Private Sector Initiatives and Public Sector Accountability: A Case Study of Contracting with City Venture Corporation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 49(3), 326-335.Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Stone, M. M. (2006). The Design and Implementation of Cross‐Sector Collaborations: Propositions from the Literature. Public administration review, 66(s1): 44-55.Coleman, James S. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Cummings, L. L., & Bromiley, P. (1996). The organizational trust inventory. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations (pp. 302-330). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Gray, B. (1985). Conditions facilitating interorganizational collaboration. Human relations, 38(10): 911-936.Gray, B. (1989) Collaborating: Finding Common Ground for Multiparty Problems. SanFrancisco: Jossey–Bass.Hall, C. M. (1999). Rethinking collaboration and partnership: A public policy perspective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 7(3-4): 274-289.Harding A. (1991). The rise of urban growth coalitions, UK-style?. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 9(3):295–317. Hodge, G. A., & Greve, C. (2007). Public–private partnerships: an international performance review. Public Administration Review, 67(3): 545-558.Huxham, C (1996). Collaboration and Collaborative Advantage. In C. Huxham (Eds.), Creating collaborative advantage (pp. 1-18). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Jamal, T. B., & Getz, D. (1995). Collaboration theory and community tourism planning. Annals of tourism research, 22(1): 186-204.Klijn, E. H., & Teisman, G. R. (2003). Institutional and strategic barriers to public—private partnership: An analysis of Dutch cases. Public money and Management, 23(3), 137-146.Linder, S. H. (1999). Coming to Terms With the Public-Private Partnership A Grammar of Multiple Meanings. American behavioral scientist, 43(1): 35-51.Lipsky, M., & Smith, S. R. (1989). Nonprofit organizations, government, and the welfare state. Political Science Quarterly, 104, 625-648.Macneil, I. R. (1985). Relational contract: What we do and do not know. Wis. L. Rev., 483. Margerum, R. D. (2001). Organizational commitment to integrated and collaborative management: matching strategies to constraints. Environmental Management, 28(4): 421-431.McCaffrey, D. P., Faerman, S. R., & Hart, D. W. (1995). The appeal and difficulties of participative systems. Organization Science, 6(6), 603-627.McCubbins, M. D. & Schwartz, T. (1984). Congressional Oversight Overlooked: Police Patrols versus Fire Alarms. American Journal of Political Science, 28: 165-179.Moe, T. M. (1984). The New Economics of Organization. American Journal of Political Science, 28(4): 739-777.Murdock, B. S., Wiessner, C., & Sexton, K. (2005). Stakeholder participation in voluntary environmental agreements: Analysis of 10 Project XL case studies.Science, Technology & Human Values, 30(2): 223-250.Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing Government: How the entrepreneurial spirit Is transforming the public sector. New York, NY: Plume.Ostrom, E. (1996). Crossing the great divide: Coproduction, synergy, and development. World Development, 24(6): 1073-1087.Ostrom, E. (1998). A behavioral approach to the rational choice theory of collective action: Presidential address, American Political Science Association, 1997. American Political Science Review: 1-22.Pratt, J. W., Zeckhauser, R., & Arrow, K. J. (1985). Principals and agents: The structure of business. Harvard Business Press.Putnam, Robert D. (1993). The Prosperous Community: Social Capital and Public Life. The American Prospect, 13: 1-11.Ring, P. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1994). Developmental processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Academy of management review,19(1): 90-118.Savas, E. S. (1987). Privatization: The Key to Better Government. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.Savas, E. S. (2000). Privatization and Public-Private Partnerships. New York: Chatham House.Sellgren, J. (1990). Local economic development partnerships — An assessment of local authority economic development initiatives. Local Government Studies, 16(4): 57-78. Singleton, G. (1994). Partnering for the Public Sector: Guest Editor`s Introduction. Australian Journal of Public Administration,53 (2): 2-5.Smith, S. R., & Lipsky, M. (1992). Privatization in health and human services: A critique. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 17(2): 233-254.Stephenson, M. O. Jr. (1991). Whither the Public-Private Partnership: A Critical Overview. Urban Affairs Quartely, 27(1): 109-127.Tendler, J. (1995, May) Social capital and the public sector: The blurred boundaries between private and public. Paper presented at the Conference of the Economic Development Working Group, Social Capital and Public Affairs Project. American Academcy of Arts and Sciences, Cambridge, MA.Thomson, A. M., & Perry, J. L. (2006). Collaboration processes: Inside the black box. Public administration review, 66(s1): 20-32.)Trist, E. (1983). Referent organizations and the development of inter-organizational domains. Human relations, 36(3): 269-284.Vangen, S., & Huxham, C. (2003). Enacting leadership for collaborative advantage: Dilemmas of ideology and pragmatism in the activities of partnership managers. British Journal of Management, 14(s1): S61-S76.Van Ham, H., & Koppenjan, J. (2001). Building Public-Private Partnerships: Assessing and managing risks in port development. Public Management Review, 3(4): 593-616. Weingast, B. R. (1984). The congressional-bureaucratic system: a principal agent perspective (with applications to the SEC). Public Choice, 44(1): 147-191.Weech-Maldonado, R., & Merrill, S. B. (2000). Building partnerships with the community: lessons from the Camden Health Improvement Learning Collaborative. Journal of healthcare management/American College of Healthcare Executives, 45(3): 189-205.Williamson O. E. (1979). Transaction-Cost Economics: The Governance of Contractual Relations. Journal of Law and Economics, 22(2): 233-261.Wilson, J. Q. (1974). Political organizations. NJ: Princeton University Press.Wood, B. D. (1989). Principal-Agent Models of Political Control of Bureaucracy. American Political Science Review, 83: 965-978.Wood, D. J., & Gray, B. (1991). Toward a comprehensive theory of collaboration. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27(2): 139-162.Yaffee, S. L., & Wondolleck, J. M. (2003). Collaborative ecosystem planning processes in the United States: Evolution and challenges. Environments: a journal of interdisciplinary studies, 31(2): 58-72.二、中文資料王瑞堂（2007，6月24日）。陳弘毅搶攻阿里山BOT，勇氣十足。經濟日報，C3版。朱鎮明（2005）。公務夥伴的整合之道－論政策網絡的管理。 研考雙月刊， 29（3）： 95-108。吳德美。（2009）。英國民間融資方案（PFI）的政治經濟分析。問題與研究，48（1），33-69。李光真（2009，8月）。【編者的話】大家的事，需要大家關心。台灣光華雜誌，2009年8月號。取自 http://www.taiwan-panorama.com/李彥圻（2013）。