請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/63195
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 曾惠斌(Hui-Ping Tserng) | |
dc.contributor.author | Chieh Lin | en |
dc.contributor.author | 林傑 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-16T16:27:33Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2013-02-01 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2013-02-01 | |
dc.date.issued | 2013 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2013-01-14 | |
dc.identifier.citation | [1] L.J. Alston, Empirical Work in Institutional Economics: an Overview, in: L.J. Alston, Eggertsson, Thrainn and North, Douglass C. (Ed.), Empirical Studies in Institutional Change, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1996, pp. 25-30.
[2] B. Alves, Spain unveils ?17bn PPP plan's 28 projects, InfrastructureInvestor, PEI Media, London, 2010. [3] M. Aoki, Analysing Institutional Change: Integrating Endogenous and Exogenous Views, in: L.M.a.G.R. Janos Kornai (Ed.), Institutional Change and Economic Behaviour, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, 2008, pp. 113-133. [4] M. Aoki, Toward a Comparative Institutional Analysis, The MIT Press, 2001. [5] M.M. Askar, A.A. Gab-Allah, Problems Facing Parties Involved in Build, Operate, and Transport Projects in Egypt, Journal of Management in Engineering 18 (4) (2002) 173-178. [6] S. Bakatjan, M. Arikan, R.L.K. Tiong, Optimal Capital Structure Model for BOT Power Projects in Turkey, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 129 (1) (2003) 89-97. [7] A.C. Brown, J. Stern, T. B., Handbook for Evaluating Infrastructure Regulatory Systems, The World Bank, 2006. [8] P. Burger, J. Tyson, I. Karpowicz, M.D. Coelho, The Effects of the Financial Crisis on Public-Private Partnerhsips, IMF Working Paper, International Monetary Fund, 2009. [9] CabinetOffice, The Development Strategy ( in Japanese), Government of Japan, 2010. [10] F. Carmichael, A guide to game theory, Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall, 2005. [11] P. Carrillo, H. Robinson, P. Foale, C. Anumba, D. Bouchlaghem, Participation, Barriers, and Opportunities in PFI: The United Kingdom Experience, Journal of Management in Engineering 24 (3) (2008) 138-145. [12] A.P.C. Chan, P.T.I. Lam, D.W.M. Chan, E. Cheung, Y. Ke, Critical success factors for PPPs in infrastructure developments: Chinese perspective, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 136 (Compendex) (2010) 484-494. [13] A.P.C. Chan, P.T.I. Lam, D.W.M. Chan, E. Cheung, Y. Ke, Drivers for adopting public private partnerships-empirical comparison between China and Hong Kong special administrative region, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 135 (Compendex) (2009) 1115-1124. [14] C.-Y. Chang, G. Ive, The hold-up problem in the management of construction projects: A case study of the Channel Tunnel, International Journal of Project Management 25 (4) (2007) 394-404. [15] C.Y. Chang, G. Ive, Rethinking the Multi-Attribute Utility Approach Based Procurement Route Selection Technique, Construction Management and Economics 29 (2002) 275-284. [16] L.M. Chang, P.H. Chen, BOT financial model: Taiwan high speed rail case, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 127 (Compendex) (2001) 214-222. [17] C. Chen, H. Doloi, BOT application in China: Driving and impeding factors International Journal of Project Management 26 (2008) 11. [18] E. Cheung, A.P.C. Chan, S. Kajewski, THE PUBLIC SECTOR'S PERSPECTIVE ON PROCURING PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS - COMPARING THE VIEWS OF PRACTITIONERS IN HONG KONG AND AUSTRALIA, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 16 (1) (2010) 19-32. [19] Y.