科學園區是將群聚治理予以制度化的一種形式，也是許多國家推動產業創新普遍使用的政策途徑，但面對高科技產業的創新樣態與全球化，這樣的科學園區政策，卻未必能對產業升級或科技生根提供更一步的動力。過去多數研究缺乏對影響科學園區效益的區域背景因素有系統性地理解，忽略了科學園區效益創新系統組成元素的協同作用是跨不同尺度規模的，其代表了各種地理尺度上地方環境要素的獨特性質，而這些要素有助於未來科學園區之發展，甚至是再發展與轉型之潛力關鍵。
有鑑於此，本研究以區域創新系統之概念作為研究取徑，了解科學園區發展之區域背景特徵，以及影響科學園區創新效益的因素與作用機制，提出「區域、城市與園區」三個不同空間尺度的內涵，建立區域創新系統觀點下科學園區發展評估指標架構與內容，接續透過兩階段的專家問卷進行檢視與評估，並從填答之結果中提出結論與發現，以期使指標架構之概念及各項因子內容，可供日後不同層級之規劃決策者、政府或相關主管機關，作為規劃的參考或應用之依據。此外，本研究更進一步依據此指標框架與各項因子之專家問卷結果，以台灣北部以新竹科學園區為中心的區域創新系統，以及南部以南科為中心的區域創新系統作為比較論證，藉以了解創新因素在兩園區之間實際的作用關係，探討之間共同性和差異性，進而提出未來台灣科學園區再發展之規劃趨勢與建議。

Science parks are a form of institutionalizing cluster governance and a policy approach that is commonly used in many countries to promote industrial innovation. However, in the face of innovation and globalization of high-tech industries, such science park policies may not be Industrial upgrading or technology rooting provides a further impetus. In the past, most studies lacked a systematic understanding of the regional background factors that affect the performance of science parks, ignoring the synergy of the components of the science park performance innovation system across different scales, which represent the uniqueness of local environmental factors at various geographic scales nature, and these elements contribute to the future development of science parks, and even the potential for redevelopment and transformation.
In view of this, this study takes the concept of regional innovation system as a research approach to understand the regional background characteristics of the development of science parks, as well as the factors and mechanisms that affect the innovation performance of science parks, and proposes three different spaces: "region, city and park" The connotation of the scale, the establishment of a scientific park development evaluation index structure and content under the perspective of a regional innovation system, followed by a two-stage expert questionnaire for review and evaluation, and conclusions and findings from the results of the answer, in order to make the concept of the index structure and The content of each factor can be used by planning decision-makers, governments or relevant competent authorities at different levels in the future as a reference or application basis for planning. In addition, based on the indicator questionnaire and the results of the expert questionnaires of various factors, this study further uses the regional innovation system centered on Hsinchu Science Park in northern Taiwan and the regional innovation system centered on Tainan Science Park in the south as a comparative argument to understand The actual role of innovation factors in the two parks, to explore the commonality and differences between them, and then put forward planning trends and suggestions for the future development of Taiwan Science Parks

一、中文部分
丁家鵬、吳思華 (2005)，台灣地方城市創意競爭力之比較研究。國立政治大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
王勝範(2009)，生態工業區公園綠地評估因子之研究，中國文化大學建築及都市計劃研究所碩士論文。
白仁德 (2015)，歷年來高速公路系統沿線地區人口及產業空間分布變遷之研究，臺灣土地研究, 18(2)， 21-46。
江昇飛（2005），區域產業創新系統關鍵發展因素之研究，國立中山大學公共事務管理研究所未出版之碩士論文。
