公私部門協力合作之研究─以「埔里跑Puli Power山城派對馬拉松」之個案為例

本研究以「埔里跑Puli Power山城派對馬拉松」為研究之個案，針對活動的主辦以及承辦單位為研究的對象，探討公部門與地方產業之間願意互相協力合作的原因和目的，了解過程中所運用的公私協力互動模式及利弊，並分析其執行成效。本研究主要採用質性研究方法進行文獻分析和深度訪談，以蒐集第一手資料作為研究和分析的工具。透過訪談的內容歸納出活動的發展背景、公私協力關係與及未來之展望，從而解答上述所欲探討之問題，以達成研究之目的。本研究的研究目的為：一、公部門與地方產業協力合作的意義與價值貢獻二、透過個案分析公部門與地方產業協力合作是否值得繼續運用三、針對缺失或困難提出改善並提升品質的建議研究發現（1）公私協力模式：以水平融合的互動模式協力合作，在行政決策上亦有別過往由公部門獨自主導的模式，而是由公部門下放權力於雙方，從而建立合作型的夥伴關係，共同分擔責任與成果，進而達成雙贏之局面。（2）協力合作成功的原因：參與協力之單位有明確的共同目標並積極的參與，透過資源與責任的共享和分擔而建立長久且永續的關係。（3）利與弊：提升效率、節省成本以及凝聚團隊的向心力，集思廣益共同提出解決問題的方法；越多單位參與依賴性越強，不太容易凝聚共識或決定導致衝突的發生。研究建議（1）組織管理改善之建議：開發活動舉辦經費來源、改善志工人力的協調、活動型態的轉型。（2）協力合作之夥伴關係：積極地擴充對外的人脈關係，彼此互信且尊重減少磨擦的出現才能長久合作。

關鍵字

公私協力合作；地方產業；觀光效益；「埔里跑Puli Power山城派對馬拉松」

並列摘要

This is a study of the case of “Puli Power Party Marathon” with two of the main organizers， Puli Township Administration and 18°C Foundation. The research is going to discuss government departments and local industries’ objectives and reasons behind of using public- private partnerships during the organizing. Besides， we want to know more about the public- private cooperation’s interaction and （dis）advantages to analyze the effectiveness. Base on using the qualitative research method， the research would like to gathers first-hand information from documents analysis and the process of in- depth interviews to generalize the development of “Puli Power Party Marathon” and the usage of public- private partnerships. The opinions given by interviewees can help to induce the event’s development background， relationship in the public- private partnerships and also future expectations in order to archive the research purpose of this study. Research purpose： 1. The value of existence and contribution form partnership cooperation between government departments and local industries 2. With the case study to analyze partnership cooperation should continue or not 3. Spot out the dilemmas and provide suggestions Research results （1） Public- private partnerships model： Horizontal’s partner relationship with shared resources and responsibilities in order to get a win-win situation. （2） Reasons of the succeeded： Active participants with the same specific objectives built up a long term cooperation relationship. （3） Pros and Cons： Increase efficiency， lower cost and enhance the teams’ cohesion. Brainstorming together and solve the problems; Overdependence would be difficult to reach a consensus or even conflicts may appear. Research suggestions （1） Improve organizations’ management： Develop the source of funding for organizing the event， improve the coordination between volunteers and make transformation when in need. （2） Cooperation partnerships： Proactively build up a network， respect and trust both parties for long term cooperation.