-H. Chiang, E.W.L. Cheng, Perception of Financial Institutions toward Financing PFI Projects in Hong Kong, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 135 (9) (2009) 833-840. [20] J.-S. Chou, H.P. Tserng, C. Lin, C.-P. Yeh, Critical Factors and Risk Allocation for PPP Policy: Comparison between HSR and General Infrastructure Projects, Transport Policy 22 (2012) 36-48. [21] A.N. Chowdhury, C. Charoenngam, Factors influencing finance on IPP projects in Asia: A legal framework to reach the goal, International Journal of Project Management 27 (1) (2009) 51-58. [22] T. Daltorio, The Global Infrastructure Boom, Investment U Research, 2010. [23] K.A.K. Devapriya, Governance issues in financing of public-private partnership organisations in network infrastructure industries, International Journal of Project Management 24 (7) (2006) 557-565. [24] A.K. Dixit, The Making of Economic Policy: A Transaction-Cost Politics Perspective, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, 1996. [25] DORTS, Network, Vol. 2011, Department of Rapid Transit Systems, 2011. [26] S. Dougma, H. Schreuder, Economic Approaches to Organizations, Pearson Education Limited, 2002. [27] G. Dudkin, T. Valila, Transaction costs in Public-Private Partnerships: A first look at the evidence, Economic and Financial Report 2005/03, European Investment Bank, 2005. [28] M. Dutz, C. Harris, I. Dhingra, C. Shugart, Public-Private Partnership Units: What Are They and What Do They Do? Public Policy for the Private Sector, World Bank, Washington D.C, 2006. [29] T. Eggertsson, A Note on the Economics of Institutions, in: L.J. Alston, Eggertsson, Thrainn and North, Douglass C. (Ed.), Empirical Studies in Institutional Change, Cambridge University Press, New York 1996, pp. 6-24. [30] EN, Mobilising private and public investment for recovery and long term structureal change: developing Public Private Partnerships, Commission of the European Communities, 2009. [31] EU, Guidelines for Successful Public - Private - Partnerships, Directorate-General Regional Policy, European Commission, 2003. [32] C. Farrugia, T. Reynolds, R.J. Orr, Public-Private Partnership Agencies: A Global Perspective. , Collaboratory for Research on Global Projects, Stanford, 2008. [33] R. Gibbons, A primer in game theory, Harvester, Hemel Hempstead, 1992. [34] A. Greif, P. Milgrom, B.R. Weingast, Coordination, Commitment, and Enforcement: The Case of the Merchant Guild, Journal of Political Economy 102 (4) (1994). [35] D. Grimsey, M.K. Lewis, Evaluating the risks of public private partnerships for infrastructure projects, International Journal of Project Management 20 (2) (2002) 107-118. [36] S.L. Grunegerg, G.J. Ive, The Economics of the Modern Construction Firm, Macmillan Press Ltd, 2000. [37] HM-Treasury, Infrastructure UK, Vol. 2011, 2011. [38] HM-Treasury, Treasury lending to PFI projects and the Treasury's Infrastructure Finance Unit, Vol. 2010, 2009, pp. Letter providing guidance on TIFU - 5 May 2009. [39] S.P. Ho, Model for Financial Renegotiation in Public-Private Partnership Projects and Its Policy Implications: Game Theoretic View, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 132 (7) (2006) 678-688. [40] S.P. Ho, Y. Hsu, E. Lin, Model for knowledge-sharing strategies: a game theory analysis, Engineering Project Organization Journal 1 (1) (2011) 53-65. [41] S.P. Ho, C. Tsui, When are public-private partnerships not an appropriate governance structure? Case study evidence, Proceedings of Construction Research Congress 2010, Banff, Canada, 2010. [42] J. Holmes, G. Capper, G. Hudson, Public Private Partnerships in the provision of health care premises in the UK, International Journal of Project Management 24 (7) (2006) 566-572. [43] T.C. Irwin, Government Guarantees-Allocating and Valuing Risk in Privately Financed Infrastructure Projects, THE WORLD BANK, Washington, D.C., 2007. [44] T.