Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/36951
|
| Title: | 數位落差狀態衡量、策略規劃及績效管理之整合性架構與模式研究
The Study of the Integrated Architecture and Model for the Measurement of the Status, the Strategic Planning and the Performance Management of Digital Divide |
| Authors: | 王行一
Wang, Hsing I |
| Contributors: | 余千智
Yu, Chien Chih
王行一
Wang, Hsing I |
| Keywords: | 數位落差
平衡計分卡
策略缺口分析
策略地圖
績效評估
Digital divide
Balancecd Scorecard
Strategy gap analysis
Strategy map
Performance evaluation |
| Date: | 2007 |
| Issue Date: | 2009-09-18 20:15:22 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 數位落差是資訊科技與數位化經濟快速發展下的產物。研究發現數位落差代表著機會的消失，更反映著社會基本素養、貧窮、醫療或其他社會問題存在的議題，只要數位落差存在，經濟的發展、國家競爭力的提升、人民生活的進步都將受到拖延而遲緩。事實上，有關數位落差如何發生、如何衡量、影響層面與嚴重性以及如何縮減數位落差的相關議題不斷的被討論，各國政府與國際組織或者自行組成研究小組，或者邀請學者專家針對縮減數位落差議題加以探討，期以建立一個公平共享數位化所帶來各項利益的社會。然而研究顯示縮減數位落差各方努力的成效仍不如預期。如何縮減數位落差的相關研究至今仍有許多缺口待彌補，包括數位落差現象觀察不完整、欠缺一個具有全方位評量的架構、縮減數位落差的方案與數位落差現象間的因果關係並無法提出一個對應的脈絡、如何檢討縮減數位落差策略的執行績效等等。
本研究由文獻探討、資料分析提出數位落差整體衡量架構，繼之由策略管理的角度建立以平衡記分卡為基礎之數位落差策略績效評比架構，確立縮減數位落差之願景、使命、策略、策略目標以及建立以BSC為基礎之數位落差評量指標。研究並提出縮減數位落差策略缺口之定義與檢視方法。數位差衡量指標以層級分析法求得權數，並將指標與策略結合，衡量縮減數位落差策略在數位落差整體表現的實質績效。研究獲得以下結論：
1. 研究提出一個國內與國際數位落差觀察與衡量整合架構，架構共分為ICT普及、均等機會、資訊社會與國家競爭力四個構面。
2. 研究結果認為縮減數位落差在策略上應考量受益群體、政府功能與流程、全國性學習與成長以及公共財政的支援。
3. 利用策略地圖所闡述的因果特性進行策略缺口分析。研究結果提出四類水平策略議題缺口、五類水平策略目標缺口、兩類垂直策略議題缺口與三類垂直策略目標缺口。水平策略缺口分析可確保策略議題之完整性，而垂直缺口分析則可檢視策略間之因果關係是否連結。最終目標則是保證縮減數位落差策略之品質。
4. 本研究將策略與數位落差評估架構結合，除了以AHP計算各指標權數，瞭解各指標之重要性，並於指標架構表中指出該指標為績效驅動指標，或為策略執行結果指標。
5. 實例分析發現，目前台灣在縮減數位落差議題上水平策略缺口包含遺漏策略議題、缺少因應台灣特質之策略與策略目標、策略議題不明、遺漏重要策略目標、缺少適當衡量指標以及無效的策略等等。垂直策略缺口情況較嚴重，表示策略間的邏輯性並未詳細檢討過。
研究最後對我國政府提出以下建議：1.重新檢討目前衡量數位落差之架構、2.擬定縮減數位落差的策略規劃與管理機制、3.借鏡先進國家的成功案例並進行跨國的合作、4.尋求質的改善。此外提出五項衍生之議題，值得後續繼續觀察與探討：1.考慮如何將本研究所提出之架構更精鍊。2.目前全球的趨勢已由觀察數位落差的移轉至數位機會的存在，在這樣的新思維下，策略上應有哪些重大的改變？如何將這種轉變以無縫的方式連接，是值得持續觀察的議題。3.指標術語或專用名詞更精確的解釋與規範。4.跨國應用與比較，實地訪談，徵詢更實際的意見與建議，增加本研究所提出架構之實務價值。5.設計問項、核定與統一衡量單位、定義問項目的與建立題庫。
Digital divide (DD) is the byproduct of the fast development of information technologies and digital economy. Previous researches indicated that the existence of digital divide implies the vanishment of digital opportunities, and furthermore, it reflects the presence of servere social problems including literacy, poverty, medical systems, etc. As long as there is a gap, the development of economy, national competitiveness, and the advance of human lives will be affected. As the matter of fact, the issues of the causes, the measurements, the impacts as well as the reducing of digital divide have been constantly discussed over a decade. Governments and international organizations have put a lot of efforts in pursuit of establishing a society in which people would equally share the benefits of e-society by minimizing the gaps. Unfortunately, research findings have indicated that the efforts for reducing digital divides were inconvincible. Major themes, such as the observation as well as the evaluation of the status of digital divide in an integrated view, the establishment of cause-and-effect relationship between strategies and the outcomes, are still absent in the discussions or researches.