李玉鈴(2013)，台灣科學工業園區發展之策略環境評估研究，臺北大學自然資訊與環境管理研究所學位論文。
李鴻毅(1996)，土地法論，中國地政研究所出版。
林楨家、馮正民、丁柏雅(2005)，以地域連攜爲基礎的科學園區規劃模式，臺灣土地研究，8(1)，41-69。
周怡祺(2016)，從三螺旋理論探討醫療器材新營運模式。
胡太山、解鴻年、王俊堯(2002)，新竹科學園區周邊地區社經發展變遷之調查研究，都市與計劃，29(1)，37-65。
陳廷雄(2010)，工業區規劃設計之回顧與展望，中興工程，(107)，99-116。
陳秉立、閻永祺、孔憲法(2016)，南部科學園區創新平台形成之政策網絡分析. Journal of architecture，17(1)， 25-52。
吳濟華、李亭林、陳協勝、何柏札(2012)，產業群聚與區域創新聚集經濟理論實證。
張素莉、胡太山、林建元 (2004)，高科技産業與生産者服務業互動關係之探討：以新竹科學園區及周邊地區爲例，科技管理學刊，9(3), 33-61。
趙永茂、陳銘顯(2012)，台灣科學園區發展政策的區域治理問題與府際關係轉變，趙永茂(編)，府際關係：新興研究議題與治理策略，北京，社會科學文獻，頁269-290。
葉秀婉(2007)，各國科學園區投資環境比較及國際科學園區合作之研究，行政院所屬各機關因公出國人員出國報告書。
張又心(2009)，台灣高科技產業創新發展研究，國立交通大學科技管理研究所碩士論文。
科技部(2015)，104年度科學工業園區滿意度調查報告。
解鴻年、胡太山、賈秉靜、侯昌佑、羅欣玫 (2013)，初探區域創新系統到智慧城域的浮現與發展，建築與規劃學報 13：165-188。
邱麗蓉(1990)，台灣地區科技產業園區環境規劃之探討，國立成功大學碩士論。
施鴻志、孔憲法(1991)，國外科技園區發展經驗比較分析，台南市：國立成功大學都市計劃學系（行政院經濟建設委員會委託）。
 
二、英文部分
Anttiroiko, A. V. (2004). Global competition of high-tech centres. International Journal of Technology Management,28(3-6), 289-323.
Albahari, A., Barge-Gil, A., Pérez-Canto, S., & Modrego, A. (2018). The influence of Science and Technology Park characteristics on firms’ innovation results. Papers in Regional Science, 97(2), 253–279.
Albahari, A., Catalano, G., & Landoni, P. (2013). Evaluation of national science park systems: A theoretical framework and its application to the Italian and Spanish systems. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 25(5), 599–614.
Albahari, A. (2015). 10 Science and Technology Parks: does one size fit all?. Making 21st century knowledge complexes: technopoles of the world revisited.
Albahari, A., Barge-Gil, A., Pérez-Canto, S., & Modrego, A. (2016). The influence of science and tech- nology park characteristics on firms’ innovation results. Papers in Regional Science.
Albahari, A., Pérez-Canto, S., Barge-Gil, A., & Modrego, A. (2017). Technology Parks versus science parks: Does the university make the difference? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 116,13–28.
Asheim, B. T., & Isaksen, A. (2002). Regional innovation systems: the integration of local ‘sticky’and global ‘ubiquitous’ knowledge. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 27(1), 77-86.
Asheim, B. T., & Gertler, M. S. (2005). Regional innovation systems and the geographical foundations of innovation. The Oxford handbook of innovation, 291-317.
Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1996). R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. The American economic review, 86(3), 630-640.
Annerstedt, J. (2006). Science parks and high-tech clustering. In P. Bianchi (Ed.), International hand- book on industrial policy (pp. 279–296). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Anthony Robert Wilson. (2004). Improving the sustainalility process at the Hong Kong Science Park Phase I. Sustainable Building South East Asia, 87-95.
Bigliardi, B., Dormio, A. I., Nosella, A., & Petroni, G. (2006). Assessing science parks’ performances: Directions from selected Italian case studies. Technovation, 26(4), 489–505.
Biggiero, L. (1998). Italian industrial districts: a Triple Helix pattern of problem solving.Industry and higher education,12(4), 227-234.
