工業技術研究院（以下簡稱工研院）建立於1973年，當時台灣欲從勞力密集產業轉向技術密集產業，工研院被賦予以進步的工業技術推動台灣工業發展的角色。本文從歷史檔案研究說明後美援時期工研院的成立過程，當時的技術官僚如何透過部會協調不同意見討論建構制度，建立與韓國科學技術研究院相似的智庫，重新釐清機構間衝突時決策的轉移過程。本文研究結果如下：第一，本文藉由歷史檔案回溯工研院的成立，提供結構學派認為產業政策對東亞國家發展具有一定重要性的案例研究；第二，本文呈現工研院的成立過程和當時冷戰架構下的跨國技術知識移轉與國家的政經考量有關；第三，本文認為「以實業救國的儒官」論解釋財經或技術官僚推動台灣戰後成功經濟發展的因素，不足以概括個人到群體政策推動的過程與背景，但可做為主事者背景的補述；第四，本文指出工研院的設置過程實際上更為複雜，與現有文獻所述有所不同，並凸顯了戰後台灣政府在決策上部會與個人之間的分歧。

This thesis utilizes historical archives to explain the establishment of the Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) during the post-U.S. aid period. It illustrates how technocrats constructed institutions through inter-ministerial coordination and discussions of differing opinions, clarifying the process of decision-making transfers amid institutional conflicts. The findings of this study are as follows: First, through historical archives, the thesis retraces the establishment of ITRI, providing a case study supporting the structuralist view that industrial policy is significant for the development of East Asian countries. Second, the thesis demonstrates that the establishment process of ITRI was related to the transfer of international technological knowledge and the political and economic considerations of the state under the Cold War framework. Third, the thesis argues that the notion of "Confucian officials saving the nation through industry," which explains Taiwan's post-war economic success through the qualities and aspirations of financial or technological bureaucrats, can serve as a supplement to the background of policymakers but is insufficient to encompass the policy promotion process from individuals to groups. Fourth, the thesis points out that the actual process of establishing ITRI was more complex than existing literature suggests, highlighting divergences among ministries or individuals within the Taiwanese government in decision-making post-war.

第一章 緒論 1
第二章 戰後台灣經濟發展理論 5
2.1 十九世紀末到1970年代經濟學的發展轉向 5
2.2 支持政府干預轉向支持自由市場 6
2.3 新自由主義對產業政策的觀點 8
2.4 結構學派 11
2.5 產業政策的主事者：鑲嵌自主性 13
2.6 看法整理 15
2.7 國家體制的政策形成：經建官僚 17
2.8 產業政策如何推動：儒官救國以外的觀點 18
第三章 個案：工研院成立 21
3.1 國家安全會議與後美援時期決策 21
3.2 賀尼克與美國科技顧問團 24
3.3 科技工業計劃 29
3.4 閻振興科學技術考察團 33
3.5 政策研議 36
3.6 立法院會議 41
第四章 討論 49
4.1 機構建設：韓國跨國模式的轉移 49
4.2 技術官僚：對產業政策的觀點角力 54
第五章 結論 60
參考文獻 63
附錄一 67
附錄二 75
附錄三 81