By reviewing literatures and analyzing the documents collected, this research first provides an integrated framework for simultaneously analyzing domestic and international digital divides. The framework is later incorporated with the BSC to form the strategic management platform for reducing DD. To ease the process for a nation to build its own DD-BSC and to refine its DD strategies, this research also presents a systemized approach to locate strategic gaps. The AHP is adopted in this research to verify the consistency of the structure of the framework as well as to calculate the weights of the indicators.
In summary, this research contributes the following results:
1. An integrated model, containing ICT Diffusion, Equal Opportunity, Information Society and National Competitiveness dimension for the measurement and evaluation of digital divide, is presented in this research.
2. Research findings suggest the strategies of reducing DD should be planned based on Beneficiaries, Governmental Functions and Processes, Nation-Wide Learning and Growth and Public Finance perspectives.
3. The research proposes and defines four types of horizontal strategic theme gaps, five types of horizontal strategic objective gaps, two types of vertical strategic theme gaps and three types of vertical strategic objective gap types. The ultimate goal of strategic gaps analysis is to ensure the qualities of the strategies of reducing DD.
4. The measurements proposed in this research can be used to measure the status of DD and to evaluate the performances of the strategies of reducing DD.
5. The case study of Taiwn reveals that in the issue of reducing DD, the government could initiate more effective strategies by referencing other developed countries. Major problems of Taiwan regarding to reducing DD include the lack of strategic objectives, the lack of proper measurement, the broken links among strategies as well as between strategy and its objectives.
Suggestions proposed to the government including the reexamination the scopes and strutrucures of measuring the status of digital divide, designing a strategic planning and control system for reducing DD, seeking for cross-nation cooperations and focusing on improving the qualities of the DD strategies. Future studies may focus on the refinement of the frameworks proposed in this research; determine the changes that are affected by the new concept of digital opportunities; define more clearly and precisely the terms used in observing or measuring DD; design questionnaires and collect data regularly. Finally, more interviews and case studies are to be conducted to improve the practical values of this research. |
| Reference: | 中文論文與書籍：
1. 王國川、 翁千惠譯 (2005) 質性資料分析 - 如何透視質性資料。原著：Boyatzis, R. E. (1998) "Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic analysis and Code Development"， 台北， 五南圖書出版公司。
2. 吳安妮 (2003) “平衡計分卡在公務機關實施之探討”， 研考雙月刊, 27, 45-61.
3. 吳麗娟 (1998) 公共工程施工性查核評估模式之建立，國立台灣科技大學營建工程系，碩士論文，台北。
4. 施純協譯（2000） 智能資本。原著：Roos, J., Roos, G.., Dragonetti, N., & Edvinsson, L., “Intellectual Capital—Navigating the New Business Landscape” 。台北，知行週刊出版有限公司。
5. 張溫波 (1998) ”國家競爭力之意義與內涵”，自由中國之工業，第88 (12)，第45-84頁。
6. 陳雄承 (2000) 應用分析層級程序法於工程專案進度控制模式研究－以工程統包個案為例，義守大學管理科學研究所，碩士論文， 高雄。
7. 楊孝濚 (1996) 傳播硏究方法總論， 台北市，三民書局。
8. 黃恆獎、王仕茹（1997）”國家競爭力指標之構念效度分析－IMD與WEF指標之評估”，管理學報， 14 (4)，第635-665頁。
9. 鄧振源、 曾國雄 (1989). "層級分析法（AHP）的內涵特性與應用（上）"， 中國統計學報， 27(6): 13707-13724.