-C. Kao, Y.-C. Lai, M.-C. Shih, Privatization versus public works for high-speed rail projects, Transportation Research Record (Compendex) (2010) 18-26. [45] A. Kappeler, Nemoz, Mathieu, Public-Private Partnerships In Europe - Before And During The Recent Financial Crisis, European Investment Bank, 2010. [46] Y. Ke, S. Wang, A.P.C. Chan, E. Cheung, Research Trend of Public-Private Partnership in Construction Journals, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 135 (10) (2009) 1076-1086. [47] Y. Ke, S. Wang, A.P.C. Chan, P.T.I. Lam, Preferred risk allocation in China's public-private partnership (PPP) projects, International Journal of Project Management 28 (5) (2010) 482-492. [48] P.Y. Kien-hong, J. Johannesson, Near-bankruptcy of the Taiwan High Speed Rail Corporation: What Went Wrong?, International Journal of Business and Management 5 (12) (2010) 14-22. [49] G.J. Lambsdorff, M. Taube, M. Schramm, Corrupt contracting: exploring the analytical capacity of New Institutional Economics and New Economic Sociology, in: G.J. Lambsdorff, M. Taube, M. Schramm (Eds.), The New Institutional Economics of Corruption, Routledge, New York, 2005, pp. 1-15. [50] H.-s. Lee, J.-o. Seo, M. Park, H.-g. Ryu, S.-s. Kwon, Transaction-Cost-Based Selection of Appropriate General Contractor-Subcontractor Relationship Type, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 135 (11) (2009) 1232-1240. [51] B. Li, A. Akintoye, P.J. Edwards, C. Hardcastle, Critical success factors for PPP/PFI projects in the UK construction industry, Construction Management and Economics 23 (Compendex) (2005) 459-471. [52] N.N.T. Li, KEEPING TAIWAN CONNECTED -THE NEW HIGH SPEED RAIL, 1998. [53] A. Mahalingam, PPP Experiences in Indian Cities: Barriers, Enablers, and the Way Forward, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 136 (4) (2010) 419-429. [54] A. Mahalingam, PPP Experiences in Indian Cities: Barriers, Enablers, and the Way Forward, Journal of Construction Engineering & Management 136 (4) (2010) 419-429. [55] C. Mandri-Perrott, I. Menzies, Private Sector Participation in Light Rail-Light Metro Transit Initiatives, THE WORLD BANK, Washington, D.C., 2010. [56] P. Marin, Public-Private Partnerships for Urban Water Utilities- A Review of Experience in Developing Countries, THE WORLD BANK, Washington, D.C., 2009. [57] R.A. McCain, Game Theory: A non-Technical Introduction to the Analysis of Strategy, Mason, Ohio: Thomson/South-Western, 2004. [58] F. Medda, A game theory approach for the allocation of risks in transport public private partnerships, International Journal of Project Management 25 (3) (2007) 213-218. [59] MOTC, Taiwan High Speed Rail (HSR) Projects, Vol. 2010, 2010, pp. Bureau of High Speed Rail, Ministry of Transportation and Communications, R.O.C. [60] D.C. North, Institutions, institutional change and economic performance, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1990. [61] OECD, OECD Principles for Private Sector Participation in Infrastructure ORGANISATION, 2007. [62] PCC, 2010 Private Participation in Infrastructure Projects: Invstor's Manual Public Construction Commission, Executive Yuan, 2009. [63] PCC, Public Construction Commission Annual Report 2012 (in Chinese), Public Construction Commission, Executive Yuan, Taipei, 2012. [64] PMI, A Guild to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide), Project Management Institute, Inc., 2004. [65] C. Podkul, View for the top, InfrastructureInvestor: CANADA: An Intelligence Report, PEI, London, 2010/11, p. 2. [66] PPIAF, Public-Private Partnership Units: Lessons for their Design and Use in Infrastructure, 2007. [67] PPIAF, Toolkit for Public-Private Partnerships in Roads & Highways, Vol. 2011, Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility, 2009. [68] I.M. Robert Gibbons, and Michael McGuigan, Has US PPP reached boiling point?, Project Finance, 2010. [69] A. Roy, Governments Access to Capital Markets:Outsourcing revolution in the public sector: New trends in strategic procurement, Golbal Governmnet Finance Summit 2010, The Asian Banker, Singapore, 2010. [70] SGA, Recent Lessons from the Stimulus: Transportation Funding and Job Creation, Vol. 2011, Smart Growth America 2011. [71] A.S. Solino, J.M. Vassallo, Using Public-Private Partnerships to Expand Subways: Madrid-Barajas International Airport Case Study, Journal of Management in Engineering 25 (1) (2009) 21-28. [72] J. Stainback, M.B. Donahue, Outside the budget box - Public/private partnership as a creative vehicle for finance and delivery of public school facilities, Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice 131 (Compendex) (2005) 292-296. [73] L. Tang, Q. Shen, E.W.L. Cheng, A review of studies on Public-Private Partnership projects in the construction industry, International Journal of Project Management 28 (7) (2010) 683-694. [74] S. Thomas Ng, J. Xie, M. Skitmore, Y.K. Cheung, A fuzzy simulation model for evaluating the concession items of public-private partnership schemes, Automation in Construction 17 (1) (2007) 22-29. [75] H.P. Tserng, J.S. Russell, C.W. Hsu, C. Lin, Analyzing the Role of National PPP Unit in Promoting PPP─Using New Institutional Economics and Case Study, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 138 (2) (2012) 242-249. [76] UIC, Financing of rail infrastructure projects through Public-Private Partnerships (PPP), International Union of Railways, 2008. [77] B.R. Weingast, The Economic Role of Political Institutions: Market-Preserving Federalism and Economic Development, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 11 (2) (1995). [78] L.T. Wells, E.S. Gleason, Is Foreign Infrastructure Investment Still Risky?, Harvard Business Review 1995 (Sep.-Oct) (1995). [79] A. Wibowo, CAPM-Based Valuation of Financial Government Supports to Infeasible and Risky Private Infrastructure Projects, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 132 (3) (2006) 239-248. [80] O.E. Williamson, The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting, Free Press, New York, 1985. [81] O.E. Williamson, The Mechanisms of Governance, Oxford University Press, 1996. [82] WorldBank, Did you know? Note 12: Investment in road projects with private participation more than doubled between 2005 and 2008, but was concentrated in a few countries, Vol. 2010, 2010. [83] WorldBank, Private Participation in Infrastructure Database. , Vol. 2011, 2011. [84] WorldBank, Public-Private Partnership Units: Lessons for their Design and Use in Infrastructure, 2007. [85] Y. Xu, J.F.Y. Yeung, A.P.C. Chan, D.W.M. Chan, S.Q. Wang, Y. Ke, Developing a risk assessment model for PPP projects in China -- A fuzzy synthetic evaluation approach, Automation in Construction 19 (7) (2010) 929-943. [86] J.-F. Yuan, M.J. Skibniewski, L. Qiming, S. Jin, THE DRIVING FACTORS OF CHINA'S PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS IN METROPOLITIAN TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS: PUBLIC SECTOR'S VIEWPOINT, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 16 (1) (2010) 5-18. [87] X. Zhang, Critical Success Factors for Public-Private Partnerships in Infrastructure Development, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 131 (1) (2005) 3-14. [88] X. Zhang, Critical Success Factors for Public–Private Partnerships in Infrastructure Development, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 131 (1) (2005) 3-14. [89] X. Zhang, Financial Viability Analysis and Capital Structure Optimization in Privatized Public Infrastructure Projects, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 131 (6) (2005) 656-668. [90] X. Zhang, S.M. Abourizk, Determining a reasonable concession period for private sector provision of public works and service, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 33 (2006) 622-631. [91] Z.