Bellini, N., Teräs, J., & Ylinenpää, H. (2012). Science and Technology Parks in the Age of Open Innovation. The Finnish Case. Symphonya. Emerging Issues in Management, (1), 25-44.
Benneworth, P., & Ratinho, T. (2014). Reframing the role of knowledge parks and science cities in knowledge-based urban development. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 32(5), 784-808.
Boschma, R. (2015). Towards an evolutionary perspective on regional resilience. Regional Studies, 49(5), 733-751.
Bass, S. J. (1998). Japanese research parks: National policy and local development. Regional Studies, 32(5), 391–403.
Broekel, T. (2012). Collaboration intensity and regional innovation efficiency in Germany—A conditional efficiency approach. Industry and Innovation, 19(3), 155–179.
Chen, C.-J., Wu, H.-L., & Lin, B.-W. (2006). Evaluating the development of high-tech industries: Tai- wan’s science park. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73(4), 452–465.
Carrillo, F. J., Yigitcanlar, T., García, B., & Lönnqvist, A. (2014). Knowledge and the city: Concepts, applications and trends of knowledge-based urban development. Routledge.Carvalho, L., & van Winden, W. (2017). Planned knowledge locations in cities: Studying emergence and change. International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, 8(1), 47–67.
Chan, K. F., & Lau, T. (2005). Assessing technology incubator programs in the science park: The good, the bad and the ugly. Technovation, 25(10), 1215–1228.
Colley, K., Brown, C., & Montarzino, A. (2016). Restorative wildscapes at work: An investigation of the wellbeing benefits of greenspace at urban fringe business sites using “go-along” interviews. Land- scape Research, 41(6), 598–615.
Colombo, M. G., & Delmastro, M. (2002). How effective are technology incubators?: Evidence from Italy. Research Policy, 31(7), 1103–1122.
Cooke, P., 1998, ‘Introduction. Origins of the Concept,’ in H.-J. Braczyk et al. (eds.), Regional Innovation Systems, London: UCL Press, pp. 2-25.
Comins, N., & Rowe, D. N. E. (2008). Success factors for science parks in the developed world and emerging economies (1).
Cooke, P. (2001). Regional innovation systems, clusters, and the knowledge economy. Industrial and corporate change, 10(4), 945-974.
Cooke, P. (2002). Regional innovation systems: general findings and some new evidence from biotechnology clusters. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 27(1), 133-145.
Cooke, P. (2004). The regional innovation system in Wales. Regional Innovation Systems. The Role of Governances in a Globalized World, 245-263.
Cabral, R. (1998). The Cabral-Dahab science park management paradigm: An introduction. Interna- tional Journal of Technology Management, 16(8), 721–725.
Cui, Z., Wen, T., & Zhang, Y. (2013). Research of Space Form Evolution of New and High Technology Industries Development Zones. In Advanced Materials Research (Vol. 671, pp. 2431-2436). Trans Tech Publications Ltd.
Doloreux, D., & Porto Gomez, I. (2017). A review of (almost) 20 years of regional innovation systems research. European Planning Studies, 25(3), 371–387.
Doloreux, D. (2004). Regional innovation systems in Canada: A comparative study. Regional Studies, 38(5), 481–494.
Doloreux, D., & Parto, S. (2005). Regional innovation systems: Current discourse and unresolved issues. Technology in society, 27(2), 133-153.
Da Cunha, I.V., Selada, C., 2009. Creative urban regeneration. Int. J. Innov. Reg. Dev. 1,371–386.
Díez-Vial, I., & Fernández-Olmos, M. (2017). The effect of science and technology parks on firms’ per- formance: How can firms benefit most under economic downturns? Technology Analysis & Strate- gic Management, 29(10), 1153–1166.
Durmaz, S. B. (2015). Analyzing the quality of place: Creative clusters in Soho and Beyoğlu. Journal of Urban Design, 20(1), 93-124.Eckardt, F. (2017). The multidimensional role of science parks in attracting international knowledge migrants. Regional Studies, Regional Science, 4(1), 218–226.