10. 鄧振源 and 曾國雄 (1989). "層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與應用（下）." 中國統計學報 27(7)，第13767-13786頁。
英文論文與書籍：
1. Ahn, H. (2001). "Applying the Balanced Scorecard Concept: An Experience Report." Long Range Planning, 34(4): 441-461.
2. Antonelli, C. (2003) "The Digital Divide: Understanding the Economics of New Information and Communication Technology in the Global Economy." Information Economics and Policy, 15(2): 173-199.
3. Arora, R. (2002). “Implementing KM - a Balanced Scorecard Approach.” Journal of Knowledge Management, 6: 240-249.
4. Atkinson, A. A. and J. Q. McCrindell (1997). "Strategic Performance Measurement in Government." CMA Management, 71(3): 20-23.
5. Bagchi, K. (2005). "Factors Contributing to Global Digital Divide: Some Empirical Results." Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 8(3): 47-65.
6. Banker, R. D., H. Chang, et al. (2004). "A Balanced Scorecard Analysis of Performance Metrics." European Journal of Operational Research, 154(2): 423-436.
7. Bates, D. L. and J. E. Dillard, Jr. (1992). "Wanted: A Strategic Planner for the 1990s." Journal of General Management, 18(1): 51-62.
8. Berelson, B. (1952). Analysis of Communication Content - Content Analysis in Communication Research, Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press.
9. Bertot, J. C. (2003). "The Multiple Dimensions of the Digital Divide: More Than the Technology `Haves? and Have Nots?" Government Information Quarterly, 20(2): 185-191.
10. Bhatnagar, S. and World Bank Consultant. (2004). "Universal e-Government and the Digital Divide." 2004 APAC Summit, retrieved July 15, 2006 from http:/www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/egov.
11. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, (2002) “Toward Equality of Access: The Role of Public Libraries in Addressing the Digital Divide.” retrieved September 6 from http://www.gatesfoundation.org/nr/Downloads/libraries/uslibraries/reports/TowardEqualityofAccess.pdf.
12. Bossidy, L., R. Charan, et al. (2002). Execution: the Discipline of Getting Things Done. New York, Crown Business.
13. Bridges.org, R. (2001). "Spanning_the_Digital_Divide - Understanding and Tackling the Issues." retrieved September 2003 from http://www.bridges.org/spanning/pdf/ spanning_the_digital_divide.pdf.
14. Butler, A., S. R. Letza, et al. (1997). "Linking the Balanced Scorecard to Strategy." Long Range Planning, 30(2): 242-253,153.
15. Bush, P. (2005). "Strategic Performance Management in Government: Using the Balanced Scorecard." Cost Management, 19(3): 24-31.
16. Campbell, D. (2001). "Can the Digital Divide be Contained?" International Labour Review, 140(2): 119-141.
17. Carmona, S. and A. Gr?nlund (2003). "Measures vs. Actions: the Balanced Scorecard in Swedish Law Enforcement." International Jounal of Operations and Production Management, 23(12): 1475-1496.
18. Chan, Y.-C. L. (2004). "Performance Measurement and Adoption of Balanced Scorecards: A Survey of Municipal Governments in the USA and Canada." The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 17(3): 204-221.
19. Charan, R. and G. Golvin (1999). “Why CEOs Fail.” Fortune, 139: 68-75.
20. Clement, A. and L. Shade (2000). “The Access Rainbow: Conceptualizing Universal Access to the Information/Communications Infrastructure.” Community Informatics: Enabling Communities with Information and Communications Technologies. M. Gurstein, Hershey, PA:Idea Group Publishing: 32-51.
21. Coveney, M., D. Ganster, et al. (2003). The Strategy Gap: Leveraging Technology to Execute Winning Strategies. New Jersey, John Wiley & Sons.
22. Cravens, K., Riercy, N. & Cravens, D. (2000) Assessing the Performance of Strategic Alliances: Matching Metrics to Strategies. European Management Journal, 18, 529-541.