-Y. Zhao, J. Zuo, G. Zillante, X.-W. Wang, Critical success factors for BOT electric power projects in China: Thermal power versus wind power, Renewable Energy 35 (6) (2010) 1283-1291. [92] S. Zheng, R.L.K. Tiong, First Public-Private-Partnership Application in Taiwan's Wastewater Treatment Sector: Case Study of the Nanzih BOT Wastewater Treatment Project, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 136 (8) (2010) 913-922. [93] S. Zheng, R.L.K. Tiong, First Public-Private-Partnership Application in Taiwan's Wastewater Treatment Sector: Case Study of the Nanzih BOT Wastewater Treatment Project, Journal of Construction Engineering & Management 136 (8) (2010) 913-922. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/63195 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 縱使公部門有良善的動機以促進民間參與公共建設(以下簡稱促參,而Build-Operate-Transfer(BOT)為其常見的一種方式)方式來執行公共建設,然而,個案的執行成果卻是良莠不齊。由於推動促參已是各國政府的趨勢,各國政府無不殷切想知道如何建立推動促參的適當制度,俾利成功地執行促參計畫。然而,與促參制度相關的研究有限,而且多是基於經驗法則。本研究即期透過更為嚴謹的研究方法,包括新制度經濟學、交易成本理論、賽局理論並結合個案研究,以提升促參相關制度研究的研究品質。本研究擇定兩個制度議題進行探討(「中央促參專責單位的角色」及「政府貸款保證契約的配套措施」),以展示所提出的研究方法具有可適切研究促參相關制度問題的價值,此外,該兩制度議題的研究成果,亦有助於提升促參的知識領域,以利執行公制合夥案件。
就中央促參專責單位的角色而言,屬於政策層面的制度議題。若其角色未事先釐清,中央促參推動單位將因此欠缺足夠的功能,難以適切的反映多變環境的需求,因此,這個組織就難以成功地推動促參案件。促參的活動,可以視為政府與私部門廠商間,彼此試著最大化各自利益的賽局,因此,依新制度經濟學,這組織的角色即可視為這個賽局的平衡解,雙方均會樂於維持這個平衡解。基此,本研究建立三個賽局情境以尋求對應的平衡解:單一主辦機關的單一賽局、單一主辦機關的重複賽局、政府(下含許多主辦機關)的重複賽局;此外,臺灣促參推動歷程及該國中央促參專責單位的角色演變,亦以個案研究的方式呈現。透過理論模型與個案研究的交互驗證,推論出該組織的共通角色為政府與民間廠商間信賴關係的創造者,是政府於促參案件的重複賽局中,為追求自身經濟效益最大化所建立的制度,以維護政府信譽,避免少數主辦機關於簽約後背棄夥伴關係的自利投機行為,引起民間廠商聯合抵制投標政府所有下屬主辦機關的案件,進而損及政府的總體長期利益。 而促參案件的契約條款,可視為個案層面的制度議題。政府在推動公私協力案件時,提供貸款保證是一個常見的措施,以促進私部門及金融機構的參與意願,雖然此舉可提高貸款可行性並降低貸款成本,然而,促參案件的成功機率卻會降低,這是因為專案公司的股東們,通常可透過參與初期的營建活動而獲取相當的利潤,當該利潤甚至超過其投入專案公司的股權時,此時,專案公司未來長期營運的好壞對其已相對不重要,因而欠缺對該案件的長期承諾。由以往政府提供貸款保證的促參案例經驗,由交易成本理論觀之,如果設計的契約機制未妥善管理民間廠商的投機行為,則政府的被挾持問題會更惡化。本部分的研究先進行個案分析,對象為臺北捷運場站聯合開發契約的協助融資機制,該協助融資機制具有類似政府貸款保證的特性,然而,亦設計許多配套機制,以保障臺北市政府的權益,而採用迄今,已有許多運用實例,可證其運用於該類案件的效果;基此,本研究進一步提出通案的政府貸款保證賽局模型,可運用於他類公共建設案件,分析建議政府得以本研究建立的模型,計算民間廠商應提供的自有資金比率外,並應確保金融機構於政府介入時仍要持續提供貸款,均為政府提供貸款保證的前提。 本研究提供決策者理論基礎與框架,以加速其執行促參案件的學習過程,而所探討的兩個制度議題,亦均具實用價值。此外,就營建領域的研究者而言,本研究結合新制度經濟學、交易成本理論、賽局理論及個案分析的研究方法,亦可運用於分析其他促進民間參與公共建設領域相關的制度議題。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Despite the good intentions for the public sector to use public-private partnerships (PPPs, a common form is Build-Operate-Transfer, BOT), results have been mixed. Together with the global expansion of PPP, governments around the world are keen to know how to establish proper institutions in order to promote PPP programs successfully. However, relevant research is limited and mainly based on rule-of-thumbs. This study aims to improve the quality of PPP research related to institutional issues by a more rigorous way which includes New Institutional Economics (NIE), Transaction Cost Theory (TCE), Game Theory and case study. Two institutional issues, the role of national PPP units and proactive measures of governmental debt guarantees, are selected to demonstrate the value of the proposed research methodology in conducting institution-related research. In addition, the findings of each topic can advance the body of knowledge in PPP implementation.