高速公路電子收費之政策弔詭－交易成本理論下的公私協力。銘傳大學公共事務研究所碩士論文，台北。李柏諭（2005）。公私協力與社區治理的理論與實務：我國社區大學與政府經驗。 公共行政學報，16：59-106。李聯康。（2008）。都市中的保育行動:以富陽公園與巴克禮公園的社區參與為例。政治大學政治研究所學位論文。林玉華（2004年5月）。公私夥伴關係的治理﹕理論初探並兼論英國的第三條路。「公共服務改革與民營化的現代課題」研討會發表之論文，東海大學公共行政學系。林易萱。（2009）。私有地上的生態保育:以雙連埤的協力治理為例。政治大學公共行政研究所學位論文。林宜樟（2009，3月10日）。阿里山小火車，爆司機集體請辭。聯合報，A8版。邱崇原、湯京平、黃建勳（2011）。地方治理的制度選擇與轉型政治：台灣水利會制度變革的政治與經濟分析。人文及社會科學集刊， 23（1）：93-126。張瓊方（2009，8月）。請神容易送神難？──BOT後的阿里山。台灣光華雜誌，2009年8月號。取自 http://www.taiwan-panorama.com/陳玉峰、陳月霞（2002）。火龍119：阿里山1976年大火與遷村事件初探。臺北市：前衛。陳明燦、張蔚宏（2005）。我國促參法下 BOT 之法制分析：以公私協力觀點為基礎。公平交易季刊，13（2）：41-75。陳敦源，&張世杰。（2010）。公私協力夥伴關係的弔詭。文官制度季刊，2（3），17-71。湯京平（2001）。民主治理與環境保護：從中埔慈濟案例檢視我國資源回收的政 策體系。台灣政治學刊，5：178-217。曾曉瑜（2006）。阿里山森林鐵路民營化再生方案之評估。成功大學交通管理科學系學位論文。曾冠球（2011）。為什麼淪為不情願夥伴？：公私夥伴關係失靈個案的制度解釋。臺灣民主季刊，8（4）：83-133。楊宗興（2008年6月20日）。七成駕駛無小火車駕照民間團體臥軌抗議阿里山BOT。苦勞網。取自 http://www.coolloud.org.tw/廖坤榮。（2004）。台灣農會的社會資本形成與政策績效。政治科學論叢，22，181-220。監察院（2009）。098財正0005案號糾正文。2009年2月17日，監察院網站。取自 http://www.cy.gov.tw/謝恩得（2009，6月4日）。劉揆開罵，阿里山鐵路馬上修，修復工程前天發包，災害鑑定昨天出爐，專家批民營化沒配套，遊客都成受害者。聯合報，A8版。蘇恩民、鄭智仁（2005，11月18日）。趙建銘扯上關說開發阿里山，護航耐斯，總統女婿促拿出證據。蘋果日報。取自 http://www.appledaily.com.tw/寶智華（2008年4月16日）。阿里山小火車頻脫軌疑操作不當。蘋果日報。取自 http://www.appledaily.com.tw/民間參與投資經營阿里山森林鐵路及阿里山森林遊樂區－興建暨營運契約（中華民國95年6月19 日）。三、判決書嘉義地方法院（民國102年6月27日）。塗銷地上權等，101，重訴，8。取自 http://jirs.judicial.gov.tw/Index.htm 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
政治研究所
97252007
101資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0097252007 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 湯京平 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) 謝崇毅 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) 謝崇毅 zh_TW dc.date (日期) 2012 en_US dc.date.accessioned 6-Aug-2014 11:51:00 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 6-Aug-2014 11:51:00 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 6-Aug-2014 11:51:00 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0097252007 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/68285 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 政治研究所 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 97252007 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 101 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 我國政府近年來積極的推動吸引民間企業投資公共建設，目的是減少財政支出甚至能夠增加財政收入，但是公部門與私部門先天上追求的目標就不同，公部門與私部門間的協力（collaboration）勢必得要解決這種公私協力夥伴關係（public-private partnerships）內在目標上公益與私利間的衝突。本研究選擇阿里山森林鐵路三合一BOT案作為探討的個案，以合產（coproduction）的理論分析此個案從規劃、執行、到契約終止所面臨的各種挑戰與困難，並分析是什麼因素使得看似對公私部門雙贏的計劃最後變成一場災難。公部門代表林務局的行動不只是基於物質性誘因（materialistic incentives）更是基於社群性（solidary）以及目的性（purposive）的誘因，與此相對的宏都阿里山公司則是評估計劃中有獲利的可能，在這樣的情況下一旦發生重大天災或是其他障礙使得物質性誘因的吸引力減弱，計劃就開始搖搖欲墜，另外該計劃所引起劇烈的反彈，反對勢力由當地居民、原住民團體、以及環保團體各自基於不盡相同的理由組合而成，這些來自不同來源的成員成功克服了集體行動（collective action）的困難而進行有組織性的陳情與抗議行動，影響了阿里山森林鐵路三合一BOT案的發展。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) There is a worldwide trend of inviting private sector to provide public infrastructure jointly with the governments. Taiwan has practiced accordingly in the past decade and experienced diverse results that help accumulating valuable lessons regarding the maintenance of accountability in such public-private partnership. This study focuses on the case of privatizing a precious mountain railway system in Taiwan to examine why a theoretically promising policy would eventually turn to a disaster. This research indicates how essential factors in local politics may overwhelm policy arena, more specifically Environmental Impact Assessment, to ruin synergy pursued via cooperation among private capital, agency of central government, and local government. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1第一節 研究背景與目的 1第二節 公私協力的發展歷史：國內外案例 4第三節 個案的選擇與研究問題 10第四節 研究設計與方法 11第二章 公私協力之理論與研究 18第一節 協力之涵義 19第二節 合產與增效：新制度經濟學對公私協力的分析 22第三節 協力失靈的討論 28第四節 協力理論的架構 30第五節 研究架構的建立 40第三章 一波三折的三合一BOT案 42第一節 林務局推行森林鐵路民營的過程 42第二節 初步了解阿里山森林鐵路三合一BOT案 46第三節 研擬計劃階段 48第四節 簽約後的發展：協力關係的建立與破滅 54第四章 個案的分析 62第一節 林務局與宏都阿里山公司合產的可能 62第二節 環境影響評估與抗議行動 65第三節 超乎眾人預期的天然災害 72第四節 契約設計以及公私部門認知的差距 76第五章 結論 81第一節 研究發現 81第二節 研究限制 83第三節 政策建議 84參考書目 87一、英文資料 87二、中文資料 91三、判決書 94 zh_TW dc.format.extent 2533409 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.language.iso en_US - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0097252007 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 公私夥伴關係 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 協力 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 合產 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 集體行動 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) BOT zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 阿里山森林鐵路 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) public-private partnership en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) collaboration en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) coproduction en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) collective action en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) BOT en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Alishan Forest Railway en_US dc.title (題名) 公私協力失靈之政治分析－以阿里山森林鐵路BOT為例 zh_TW dc.type (資料類型) thesis en dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 一、英文資料Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4): 543-571.Baiman, S., & Evans, J. H. (1983). Pre-Decision Information and Participative Management Control Systems. Journal of Accounting Research, 21(2): 371-395.Bertelli, A. M., & Smith, C. R. (2010). Relational contracting and network management. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(suppl 1), i21-i40.Bradford, C. (1983). Private Sector Initiatives and Public Sector Accountability: A Case Study of Contracting with City Venture Corporation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 49(3), 326-335.Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Stone, M. M. (2006). The Design and Implementation of Cross‐Sector Collaborations: Propositions from the Literature. Public administration review, 66(s1): 44-55.Coleman, James S. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Cummings, L. L., & Bromiley, P. (1996). The organizational trust inventory. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations (pp. 302-330). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Gray, B. (1985). Conditions facilitating interorganizational collaboration. Human relations, 38(10): 911-936.Gray, B. (1989) Collaborating: Finding Common Ground for Multiparty Problems. SanFrancisco: Jossey–Bass.Hall, C. M. (1999). Rethinking collaboration and partnership: A public policy perspective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 7(3-4): 274-289.Harding A. (1991). The rise of urban growth coalitions, UK-style?. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 9(3):295–317. Hodge, G. A., & Greve, C. (2007). Public–private partnerships: an international performance review. Public Administration Review, 67(3): 545-558.Huxham, C (1996). Collaboration and Collaborative Advantage. In C. Huxham (Eds.), Creating collaborative advantage (pp. 1-18). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Jamal, T. B., & Getz, D. (1995). Collaboration theory and community tourism planning. Annals of tourism research, 22(1): 186-204.Klijn, E. H., & Teisman, G. R. (2003). Institutional and strategic barriers to public—private partnership: An analysis of Dutch cases. Public money and Management, 23(3), 137-146.Linder, S. H. (1999). Coming to Terms With the Public-Private Partnership A Grammar of Multiple Meanings. American behavioral scientist, 43(1): 35-51.Lipsky, M., & Smith, S. R. (1989). Nonprofit organizations, government, and the welfare state. Political Science Quarterly, 104, 625-648.Macneil, I. R. (1985). Relational contract: What we do and do not know. Wis. L. Rev., 483. Margerum, R. D. (2001). Organizational commitment to integrated and collaborative management: matching strategies to constraints. Environmental Management, 28(4): 421-431.McCaffrey, D. P., Faerman, S. R., & Hart, D. W. (1995). The appeal and difficulties of participative systems. Organization Science, 6(6), 603-627.McCubbins, M. D. & Schwartz, T. (1984). Congressional Oversight Overlooked: Police Patrols versus Fire Alarms. American Journal of Political Science, 28: 165-179.Moe, T. M. (1984). The New Economics of Organization. American Journal of Political Science, 28(4): 739-777.Murdock, B. S., Wiessner, C., & Sexton, K. (2005). Stakeholder participation in voluntary environmental agreements: Analysis of 10 Project XL case studies.Science, Technology & Human Values, 30(2): 223-250.Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing Government: How the entrepreneurial spirit Is transforming the public sector. New York, NY: Plume.Ostrom, E. (1996). Crossing the great divide: Coproduction, synergy, and development. World Development, 24(6): 1073-1087.Ostrom, E. (1998). A behavioral approach to the rational choice theory of collective action: Presidential address, American Political Science Association, 1997. American Political Science Review: 1-22.Pratt, J. W., Zeckhauser, R., & Arrow, K. J. (1985). Principals and agents: The structure of business. Harvard Business Press.Putnam, Robert D. (1993). The Prosperous Community: Social Capital and Public Life. The American Prospect, 13: 1-11.Ring, P. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1994). Developmental processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Academy of management review,19(1): 90-118.Savas, E. S. (1987). Privatization: The Key to Better Government. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.Savas, E. S. (2000). Privatization and Public-Private Partnerships. New York: Chatham House.Sellgren, J. (1990). Local economic development partnerships — An assessment of local authority economic development initiatives. Local Government Studies, 16(4): 57-78. Singleton, G. (1994). Partnering for the Public Sector: Guest Editor`s Introduction. Australian Journal of Public Administration,53 (2): 2-5.Smith, S. R., & Lipsky, M. (1992). Privatization in health and human services: A critique. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 17(2): 233-254.Stephenson, M. O. Jr. (1991). Whither the Public-Private Partnership: A Critical Overview. Urban Affairs Quartely, 27(1): 109-127.Tendler, J. (1995, May) Social capital and the public sector: The blurred boundaries between private and public. Paper presented at the Conference of the Economic Development Working Group, Social Capital and Public Affairs Project. American Academcy of Arts and Sciences, Cambridge, MA.Thomson, A. M., & Perry, J. L. (2006). Collaboration processes: Inside the black box. Public administration review, 66(s1): 20-32.)Trist, E. (1983). Referent organizations and the development of inter-organizational domains. Human relations, 36(3): 269-284.Vangen, S., & Huxham, C. (2003). Enacting leadership for collaborative advantage: Dilemmas of ideology and pragmatism in the activities of partnership managers. British Journal of Management, 14(s1): S61-S76.Van Ham, H., & Koppenjan, J. (2001). Building Public-Private Partnerships: Assessing and managing risks in port development. Public Management Review, 3(4): 593-616. Weingast, B. R. (1984). The congressional-bureaucratic system: a principal agent perspective (with applications to the SEC). Public Choice, 44(1): 147-191.Weech-Maldonado, R., & Merrill, S. B. (2000). Building partnerships with the community: lessons from the Camden Health Improvement Learning Collaborative. Journal of healthcare management/American College of Healthcare Executives, 45(3): 189-205.Williamson O. E. (1979). Transaction-Cost Economics: The Governance of Contractual Relations. Journal of Law and Economics, 22(2): 233-261.Wilson, J. Q. (1974). Political organizations. NJ: Princeton University Press.Wood, B. D. (1989). Principal-Agent Models of Political Control of Bureaucracy. American Political Science Review, 83: 965-978.Wood, D. J., & Gray, B. (1991). Toward a comprehensive theory of collaboration. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27(2): 139-162.Yaffee, S. L., & Wondolleck, J. M. (2003). Collaborative ecosystem planning processes in the United States: Evolution and challenges. Environments: a journal of interdisciplinary studies, 31(2): 58-72.二、中文資料王瑞堂（2007，6月24日）。陳弘毅搶攻阿里山BOT，勇氣十足。經濟日報，C3版。朱鎮明（2005）。公務夥伴的整合之道－論政策網絡的管理。 研考雙月刊， 29（3）： 95-108。吳德美。（2009）。英國民間融資方案（PFI）的政治經濟分析。問題與研究，48（1），33-69。李光真（2009，8月）。【編者的話】大家的事，需要大家關心。台灣光華雜誌，2009年8月號。取自 http://www.taiwan-panorama.com/李彥圻（2013）。高速公路電子收費之政策弔詭－交易成本理論下的公私協力。銘傳大學公共事務研究所碩士論文，台北。李柏諭（2005）。公私協力與社區治理的理論與實務：我國社區大學與政府經驗。 公共行政學報，16：59-106。李聯康。（2008）。都市中的保育行動:以富陽公園與巴克禮公園的社區參與為例。政治大學政治研究所學位論文。林玉華（2004年5月）。公私夥伴關係的治理﹕理論初探並兼論英國的第三條路。「公共服務改革與民營化的現代課題」研討會發表之論文，東海大學公共行政學系。林易萱。（2009）。私有地上的生態保育:以雙連埤的協力治理為例。政治大學公共行政研究所學位論文。林宜樟（2009，3月10日）。阿里山小火車，爆司機集體請辭。聯合報，A8版。邱崇原、湯京平、黃建勳（2011）。地方治理的制度選擇與轉型政治：台灣水利會制度變革的政治與經濟分析。人文及社會科學集刊， 23（1）：93-126。張瓊方（2009，8月）。請神容易送神難？──BOT後的阿里山。台灣光華雜誌，2009年8月號。取自 http://www.taiwan-panorama.com/陳玉峰、陳月霞（2002）。火龍119：阿里山1976年大火與遷村事件初探。臺北市：前衛。陳明燦、張蔚宏（2005）。我國促參法下 BOT 之法制分析：以公私協力觀點為基礎。公平交易季刊，13（2）：41-75。陳敦源，&張世杰。（2010）。公私協力夥伴關係的弔詭。文官制度季刊，2（3），17-71。湯京平（2001）。民主治理與環境保護：從中埔慈濟案例檢視我國資源回收的政 策體系。台灣政治學刊，5：178-217。曾曉瑜（2006）。阿里山森林鐵路民營化再生方案之評估。成功大學交通管理科學系學位論文。曾冠球（2011）。為什麼淪為不情願夥伴？：公私夥伴關係失靈個案的制度解釋。臺灣民主季刊，8（4）：83-133。楊宗興（2008年6月20日）。七成駕駛無小火車駕照民間團體臥軌抗議阿里山BOT。苦勞網。取自 http://www.coolloud.org.tw/廖坤榮。（2004）。台灣農會的社會資本形成與政策績效。政治科學論叢，22，181-220。監察院（2009）。098財正0005案號糾正文。2009年2月17日，監察院網站。取自 http://www.cy.gov.tw/謝恩得（2009，6月4日）。劉揆開罵，阿里山鐵路馬上修，修復工程前天發包，災害鑑定昨天出爐，專家批民營化沒配套，遊客都成受害者。聯合報，A8版。蘇恩民、鄭智仁（2005，11月18日）。趙建銘扯上關說開發阿里山，護航耐斯，總統女婿促拿出證據。蘋果日報。取自 http://www.appledaily.com.tw/寶智華（2008年4月16日）。阿里山小火車頻脫軌疑操作不當。蘋果日報。取自 http://www.appledaily.com.tw/民間參與投資經營阿里山森林鐵路及阿里山森林遊樂區－興建暨營運契約（中華民國95年6月19 日）。三、判決書嘉義地方法院（民國102年6月27日）。塗銷地上權等，101，重訴，8。取自 http://jirs.judicial.gov.tw/Index.htm zh_TW
