析探國家協力治理角色在科學園區之研究：以臺灣與俄羅斯為個案分析

Exploring the State Role of Collaborative Governance on Science Park Development: The Cases of Taiwan and Russia

臺灣於1980年代，因政府計畫性地主導科技政策制定，大量聘請美國華裔科技人才返臺參與科學園區發展，因而成為全球科技創新的重鎮。俄羅斯則是具有豐厚的天然資源，卻也面臨創新產業轉型之困境。儘管政府積極制定相關政策，但因傳統國營企業掌控決策權力的局面，促使企業投資面臨政策執行的困難。臺灣的發展脈絡係從新竹、臺中、臺南等地區凝結的群聚優勢，串起了高度創新的產業鏈效應。透過大學、研發機構與企業等機構形成強大穩固的產業網絡，成功執行科技政策與技術的研發應用，而政府也從主導轉為輔助的角色。俄羅斯則是擁有深厚的基礎科學，以及自然資源之優勢，過去主要是向「北京中關村」學習創新科技策略，而中關村的發展模式則是以臺灣模式為典範。近年來，俄羅斯政府雖積極發展科技創新園區，卻面臨著中央與地方政府步調不一、吸引國外科技廠商之政策制定緩不濟急，以及政策網絡的整合混亂等困境，導致科技產業的成效不如預期，許多跨國企業也陸續撤資。本研究以Klochikhin提出的五大治理指標為架構，探討跨面向的協力治理角色，包括知識流動與制度發展、研究與教育能力、群聚與網絡、工業與企業成長、區域擴散與生產創新等構面。本研究透經由訪談後發現：一、國營企業扮演影響政策制定的角色，並在避免依賴政府的保護政策下形成科技創新政策的受益者，而中小型創新企業則呈現邊陲化的現象；二、當民間研發學術能量不足時，政府主導科技的途徑將不利於由下而上的創新政策的執行；三、地方政府若能發揮課責的角色，將會影響國際投資的程度；四、政府權力的分享，是影響創新科技的發展與規模的因素；五、地理區位的侷限性，是導致政府無法有效進行跨部門協力之因素。

Since the 1980s a large number of technology professionals of ethnic Chinese in the United States returned from Silicon Valley being employed in Taiwan in order to enhance the development of technology innovation. Through governmental strategic plan of national development, Taiwan becomes the world's center of scientific and technological research and innovation. The impressive technological achievements are not only from the governmental efforts, but also from the policy network within which the stakeholders interacted and collaborated intensively. Taiwan has set up Hsinchu, Taichung, Tainan, NeiHu and Nankang science parks which have made highly intensive innovation industries develop the cluster effects. The parks, universities, industrial technology research institute, enterprises, as well as international investors constituted a powerful and entrepreneur network that the stakeholders promoted successful implementation of technology policy and R&D application. On the other side, with the inherent advantages of natural resources, Russia recently expected to carry out industrial restructuring. However, Russia has confronted the difficulties of technology transformation limited by national scientific and technological policy, even the central government learned innovation strategies from Zhongguancun experience in Beijing. During recent years, we found that cross-sector coordination between federal and local governments is out of step. In particular, the real phenomenon of attracting foreign technology investment in Russia is quite slow. These factors led to the ineffectiveness results in developing science and technology parks. The main findings of this study are: First, Russia's state-owned enterprises which relied on heavily governmental protection policies, that median and small innovative enterprises grow into the peripheral position in the network; In addition, government-led policies cannot take the advantage on bottom-up implementation; Third, the local governmental accountability is the key factor to influence the result of foreign investment; Forth, the power-sharing from public sectors influenced the development and scale of innovative technology; Finally, the remote location of innovation parks restricted the development of cross-sector collaboration.