23. Daniel, R.D. (1961). Management Information Crisis. Harvard Business Review, 39(5): 111-121.
24. Dragulanesgu, N.-G. (2002). "Social Impact of the "Digital Divide" in a Central-Eastern European Country." International Information and Library Review, 34(2): 139-151.
25. Dutta, S. and Jain, A. (2005) “INSEAD, The Networked Readiness Index2003–2004: Overview and Analysis Framework.” Retrieved March 2006 from http://www.weforum.org/pdf/Gcr/GITR_2003_2004/Framework_Chapter.pdf.
26. Epstein, M. and J.-F. Manzoni (1998). "Implementing Corporate Strategy: From Tableaux de Board to Balanced Scorecards." European Management Journal, 16(2): 190-203.
27. Ge, W. and H. Jain (2003). Internet Diffusion and Digital Divide in China: Some Empirical Results. AIS Proceedings.
28. Griffiths, J. (2003). "Balanced Scorecard Use in New Zealand Government Departments and Crown Entities." Australian Journal of Public Administration, 62(4): 70-79.
29. Haan, J. D. (2004). "A Multifaceted Dynamic Model of the Digital Divide." IT & Society, 1(7): 66-88.
30. Hagelin, E. (1999). "Coding Data from Chile Health Records: The Relationship Between Inter-rater Agreement and Interpretive Burden." Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 14(5): 313-321.
31. Harrison, E. F. (1989). "The Concept of Strategic Gap." Journal of General Management, 15(2): 57.
32. Hoffman, D. L. and T. P. Novak (1999). The Growing Digital Divide: Implications for an Open Research Agenda, Owen Graduate School of Management, Vanderbilt University, Nashville.
33. Hoffman, D. L., T. P. Novak, et al. (2004). "Has The Internet Become Indispensable? Empirical Findings and Model Development." Communications of the ACM, 47(7): 37-42.
34. Holsti, O. (1969). Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities, Don Mills: Addison-Wesley.
35. Ifinedo, P. and R. Davidrajuh (2005). "Digital Divide in Europe: Assessing and Comparing the E-readiness of a Developed and an Emerging Economy in the Nordic Region." Electronic Government, an International Journal, 2(2): 111-133.
36. Irwin, D. (2002). "Strategy Mapping in the Public Sector." Long Range Planning, 35(6): 637-647.
37. Jalava, J. and M. Pohjola (2002). "Economic Growth in the New Economy: Evidence from Advanced Economics." Information Economics and Policy, 14 (2): 189-210.
38. Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton (1996a). "Using the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic Management System." Harvard Business Review, 74(1): 75-85.
39. Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton (1996b). The Balanced Scorecard - Translating Strategy into Action. Boston, Harvard Business School Press.
40. Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton (2000). "Having Trouble With Your Strategy? Then Map It." Harvard Business Review, 78(4): 167-176.
41. Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton (2001a). "Transforming the Balanced Scorecard from Performance Measurement to Strategic Management: Part I." Accounting Horizons, 15(1): 87-104.
42. Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton (2001b). The Strategy Focused Organization: How Balanced Scorecard Companies Thrive in the New Business Environment, Harvard Business School Press.
43. Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton (2003). Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets Into Tangible Outcomes, Harvard Business School Press.
44. Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton (2004a). "The strategy map: guide to aligning intangible assets." Strategy & Leadership, 32(5): 10-17.
45. Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton (2004b). "How Strategy Maps Frame an Organization`s Objectives." Financial Executive, 20(2): 40-45.
46. Kloot, L. and J. Martin (2000). "Strategic Performance Management: A Balanced approach to Performance Management Issues in Local Government." Management Accounting Research, 11(2): 231-251.
47. Krippendorff, K. (2004). "Reliability in Content Analysis: Some Common Misconceptions and Recommendations." Human Communication Research, 30(3): 411-433.
48. Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
49. Lang, S. S. (2004). "Balanced Scorecard and Government Entities." The CPA Journal, June: 48-52.
50. Lentza, R.G. and Oden, Michael D. (2001). “Digital Dvide or Digital Opportunity in the Mississippi Delta Region of the US.” Telecommunications Policy, 25(5): 291-313.