Etzkowitz H, 2012, “Triple helix clusters: boundary permeability at university-industry-govemment interfaces as a regional innovation strategy” Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 30 766-779
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The Dynamics of Innovation: From National Systems and '‘Mode 2'’ to a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109-123
Etzkowitz, H., & Kloftsen, M. (2005). The innovating region: Towards a theory of Knowledge Based Regional Development. R&D Management, 35(3), 243–255.
Etzkowitz, H., & Zhou, C. (2018). Innovation incommensurability and the science park. R and D Management, 48(1), 73–87.
Esmaeilpoorarabi, N., Yigitcanlar, T., & Guaralda, M. (2016). Towards an urban quality framework: determining critical measures for different geographical scales to attract and retain talent in cities. International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, 7(3), 290-312.
Esmaeilpoorarabi, N., Yigitcanlar, T., Guaralda, M., & Kamruzzaman, M. (2018). Does place quality matter for innovation districts? Determining the essential place characteristics from Brisbane’s knowledge precincts. Land Use Policy, 79, 734-747.
Faggian, A., & McCann, P. (2009). Human capital, graduate migration and innovation in British regions. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 33(2), 317-333.
Fikirkoca, A., & Saritas, O. (2012). Foresight for science parks: The case of Ankara University. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 24(10), 1071–1085.
Frenkel, A., Bendit, E., & Kaplan, S. (2013). Residential location choice of knowledge-workers: The role of amenities, workplace and lifestyle. Cities, 35, 33-41.
Freeman, C. (1995). The ‘National System of Innovation’in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of economics, 19(1), 5-24.
Flanagan, K., Uyarra, E., & Laranja, M. (2011). Reconceptualising the ‘policy mix’ for innovation. Research Policy, 40, 702–713.
Fritsch, M. (2003). Does R&D-cooperation behavior differ between regions?. Industry and Innovation, 10(1), 25-39.
Fukugawa, N. (2006). Science parks in Japan and their value-added contributions to new technology-based firms. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 24(2), 381–400.
Ferguson, R., & Olofsson, C. (2004). Science parks and the development of NTBFs—Location, survival and growth. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(1), 5–17.
Florida, R. (2002). The economic geography of talent. Annals of the Association of American geographers, 92(4), 743-755.
Florida, R. (2005). Cities and the creative class. Routledge.
Flew, T. (2012). Creative suburbia: Rethinking urban cultural policy–the Australian case. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 15(3), 231-246.
Gkypali, A., Kokkinos,V., Bouras, C., & Tsekouras, K. (2016). Science parks and regional innovation performance in fiscal austerity era: Less is more?. Small Business Economics, 47(2), 313-330.
Giuliani, E. (2005). The structure of cluster knowledge networks uneven, not pervasive and collective (No. 05-11). DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
Goldstein, H. A., & Luger, M. I. (1992). University-based research parks as a rural development strategy. Policy Studies Journal, 20(2), 249–263.
Gilchrist, K., Brown, C., & Montarzino, A. (2015). Workplace settings and wellbeing: Greenspace use and views contribute to employee wellbeing at peri-urban business sites. Landscape and Urban Planning, 138, 32–40.
Heebels, B., & Van Aalst, I. (2010). Creative clusters in Berlin: Entrepreneurship and the quality of place in Prenzlauer Berg and Kreuzberg. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 92(4), 347-363.
Hsieh, H. N., Chen, C. M., Wang, J. Y., & Hu, T. S. (2015). Knowledge-intensive business services as knowledge intermediaries in industrial regions: A Comparison of the Hsinchu and Tainan metropolitan areas. European Planning Studies, 23(11), 2253-2274.
He, J. L., & Gebhardt, H. (2014). Space of creative industries: a case study of spatial characteristics of creative clusters in Shanghai. European planning studies, 22(11), 2351-2368.