吳大猷1989，〈一項歷史性的文件——我國「核能」政策史的一個補註〉，《在臺工作回憶錄》，台北：遠流，頁82-85。
吳大猷1989，〈給蔣彥士先生的一封信——國科會初期工作的阻撓〉，《在台工作回憶》，台北：遠流，頁86-97。
費景漢1989，〈臺灣經濟發展政策的演變過程〉，見馬凱（編），《臺灣工業發展論文集》，台北：聯經。
楊艾俐1989，《孫運璿傳》，台北：天下。
楊翠華，〈王世杰與中美科學學術交流，1963-1978：援助或合作？〉，《歐美研究》，第29卷第2期（1999年6月），頁41-103。
楊翠華，〈臺灣科技政策的先導：吳大猷與科導會〉，《臺灣史研究》，第10卷第2期（2003年），頁67-110。
趙既昌1985，《美援的運用》，台北：聯經。
劉承愚、賴文智與陳仲嶙2001，《財團法人監督法制之研究》，台北：翰蘆出版。
蔡偉銑，〈技術官僚與產業升級：台灣 1970 年代 IC 計畫的重新檢視〉，《人文及社會科學集刊》，第21卷第1期（2009年3月），頁25-99。
瞿宛文2017，《台灣戰後經濟發展的源起：後進發展的為何與如何》，台北：聯經。
Amsden, Alice H. (1989). Asia's next giant: South Korea and late industrialization, New York: Oxford University Press.
Backhouse, Roger E. (2005). “The Rise of Free Market Economics: Economists and the Role of the State since 1970,” History of Political Economy, 3, pp. 355-392.
Berger, Mark T. and Mark Beeson (1998). “Lineages of liberalism and miracles of modernisation: The World Bank, the East Asian trajectory and the international development debate,” Third World Quarterly, 19:3 (1998), pp. 487-504.
Boffey, Philip M. (1970). “Korean Science Institute: A Model for Developing Nations?” Science, 167, pp. 1354-1357.
Buchanan, James M. (1975). “Public finance and public choice.” National Tax Journal, 28:4, pp. 383-394.
Buchanan, James M. and Gordon Tullock (1965). The calculus of consent: Logical foundations of constitutional democracy, Vol. 100, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan press.
Choi, Kwang (1977). “Tax Policy and Tax Reform in Korea,” Tax Reform in Developing Countries, Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Evans, Peter B. (1992). “The state as problem and solution: Predation, embedded autonomy, and structural change,” The Politics of Economic Adjustment, 3:3, pp. 138-181.
Friedman, Milton (1968). “The role of monetary policy,” American Economic Review, 58, pp. 1-17.
Friedman, Milton (1969). The Optimum Quantity of Money, and Other Essays, New York: Routledge.
Gamble, Andrew ”Neo-liberalism,” Capital & Class, 25:3 (2001), pp. 127-134.
Gerschenkron, Alexander (1962). “On the concept of continuity in history,” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 106:3, pp. 195-209.
Gershuny, Jonathan I. (1978). “Policymaking rationality: a reformulation,” Policy Sciences, 9:3, pp. 295-316.
Greene, J. Megan (2008). The origins of the developmental state in Taiwan: science policy and the quest for modernization, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Hagemann, Harald and Omar Hamouda, eds, (2005). The Legacy of Sir John Hicks: His Contributions to Economic Analysis, New York: Routledge.
Haggard, Stephan, and Chung-In Moon (1990). “Institutions and economic policy: theory and a Korean case study,” World Politics, 42:2, pp. 210-237.
Hayek, Friedrich A. (1945). “The use of knowledge in society.” American Economic Review, 35:4, pp. 519-530.
Ho, Samuel P.S. (1987). “Economics, economic bureaucracy, and Taiwan's economic development,” Pacific Affairs, pp. 226-247.
Klein, Lawrence R. (1980). The Keynesian Revolution, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Little, Ian M. D. (1982). Economic development: theory, policy, and international relation, Vol. 130, New York: Basic Books.
Maddison, Angus (2001). Development Centre Studies: The World Economy A Millennial Perspective: A Millennial Perspective, Paris: OECD Publishing.
Mankiw, N. Gregory, and Ricardo Reis (2018). “Friedman's presidential address in the evolution of macroeconomic thought.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 32:1. pp. 81-96.
Minsky, Hyman P. (1975). John Maynard Keynes, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mudge, Stephanie L. (2008). “What is neo-liberalism?” Socio-economic review, 6:4, pp. 703-731.
North, Douglass C. (1982). Structure and change in economic history, NYC/London: W.W. Norton & Company.
Pack, Howard, Nancy M. Birdsall, Richard Sabor, Chang-Shik Kim, Joseph E. Stiglitz, Lawrence MacDonald [editor], Jose Edgardo L. Campos, John Page, and W. Max Corden (1993). The East Asian miracle: economic growth and public policy, Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group.
Pritchett, Lant (1997).“Divergence, big time,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11:3, pp. 3-17.
Samuelson, Paul A. (1983). Foundations of economic analysis, Cambridge, MA: Harvard university press.
Samuelson, Paul A., and William A. Barnett, eds, (2009). Inside the economist's mind: conversations with eminent economists, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Stiglitz, Joseph E. (2002). “Information and the Change in the Paradigm in Economics,” American Economic Review, 92:3, pp. 460-501.
Wade, Robert (1990). “Industrial policy in East Asia: does it lead or follow the market?” Manufacturing Miracles: Paths of Industrialization in Latin America and East Asia, pp. 231-266.
Wade, Robert (1996), “Japan, the World Bank, and the art of paradigm maintenance: “The East Asian miracle” in political perspective,” New Left Review, 217:3.
Wade, Robert (2018). Governing the market: Economic theory and the role of government in East Asian industrialization, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.