51. Levetan, L. (2000). “Implementing Performance Measures." The American City and Country, 115(13): 40-44.
52. Lipe, M. G. and S. E. Salterio (2000). "The Balanced Scorecard: Judgmental Effects of Common and Unique Performance Measures." The Accounting Review, 75(3): 283-298.
53. Lombard, M., J. Snyder-Duch, et al. (2002). "Content analysis in Mass Communication research: An Assessment and Reporting of Intercoder Reliability." Human Communication Research, 28(4): 587-604.
54. Mansell, R. (2002). "From Digital Divides to Digital Entitlements in Knowledge Societies." Current Sociology, 50(3): 407-426.
55. Manson, S. M. and K. L. Hacker (2003). "Applying Communication Theory to Digital Divide Research." IT & Society, 1(5): 40-55.
56. McAdam, R. and T. Walker (2003). "An Inquiry into Balanced Scorecards within Best Value Implementation within UK Local government." Public Administration, 81(4): 873-892.
57. MeIver, W. J. J. (2000). A Human Rights Perspective on the Digital Divide: The Human Right to Communicate. Proceedings of the DIAC 2000 Symposium, Seattle, Washington.
58. Meng, Q. and M. Li (2002). "New Economy and ICT development in China." Information Economics and Policy, 14 (2): 275-295.
59. Mintzberg, H. (1994). "The Fall and Rise of Strategic Planning." Harvard Business Review, 72(1): 107-114.
60. Mistry, J. J. (2005). "A Conceptual Framework for the Role of Government in Bridging the Digital Divide." Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 8(3): 28-46.
61. Modell, S. (2004). "Performance Measurement Myths in the Public Sector: A Research Note." Financial Accountability & Management, 20(1): 39-55.
62. Mooraj, S., D. Oyon, et al. (1999). "The Balanced Scorecard: a Necessary Good or an Unnecessary Evil?" European Management Journal, 17(5): 481-491.
63. Moussalli, A. and C. Stokes (2002). “Bridging the Digital Divide with AVANTI Technology.” R. Traunmüller and K. Lenk (Eds.), EGOV 2002, LNCS 2456, 344-349.
64. Niven, P. R. (2002). Balanced Scorecard Step-by-Step, Maximizing Performance and Maintaining Results. New York, Wiley.
65. Niven, P. R. (2003) Balanced Scorecard Step-by-Step, for Government and Nonprofit Agencies, New York, Wiley.
66. Owen, A. (2000). "Falling Through the Net: Defining the Digital divide. A Report on the telecommunications and Information Technology gap in America." Journal of Government Information, 27(2): 245-246.
67. Piazolo, D. (2001). The New Economy and the International Regulatory Framework. Kiel Working Paper. No. 1030.
68. Porter, M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York, The Free Press.
69. Portter, W. and D. Levine-Donnerstein (1999). "Rethinking Validity and Reliability in Content Analysis." Journal of Applied Communications Research, 27(3): 258-284.
70. Proctor, T. (1997). "Establishing a Strategic Direction: A Review." Management Decision, 35(2): 143-165.
71. Quibria, M. G., S. N. Ahmed, et al. (2003). "Digital Divide: Determinants and Policies With Special Reference to Asia." Journal of Asian Economics, 13(6): 811-825.
72. Riffe, D., S. Lacy, et al. (1998). Analyzing Media Messages: Quantitative Content Analysis. New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
73. Robinson, J. P., P. Dimaggio, et al. (2003). "New Social Survey Perspectives on the Digital Divide." IT & Society, 1(5): 1-22.
74. Rourke, L., T. Anderson, et al. (2002). "Methodological Issues in the Content Analysis of Computer Conference Transcripts." International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12: 8-22.
75. Saaty, T. L. (1990). Multicriteria Decision Making: The Analytic Hierarchy Process - Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation. Pittsburgh, RWS Publications.
76. Sciadas, G. (2002). "Monitoring Digital Divide." Retrieved July 2006 at http://www.digitaldivide.gov.
77. Servaes, J. and F. Heinderyckx (2002). "The "New` ICTs Environment in Europe: Closing or Widening the Gaps?" Telematics and Informatics, 19(2): 91-115.