Hoffman, K., Parejo, M., Bessant, J., & Perren, L. (1998). Small firms, R&D, technology and innovation in the UK: A literature review. Technovation, 18(1), 39–55.
Huang, K.-F., Yu, C.-M. J., & Seetoo, D.-H. (2012). Firm innovation in policy-driven parks and sponta- neous clusters: The smaller firm the better? The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(5), 715–731.
Hobbs, K. G., Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2017). Science and technology parks: an annotated and analytical literature review. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(4), 957-976.
Hafeez, K., Foroudi, P., Dinnie, K., Nguyen, B., & Parahoo, S. K. (2016). The role of place branding and image in the development of sectoral clusters: The case of Dubai. Journal of Brand Management, 23(4), 383-402.
Hassink, R. (2010). Regional resilience: a promising concept to explain differences in regional economic adaptability?. Cambridge journal of regions, economy and society, 3(1), 45-58.
Hassink, R., & Hu, X. (2012). From specialisation to diversification in science and technology parks. World Technopolis Review, 1(1), 6-15.
Heblich, S., & Slatchev, V. (2014). Parent Universities and the location of Academic Startups. Small Business Economics, 42(1), 1–15.
Isaksen, A., & Trippl, M. (2016). 4 Path Development in Different Regional Innovation Systems: A Conceptual Analysis. In Innovation drivers and regional innovation strategies (pp. 82-100). Routledge.
Simmie, J. (2002). Knowledge spillovers and reasons for the concentration of innovative SMEs. Urban Studies, 39(5-6), 885-902.
Sepe, M. (2010). Liveability, quality and place identity in the contemporary city. Journal of Place Management and Development.
Koh, F. C. C., Koh, W. T. H., & Tschang, F. T. (2005). An analytical framework for science parks and technology districts with an application to Singapore. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 217–239.
Komninos, N. (2002) Intelligent Cities. Innovation, Knowledge Systems and Digital Spaces, London and New York: Spon Press.
Koçak, Ö., & Can, Ö. (2014). Determinants of inter-firm networks among tenants of science technology parks. Industrial and Corporate Change, 23(2), 467–492.
Kloosterman, R. C., & Trip, J. J. (2011). Planning for quality? Assessing the role of quality of place in current Dutch planning practice. Journal of Urban Design, 16(4), 455-470.
Kline , S. J. & N. Rosenberg .(1986) . An Overview of Innovation . In The positive Sum Game, edited by R. Landau and N. Rosenberg . Washington DC : National Academy Press .
Kung, S. F. (1995). The role of science parks in the development of high technology industries, with special reference to Taiwan (Doctoral dissertation, University of Cambridge).
Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2003). US science parks: The diffusion of an innovation and its effects on the academic mission of universities. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21, 1323–1356.
Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2018). Geographic proximity and science parks. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Economics and Finance.
Lonnqvist, A., Kapyla, J., Salonius, H., Yigitcanlar, T., 2014. Knowledge that matters. Eur. Plan. Stud. 22, 2011–2029.
Lundvall, B. Å. (1992). User-producer relationships, national systems of innovation and internationalisation. In National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning (pp. 45-67). Pinter Publishers.
Lundvall, B. Ä., & Johnson, B. (1994). The learning economy. Journal of industry studies, 1(2), 23-42.
Lofsten, H., & Lindelof, P. (2001). Science parks in Sweden – industrial renewal and development? R and D Management, 31(3), 309–322.
Lofsten, H., & Lindelöf, P. (2002). Science parks and the growth of new technology-based firms—academic-industry links, innovation and markets. Omega, 30(3), 143–154.
Lee, W.-H., & Yang, W.-T. (2000). The cradle of Taiwan high technology industry development—Hsinchu Science Park (HSP). Technovation, 20(1), 55–59.
Lecluyse, L., Knockaert, M., & Spithoven, A. (2019). The contribution of science parks: A literature review and future research agenda. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 44(2), 559-595.
