台灣每年四、五月為梅雨季節,六至十月為颱風季節,由於地理位置與地形環境特殊,在近年屢次受到颱風、洪水之侵襲下,造成嚴重災害。為解決水災問題,民國九十五年行政院經濟部頒布「易淹水地區水患治理計畫」,預算合計8年1160億元(編列水利署800億),整治範圍包括縣市管河川計21條、區域排水115條水系、5處海堤及河、排水系統範圍內的相關雨水下水道。 天災嚴重性直接反映於水利工程之保險問題,經濟部水利署辦理之水利工程於發包後,皆要求承包商先覓得工程保險後方可開工及計價,然欲承保之產險公司或國際再保公司對於目前業主之規定普遍無法接受,直接導致承包商覓保困難或保單之天災自負額過高,甚至附加條款與目前保險規定有所出入,造成買到實質保障不大的保險。再加上8年800億特別預算之推動執行,水利工程量突增,而保險問題卻未解決情況下,將可能造成業主工程進度執行延遲、承包商權益損失、及工程保險理賠爭議產生等情況。 近年來已有不少探討隧道工程保險之相關研究,但國內對於水利工程保險制度與成效研究卻十分缺乏,儘管此二類工程皆有高風險工程之特性,都有覓保困難之問題,但因工程性質根本上之不同,所衍生出工程保險之問題亦有所不同,欲釐清其中差異、解決目前覓保問題與承包商權益損失,故有其深入研究水利工程保險之必要。 本研究探討水利工程營造財物損失保險,首進行水利署初步訪談,同時佐以文獻回顧以瞭解目前保險現況,再以深度專家訪談建立業主、承包商、保險公司三方之意見,並假設分析,發展可行之解決對策,最後採用問卷發放對於可能之制度歸納統整。本研究成果有以下三點: 一、 彙整目前水利工程保險制度與現況之困難。 二、 歸納業主、承包商、保險公司三方對於現況之不同意見。 三、 分析業主統保、風險自留和以現行制度改善之可能選擇,提供未來制度上之建議選擇。
Due to the critical geography and topography of Taiwan, it will cause enormously damages when it comes to monsoon season annually. Therefore, Executive Yuan(ROC) has agreed the project to ameliorate the predicaments of the specific areas where suffer serious flood ravage during the typhoon season, The estimated budget of the project is 11600 billion NTD for 8 years, partially, 8000 billion NTD has been subsidized to the Water Resource Agency. Consequently, flood catastrophes is arising the issue of engineering insurance. The contractors are obligated to pay for the insurances at the interval between after-bidding and the commencement of the project by the Water Resource Agency. However, during recent cases has revealed that most of insurance companies would not accept the regulations offered by contractors because of high risk of the project. The dilemma situations have forced contractors to purchase ineffectual insurance to meet the requirement from the Water Resouce Agency. If current engineering insurances difficulties were not confronting, the coming insurance arguments of the 8000 billion NTD project from Executive Yuan could be foreseen. This essay will look into Construction All Risk Insurance(CAR) by literature review and field interview. It has encompassed three dimensions as followed: 1. Studying the difficulties between theoretical policy making and practical industry applying. 2. Inducing the observations on owners, contractors, and insurance companies. 3. Analyzing three strategies as OCIP, risk retention, and improvement of the present policy, it will attempt to render the suggestions to coming policy makers.