78. Shade, L. R. (2002). "The Digital Divide: From Definitional Stances to Policy Initiatives." retrieved January 2004 from http://www3.fis.utoronto.ca/research/iprp/publications/shade_digitaldivide.pdf, Prepared for Department of Canadian Heritage P3: Policy and Program Forum Ottawa.
79. Steinmueller, W. E. (2001). "ICTs and The Possibilities for Leapfrogging by Developing Countries." International Labour Review, 140(2): 193-210.
80. Tobias, H. and H. Selhofer (2004). "DIDIX: A Digital Divide Index for Measuring Inequality in IT Diffusion." IT & Society, 1(7): 21-38.
81. Voelker, K. E., J. S. Rakich, et al. (2001). "The Balanced Scorecard in Healthcare Organizations: A Performance Measurement and Strategic Planning Methodology." Hospital Topics, 79(3): 13-24.
82. Walton CB, R. (2005). "Identity Infrastructure: Security Considerations." Computer Fraud & Security, 2005(8): 4-8.
83. West, D. M. (2002) Global E-Government 2002. Rhode Island, United States, Center for Public Policy, Brown University.
84. Wimmer, R. D. and J. R. Dominick (1991). Mass Media Research: An Introduction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Inc.
85. Wong, P.-K. (2002). "ICT Production and Diffusion in Asia Digital Dividends or Digital Divide?" Information Economics and Policy, 14(2): 167-187.
86. Yu, C.-C. (2001). "An Integrated Framework of Business Models for Guiding Electronic Commerce Applications and Case Studies." Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2115: 111-120.
87. Yu, C.-C. and H.-I. Wang (2004a). "Digital divide in Taiwan: Evidences, comparisons, and strategies." Electronic Government,1(2): 179-197.
88. Yu, C.-C. and H.-I. Wang (2004b). "An Integrated Framework for Analyzing Domestic and International Digital Divides." EGOV 2004, R. Traunmuller (Ed.) Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3183(0): 293-299.
89. Yu, C.-C. and H.-I. Wang (2005). Measuring the Performance of Digital Divide Strategies: The Balanced Scorecard Approach. EGOV 2005, R. Traunmuller (Ed.) Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3591: 151-162
90. Yu, C.-C. and H.-I. Wang (2006). "Analyzing Strategic Gaps of Digital Divide Projects Based on the Balanced Scorecard." Proceedings of the I3E 2006 conference, the sixth IFIP conference on e-Commerce, e-Business, and e-Government. Turku, Finland.
91. Zhou, Q. (2005). National & Municipal Government Websites: a Comparison Between the United States and China. Proceedings of the 2005 National Conference on Digital Government Research dg.o2005, Atlanta, Georgia.
報告
1. APEC, "2002 The New Economy in APEC: Innovations, Digital Divide and Policy." http://www.apec.org/apec/publications/free_downloads/02_ec_neweconomy.pdf.
2. APEC, Electronic Commerce Steering Group, http://www.apec.org/apec/apec_groups/som_special_task_groups/electronic_commerce.html.
3. EIU. (various years). "E-Readiness Report." http://graphics.eiu.com/files/ad_pdfs/.
4. G8 Information Center, 2000, "Okinawa Charter on Global Information Society", Kyushu-Okinawa Summit 2000, http://www.g8.utoronto.ca/summit/2000okinawa/gis.htm.
5. G8 Information Center, 2002, "2002 Genoa Compliance Report - Bridging the Digital Divide Dot Force", http://www.g8.utoronto.ca/evaluations/2002compliance/2002reportCompDOT.pdf, accessed December 5, 2005.
6. IDC. Information Society Index." http://www.worldpaper.com.
7. IKS Division, ITM Department, ICT Knowledge for ICT Diffusion, Information and Communication Division, Department of Information Technology and Media, Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden, http://www.spidercenter.org/upl/filer/533.pdf.
8. IMD. The World Competitiveness Yearbook, International Institute for Management Development, Lausanne.
9. ISPO, Information Society Indicators in the Member States of the European Union, Information Society Promotion Office, Prepared by ESIS Project Management Support Team, http://europa.eu.int/ISPO/esis/default.htm.
