產業園區智慧化評估與發展策略之研究：以編定工業區為例

傳統產業園區僅為提拱廠商聚集之處而設立，當內在需求與外在環境改變，產業園區面臨發展瓶頸，各國紛紛將產業園區導入智慧化概念，以新一代資通訊技術來提升產業園區的服務營運效率，許多國家更設計評估架構，作為產業園區智慧化發展的依循。同時，園區的智慧化發展與城鄉智慧化亦有互相影響關係，形成資源、技術與人才流通的雙向互動連結。亦即，產業園區透過智慧化將園區轉型與升級是解決發展課題的重要途徑，然而多數產業園區對智慧化的建設需求並不瞭解，因此產生了許多相關工程盲目推動的問題。針對產業園區智慧化的概念，臺灣目前尚未有較深入之研究及評估架構可供參考，為避免發展時出現上述問題，本研究首先進行兩階段專家問卷的調查，建立臺灣產業園區智慧化的評估架構，並以該評估架構對臺灣經濟部工業局設立之61處編定工業區進行智慧化程度調查，掌握各園區智慧化的發展程度與薄弱之處；同時，以階層迴歸模型分析臺灣產業園區智慧化的程度與外在環境的關聯性，以瞭解臺灣產業園區智慧化與智慧城鄉的互動程度。問卷結果顯示，評估架構中以智慧訊息資源之面向最為重要，其次為智慧基礎設施、智慧營運管理，而權重值最高的指標項目為「智慧化產業園區推動組織與計畫」；其次，評估結果發現，高於整體平均分數產業園區主要集中在南區，以臺南科技園區為最高分；最後，階層迴歸模型中，本研究以「園區本身條件」、「園區所在城鄉環境特性」、「園區所在城鄉智慧化發展程度」三個階層為自變數選取的依據，分析結果顯示目前臺灣產業園區智慧化的發展程度與園區外部並非同步發展的情況。

關鍵字

產業園區；智慧化；智慧城市

並列摘要

Traditional industrial parks were only set up to assemble manufactures. When internal and external environments changed, industrial parks were faced with bottlenecks. Foreign countries had introduced the concepts of ＂Smart＂, information and communication technology, into industrial park in order to improve operation efficiency in industrial parks. Further, many countries had designed evaluation frameworks as a reference. In addition, the development of smart industrial park would interact with smart city and form a two-way interactive link between resources, technology, and talent circulation. Related to the concept of smart industrial parks, Taiwan has not yet provided deeper researches and evaluation frameworks for reference. In this study, expert panel was utilized to establish an evaluation framework for Taiwan's smart industrial parks. With this evaluation framework, 61 industrial parks set up by IDB-MOEA were investigated to grasp the level of smart development and weaknesses; furthermore, hierarchical regression model was used to analyze the relevance between Taiwan's smart industrial parks and the external environment in order to understand the degree of interaction between Taiwan's smart industrial parks and smart city. The results of the survey showed that the most important aspect of the evaluation framework was smart information and resources, and followed by smart infrastructure, smart operation management. The detailed evaluation indicators for the highest weight value are ＂smart industrial park promotion organizations and projects＂. Secondly, according to the evaluation results, the smart industrial parks with a score higher than the overall average score were mainly concentrated in the southern district. Among them, the highest score was the Tainan Technology Industrial Park; finally, in the hierarchical regression model, this study used three levels: ＂the conditions of the park itself＂ and ＂environmental characteristics of the city where the park was located＂ and ＂the development degree of smart city where the park was located＂. Model analysis results showed that the explanatory power of the three hierarchical models is low, that is, the current development degree of smart industrial park in Taiwan had a greater correlation with the internal organizational driving force.