在國家蓬勃發展的過程中，民眾對於公共建設、公共服務的質量與需求遽增，政府欲在有限的公務人力與財政經費限制下，兼顧滿足日益增加的人民需求，「民間參與公共建設」即是立意良善，增進公共福祉，共創人民、政府、民間企業三贏的良好制度。 「促進民間參與公共建設法」立法迄今已20餘年，惟我國政府與民間機構對於公私合作夥伴關係之制度運行，似仍未與建立互信、穩定的合作平衡。以政府本位的立場而論，推動公共建設，強化公共服務，似為傳統政府之於人民存在之根本價值，而有別於傳統多以政府採購的制度為之運行，在「民間參與公共建設」新穎的概念下，政府恰似陷於傳統政府採購制度的思維窠臼，常以興利防弊口號、公共利益的大旗，卻同時想獲取民間參與公共建設之利益，如此不僅與「公私夥伴關係」之精神相左，更戕害未來民間機構對於參與公共建設之信任，使我國公共建設與經濟發展陷入惡性循環。 本研究透過文獻回顧、法律研析、個案分析、專家訪談與驗證等方式，旨在探討地方政府主辦之BOT專案，於興建階段同時兼具「促參案件之主辦機關」與「公法管制之主管機關」雙重身分，能否超然客觀的同時扮演兩種截然不同，甚至身分衝突之法律角色，而現行促參制度與相關公法管制制度，對於BOT專案執行與成效產生何種影響，最終回顧我國促參制度執行之文件或流程，提供相關之研究結果與建議，以供未來民間參與公共建設執行參考。 ;In the process of the country development, the public has increased the quality and demand for public construction and public services. The government has to meet people’s demand with limited financial resource. Private-Public-Participation(PPP) is a pattern that could create win-win situation for the people, government and private institution. Rule of Act for Promotion of Private Participation in Infrastructure Project has been legislated for more than 20 years. However, the government and the private institution haven’t established mutual trust and stable cooperation balance. From a government-based standpoint, promoting public construction and strengthening public services seem to be the fundamental value of the existence of traditional government to the people. It is different from the traditional government procurement system when operating PPP. Under this novel concept, the government is just like the ideological government trapped in the traditional procurement system. It often uses the slogan of "prosperity and prevention" and the banner of public interest. At the same time, it wants to obtain the benefits of private participation in public construction and the spirit of "public-private relations". This not only conflict the spirit of PPP bout also make public construction and economic development into a vicious circle. Through literature review, Legal study,case analysis, expert interviews and verification, this research aims to explore the construction of BOT sponsored by local governments. During the construction phase, it has the dual identities of "the sponsoring agency for promoting participation in cases" and the "competent agency for public law control". Whether it is detached and objective while playing two completely different legal roles, even conflicting identities, and how the current participation promotion system and related public law control systems will affect the implementation and effectiveness of BOT construction? Finally, review the documents or the implementation of our country’s participation promotion system. Process, provide relevant research results and suggestions for future private participation in public construction implementation reference.