10. ITU, "Measuring Digital Opportunity", International Telecommunication Union, WSIS Thematic Meeting on Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships for Bridging the Digital Divide Seoul, Republic of Korea, 23 - 24 June 2005, http://www.itu.int/osg/spu/ni/wsisbridges/linked_docs/Background_papers/Measuring_Digital_Opp_Revised_31_Oct_2005.pdf.
11. Japan. Stirring of the It-Prevalent Society, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, http://www.johotsusintokei.soumu.go.jp/whitepaper/eng/WP2002/2002-index.html, 2002 white papers.
12. Korea, IT839 strategy: introduce "eight new major information and communications services to prompt investment in "three major" network infrastructures, and make "nine new major" It growth engines.
13. MIC, "IT839 Strategy", Ministry of Information and Communication, http://www.mic.go.kr/it839eng.pdf.
14. Ministry of Defense, 2002, “Ministry of Defense - Performance Report 2001/2002”, Ministry of Defense, UK, http://www.archive2.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm56/5661/summary.htm.
15. Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Japan, 2001, "The Accelerating IT Revolution: A Broadband-driven IT Renaissance", 001 white papers http://www.johotsusintokei.soumu.go.jp/whitepaper/eng/WP2001/2001-index.html.
16. Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Japan, 2002, "Stirring of the It-Prevalent Society",2002 white papers http://www.johotsusintokei.soumu.go.jp/whitepaper/eng/WP2002/2002-index.html.
17. Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Japan, 2003, "Building a "New, Japan-Inspired IT Society", 2003 white papers http://www.johotsusintokei.soumu.go.jp/ whitepaper/eng/WP2003/2003-index.html.
18. Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Japan, 2004, "Building a Ubiquitous Network Society That Spreads Through out the World", 004 white papers http://www.johotsusintokei.soumu.go.jp/whitepaper/eng/WP2004/2004-index.html.
19. Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Japan, 2005, "Information and Communications in Japan- Stirrings of U-Japan", 2005 white papers http://www.johotsusintokei.soumu.go.jp/whitepaper/eng/WP2005/2005-index.html.
20. Ministry of Defence. Ministry of Defence - Performance Report 2001/2002. UK. http://www.archive2.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm56/5661/summary.htm.
21. National Computer Agency, (2003) "White Paper Internet Korea 2003", Ministry of Information and Communication, http://www.nca.or.kr/whitepaper2003.pdf.
22. NTIA (1995). Falling through the Net: A Survey of the "Have Nots" in Rural and Urban America. Washington, DC, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, US Department of Commerce.
23. NTIA (1999). Falling Through the Net: Part I - Household Access. Washington, DC, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, US Department of Commerce.
24. NTIA (1999). Falling Through the Net: Part II - Internet Access and Usage. Washington, DC, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, US Department of Commerce.
25. OECD. "The Digital Divide: Enhancing Access to ICTs." http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/37/14/1887821.ppt.
26. OECD. Understanding the Digital Divide. OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation And Development), http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/38/57/1888451.pdf.
27. OECD, Science, Technology and Industry Outlook 2002, http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/61/31/2762979.pdf.
28. OECD. "Digital Opportunities for Poverty Reduction: Addressing the international digital divide." http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/25/61/2495467.pdf.
29. OECD. "The Future Digital Economy: Digital Content Creation, Distribution and Access." http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/54/35/36854745.pdf.
30. OECD. “Bridging the "Digital Divide": Issues and Policies in OECD Countreis.” http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/10/0/27128723.pdf.
31. Paua, F. Global Diffusion of ICT: A Progress Report (Chapter 2 in Global Information Technology Report, 2003-2004), World Economic Forum.
32. Sweden. An Information Society for All, the Ministry of Industry, Employment and Communications, Sweden. http://www.sweden.gov.se/content/1/c6/01/84/48/99740a84.pdf.
33. The Danish State, "IT Action Plan 2002", http://denmark.dk/portal/page?_pageid=374,520816&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL.
34. The White House (2000) The Clinton-Gore Administration: From Digital Divide To Digital Opportunity. http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/digitaldivide/digital1.html.