Regarding the role of national PPP units, it is a policy-level institution. Unless its role is clarified, a national PPP unit cannot be successful because it lacks adequate authority to respond appropriately to the changing environment. The PPP activities can be analyzed as a game between the host government and private developers trying to maximize their respective payoffs; thus, in accordance with NIE, a national PPP unit can be considered an endogenous equilibrium outcome of a game. On the basis of this perspective, three game theoretical models are constructed to find equilibriums: a single game for a single authority, repeated games for a single authority, and repeated games for government with multiple subordinate authorities. This part also uses a case study to present the history of PPPs in Taiwan and the evolutionary role of the National PPP Taskforce, Taiwan. National and international data confirm the theoretical model, which indicates that the common role of a national PPP unit is as a trust-creator between the public and private sectors. The contractual arrangement in a PPP contract can be viewed as the project-level institution. Governmental Debt Guarantees (GDGs) are often used to encourage involvement by developers and financial institutions in PPP projects. However, even after demonstrating the bankability of a project and reducing debt cost, the success of the project may be prevented by the lack of long-term commitment from shareholders. Equity contributions by developers in the project company are generally recovered from earnings on short-term construction activities. Based on lesson learned from early PPP projects with GDG, the hold-up problem for government in the view of TCE theory may worsen if the designed contractual structure does not adequately manage opportunistic behaviors from developers. This part empirically examined the effects of a structured GDG mechanism with particular complementary measures applied in joint projects to develop the Taipei Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) stations. A GDG game model was then applied to bridge the theoretical gap based on the Taipei MRT experience. The analysis shows that requiring the developer to provide sufficient equity and ensuring the commitment of the lender to provide the loan are the appropriate proactive measures. This pilot study contributes to the theoretical foundation that policymakers need to accelerate the learning process for implementing a PPP. It also provides researchers in the construction field with a more rigorous methodology by combining NIE, TCE, game theory and case study for analyzing other governance structures in the construction field. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-16T16:27:33Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-102-D98521020-1.pdf: 792220 bytes, checksum: dee13a8d437f3374ea07c7ae4121d660 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2013 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員審定書 1
誌謝 2 中文摘要 3 Abstract… 5 Chap 1.Introduction 7 1.1 Background and motivation 7 1.2 Research objective and value 7 1.3 Research scope and flow 8 Chap 2.Literature review 9 2.1 PPP related research 9 2.2 PPP development in Taiwan 13 2.3 Theoretical tools 14 2.3.1 New institutional economics 14 2.3.2 Transaction cost economics 15 2.3.3 New institutional economics with game theory 16 Chap 3.Case of policy-level institution: The role of national PPP units in promoting PPP 18 3.1 Introduction 18 3.2 Theoretical model 19 3.2.1 Game 1: A single game for a single Authority 20 3.2.2 Game 2: Repeated games for a single Authority 22 3.2.3 Game 3: Repeated games for Government 24 3.2.4 Implication 26 3.3 Case study 28 3.3.1 Evidence from studies in other countries 28 3.3.2 National PPP Taskforce Taiwan 28 3.4 Brief summary 31 Chap 4.Case of project-level institution: Proactive measures of governmental debt guarantees to facilitate PPP Project 33 4.1 Introduction 33 4.2 Review of literature on governmental debt guarantee 34 4.2.1 Why GDG 34 4.2.2 Problems caused by GDG in the view of transaction cost economics theory 35 4.2.3 Real cases facing problems caused by GDG 38 4.3 Research design 38 4.4 Case study 39 4.4.1 Background of Taipei MRT station PPP cases 39 4.4.2 Introduction of assistive financing mechanism 41 4.4.3 Analyzing the underlying principles of assistive financing mechanism 44 4.5 The GDG game 45 4.5.1 Model setup 45 4.5.2 Propositions and discussions 46 4.6 Suggested proactive measures and applications 48 4.7 Brief summary 49 Chap 5.Conclusions 51 Reference 53 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.title | 以賽局理論分析促進民間參與公共建設(PPP)制度之研究 | zh_TW |
dc.title | An Analysis of institutional issues in Public-Private Partnerships using Game Theory | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 101-1 | |
dc.description.degree | 博士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 郭斯傑(Sy-Jye Guo),鄭富書(Fu-Shu Jeng),林建元(Chien-Yuan Lin),周瑞生(Jui-Sheng (Rayson),葉怡成(I-Cheng Yeh) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 促進民間參與公共建設,賽局理論,中央促參專責單位,政府貸款保證, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | public-private partnerships,game theory,a national PPP unit,governmental debt guarantee., | en |
dc.relation.page | 59 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2013-01-15 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 工學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 土木工程學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 土木工程學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-102-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 773.65 kB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。