我國公共投資計畫採購模式決策基準之研究

A Study to Develop Instructions for Deciding Procurement Model in Domestic Public Infrastructure Projects

陳惠婷(Hui-Ting Chen)

指導教授 ： 周慧瑜

朝陽科技大學/理工學院/營建工程系/碩士(2009年)

摘要

愛台十二建設自民國97年5月正式成為國家經濟發展新藍圖後，政府便在8年內投資3.99兆元的計畫目標下，陸續開展各項公共建設計畫，期望即時發揮提振景氣、改善社會環境的效果。然而上述計畫目標中，除了政府擬投資2.65兆元之外，其餘1.34兆期望來自民間投資。以如此龐大的民間投資目標，對應過去歷年來扣除民間經營模式（OT）後，促參案件總推案金額逐漸萎縮的現象，即可知現行著重自償性的促參體制，實際上並未能充分提供民間參與各類型公共建設計畫的可行機制。若能參酌世界各先進國家的作法與經驗，將另一種具有公共服務採購性質，不要求自償性，且適用範疇更可擴及高公益性計畫之PFI（Private Finance Initiative）模式，填補現行採購模式不及之處，以其機制設計而言，政府便可在短時間內，快速藉助民間之力擴增公共投資能量，改善公共設施品質並提升服務水準。
不過，公共建設計畫在面對更多樣型態的推動模式時，決策評估的流程與準則是否能引導主辦機關選出最具經濟效率的可行方案，也同時變成影響計畫執行成效的關鍵影響因素之一。我國未來若引進PFI模式，公共建設投資模式便會形成現行政府採購模式與促參模式再加上PFI模式的三足鼎立情況。此時在判斷各類推動模式之適用優先性上，除了完全自償型計畫因其對降低政府財政壓力具有最大之功效，而可較明確地被視為優先方案，使外，其餘模式由於或多或少均牽涉到政府出資情況，資本結構又有部份雷同之處，因此在比較模式適用性時，便必須思考PFI模式如何與現行之評估決策程序相互整合，使先期計畫與可行性評估，可一併考量政府採購模式、促參模式及PFI模式等三大系統。
基於上述背景動機，本研究運用多屬性決策方法之思考邏輯，建立本研究採購模式之決策思考邏輯，並以我國現行公共建設計畫審議機制為基礎，且參考英國評估PFI模式適宜性所使用之定性及定量評估機制，依各種採購模式之優先適用條件及評估機制，建立各採購模式之初步篩選屬性及模式可行性評估屬性，最後依其評估屬性找出影響各種採購模式選擇之關鍵指標及評估項目。依據邏輯推演之結果，本研究建議我國公共投資計畫未來若推行PFI模式後，假設衡量初步篩選屬性決定方案選項階段，三大採購模式皆初步可行，則各模式可行性評估程序之先後順序，及各項程序中所需評估之關鍵指標可為：(1)法律可行性評估，關鍵指標為專案類型；(2)(專案採單一促參模式之)財務可行性評估，關鍵指標為自償性、投資效益及融資可行性；(3)(專案採組合型促參模式之)財務可行性評估，關鍵指標亦為自償性、投資效益與融資可行性；(4)PFI模式適用性之定性評估，關鍵指標為成果規範可行性、專案核心技術穩定性及專案規模；(5)PFI適用性之VfM評估，關鍵指標為風險移轉民間效益；(6)財政可負擔性評估，關鍵指標為財政可負擔性。上述決策流程與基準之建立，目的在提供未來公共投資計畫調整審議評估機制之參考，以求公共建設與服務之供給，能以最具經濟效率的方式推動，提高公共資本預算之執行績效與投資效益。

關鍵字

民間參與公共建設 ； 計畫審議 ； PFI模式

並列摘要

Public investment in infrastructure has promotive effects on economic development. The i-Taiwan 12 Projects, being a new economic development blueprint for Taiwan, call for the investment of NTD3.99 trillion over eight years since 2008. However, NTD1.34 trillion, ie. about one-third of the total, is expected to contributed by the private sector. Compared with the annual cumulative contract prices of the private investment promotion projects from 2002 to 2008, such investment from the private sector should be a tough goal. The private participation model implemented in infrastructure and public service projects can be divided into two major systems: “concession model” and “PFI (Private Finance Initiative) model“. The concession model has been used in Taiwan with the promulgation of the Law for Promotion of Private Participation in Infrastructure Projects on 2000. The PFI model, first adopted by United Kingdomon 1992, has been introduced in more than 30 countries. It has not been applicable in Taiwan yet, but it is broadly regarded as positive to rapidly push ahead with the investment on infrastructure and public services, especially those with high public interests but low self-liquidity. Therefore, it is an important issue for Taiwan government to investigate how to introduce PFI model into domestic private participation system for social capital investment.
However, the introduction of PFI makes the preliminary evaluation of the infrastructure projects more complicated and difficult. The public authorities have to evaluate the benefits and costs of each infrastructure project executed by different procurement model, and decide which alternative would bring the best value for money. It is essential for the public authorities to establish the procedure and criteria for their decision making. This research applied the logic of multiple attribute decision making method to develop the framework of procurement model evaluation. The evaluation process and items were based on the current running evaluation mechanism for domestic infrastructure projects, and the qualitative and quantitative assessment mechanism used by United Kingdom to evaluate the feasibility of PFI model. The research suggested that the procedure of the procurement model evaluation should be simplified through a preliminary qualitative test to eliminate the unapplicable procurement models first. Then the public authority should go a step further to the feasibility tests for the alternatives in which different procurement models are proposed. The feasibility tests should be done in sequence, and the priority of the evaluation items are as follows: (1)legal feasibility evaluation for private participation model with facility type of the project as the key indicator; (2)financial feasibility evaluation for single private participation model with self liquidating rate, investment return rate and financing feasibility as the key indicators; (3)financial feasibility evaluation for combined private participation models with self liquidating rate, investment return rate and finacing feasibility as the key indicators; (4)qualitative feasibility evaluation for PFI model with applicability of output specification, long-term stability of the core technique and project scope as the key indicators; (5)VfM evaluation for PFI model with the benefit of project risk transfer to the private sector as the key indicator; and (6)finance affordability evaluation for PFI model with finance affordability as the key indicator. The proposed procedure and evaluation criteria for procurement model decision making of public investment projects is expected to help the public authorities offer the infrastructure and public services in more economical and effective way.

並列關鍵字

Project evaluation ； PFI model ； Promotion of Private Participation

參考文獻

12.行政院公共工程委員會網站，http://www.pcc.gov.tw，2009.03

15.行政院公共工程委員會，促進民間參與公共建設政策白皮書，臺北，2009。

6.Mott McDonald,“Review of Large Public Procurement in the UK,” Report to HM Treasury, London, UK, 2002.

16.李俊佳，「網路學習系統評估模式之研究－模糊多屬性決策之應用」，碩士論文，中原大學資訊管理研究所，桃園，2003。

1.4ps, Review of Operational PFI and PPP Projects, Public-Private Partnership Programme, London, UK, 2004.