35. UNCTAD. E-Commerce and Development Report 2001. The United Nations Conferences on Trade and Development.
36. UNCTAD.The Digital Divide Report: ICT Diffusion Index 2005. The United Nations Conferences on Trade and Development.
37. United Nations, Core ICT Indicators, http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/partnership/material/CoreICTIndicators.pdf.
38. UND, Creating a Development Dynamic: Final Report of the Digital Opportunity Initiative, Accenture, Markle Foundation, United Nations Development Programme, http://www.markle.org/downloadable_assets/doifinalreport.pdf.
39. WEF. "The Global Competitiveness Report." http://www.weforum.org.
40. 行政院研究發展考核委員會. 95年個人/家戶數位落差調查報告, 委託研究計畫報告, http://www.digitaldivide.nat.gov.tw.
41. 曾淑芬 (2003). 數位落差整體評估指標架構. 行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究計畫報告.
42. 盧建旭 (2003). 推動APEC數為機會發展中心之行動計畫, 台灣經濟研究院國際事務處.
網路資源(國家)
1. Demark, National IT and Telecom Agency, Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation of Denmark, http://itst.dk.
2. Denmark. http://dk/portal.
3. Finish, http://www.sitra.fi.
4. Finish Government, http://www.government.fi.
5. Japan, Ministry of Information and Communication (MIC), http://www.johotsusintokei.soumu.go.jp.
6. Korea, Ministry of Information and Communication (MIC), http://www.mic.go.kr.
7. Korea, Nation computerization Agency of Korea (NCA), http://www.nca.or.kr.
8. Norway, http://www.sintef.no.
9. Singapore, Infocomm Development Authority (IDA), http://www.ida.gov.sg.
10. Sweden, http://www.itkommissionen.se.
11. Sweden, http://www.sweden.gov.se/.
12. United States, FCC, Federal Communications Commission, http://www.fcc.gov/initiatives.html.
13. United States, NTIA, National Telecommunication and Information Administration, U.S. department of Commerce, United States, www.ntia.doc.gov.
14. United States, FIRSTGOV.GOV, The U.S. Government Official Web Portal, http://firstgov.gov.
網路資源(台灣)
1. 公務員資訊學習網，http://itschool.dgbas.gov.tw.
2. 行政院科技顧問組，http://www.stag.gov.tw
3. 行政院研究發展考核委員會，http://www.rdec.gov.tw.
4. 行政院教育部，http://www.edu.tw
5. 行政院經濟部，http://moea.gov.tw.
6. 行政院國家科學委員會，https://nscnt07.nsc.gov.tw/tc/NEWS/ATTFILE/0950006_1.pdf.
7. 經濟部工業局數位學習網路科學園區， http://www.epark.org.tw.
8. 財團法人國家實驗研究院科技政策研究與資訊中心，http://cdnet.stpi.org.tw.
9. 縮減產業數位落差計畫網站，http://www.e98.org.tw:8080.
網路資源(其他)
1. APEC, Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, http://www.apecsec.org.
2. Balanced Scorecard Collaborative, http://www.bscol.com.
3. Globalreach, Global Internet Statistics. http://global-reach.biz/globstats/index.php3.
4. Digital Divide Network, http://digitaldivide.net.
5. DOT, Digital Opportunity Task Force, http://www.dotforce.org.
6. EIU, Economist Intelligence Unit, http://www.ebussinessforum.com.
7. Europa, Gateway to European Union, http://europa.eu.int.
8. G8, Group of Eight, http://www.g8.utoronto.ca.
9. IDC, http://www.worldpaper.com.
10. IMD, International Institute for Management Development, Lausanne http://www.imd.ch
11. ITU, http://www.itu.int.
12. OECD, Organization for Economic Co-operation And Development, http://www.oecd.org.
13. RCMP, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/ab/docs.
14. The World Bank Group http://www.worldbank.org.
15. UNCTAD, The United Nations Conferences on Trade and Development, http://www.unctad.org/en.
16. WEF World Economic Forum, http://www.weforum.org.
17. WSIS World Summit on the Information Society, http://www.itu.int/wsis. |
| Description: | 博士
國立政治大學
資訊管理研究所
90356505
96 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0903565051 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [資訊管理學系] 學位論文
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