Laranja, M., Uyarra, E., & Flanagan, K. (2008). Policies for science, technology and innovation: Translating rationales into regional policies in a multi-level setting. Research Policy I, 37(5), 823–835.
Luger, M. (2001). The Use of Cluster Analysis, in High Tech Industrial Park Planning, Symposium on Industrial Park Planning and Development, 8(2), pp.52-73.
Lindelöf, P., & Löfsten, H. (2002). Growth, management and financing of new technology-based firms-assessing value-added contributions of firms located on and off science parks. Omega,30(3), 143–154.
Minguillo, D., & Thelwall, M. (2015b). Which are the best innovation support infrastructures for universities? Evidence from R&D output and commercial activities. Scientometrics, 102(1), 1057–1081.
Minguillo, D., Tijssen, R., & Thelwall, M. (2015). Do science parks promote research and technology? A scientometric analysis of the UK. Scientometrics, 102(1), 701–725.
Murphy, E., Fox‐Rogers, L., & Redmond, D. (2015). Location Decision Making of “Creative” Industries: The Media and Computer Game Sectors in D ublin, I reland. Growth and Change, 46(1), 97-113.
Moulaert, F., & Sekia, F. (2003). Territorial innovation models: A critical survey. Regional Studies,37(3), 289–302.
Mieg, H. A. (2012). Sustainability and innovation in urban development: Concept and case. Sustainable Development, 20(4), 251–263.Miao, J. T., & Hall, P. (2014). Optical illusion? The growth and development of the optics valley of China.Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 32(5), 863–879.
McCarthy, I. P., Silvestre, B. S., von Nordenflycht, A., & Breznitz, S. M. (2018). A typology of university research park strategies: What parks do and why it matters. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 47(August 2015), 110–122.
Miao, J. T. (2017). Housing the knowledge economy in China: An examination of housing provision in sup- port of science parks. Urban Studies, 54(6), 1426–1445.
Muhammad M. E., Ghafoor M. M., & Naseer S. (2011). Far East Journal of Psychology and Business 2(1) 37-48.
Martin, R., & Trippl, M. (2017). The evolution of the ICT cluster in southern Sweden–regional innovation systems, knowledge bases and policy actions. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 99(3), 268-283.
Mian, S., Lamine, W., & Fayolle, A. (2016). Technology business incubation: An overview of the state of knowledge. Technovation, 50, 1–12.
Mora-Valentín, E. M., Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado, M., & Nájera-Sánchez, J. J. (2018). Mapping the conceptual structure of science and technology parks. Journal of Technology Transfer, 1–26.
National Research Council. (2009). Understanding research, science and technology parks: Global best practices. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Nahm, K.-B. (2000). The evolution of science parks and metropolitan development. International Journal of Urban Sciences, 4(1), 81–95.
Nambisan, S., & Sawhney, M. (2008). The global brain. Creare innovazione nel mercato aperto. Pearson.
Oh, D.S., & I. Yeom. 2012. Daedeok Innopolis in Korea: From science park to innovation cluster. World Technopolis Review, 1(2): 141-154.
Poonjan, A., & Tanner, A. N. (2020). The role of regional contextual factors for science and technology parks: a conceptual framework. European Planning Studies, 28(2), 400-420.
Parry, M. (2018). The Future of Science Parks and Areas of Innovation: Science and Technology Parks Shaping the Future. World Technopolis Review, 7(1), 44-58.
Phillips, M. S.-A., & Yeung, H. W. (2003). A place for R&D? The Singapore Science Park. Urban Studies, 40(4), 707–732.
Phelps, N. A., & Dawood, S. R. S. (2014). Untangling the spaces of high technology in Malaysia. Environ- ment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 32(5), 896–915.
Phan, P.H., Siegel,D. S.,&Wright,M. (2005). Science parks and incubators:Observations, synthesis and future research. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 165–182.
Rowe, D. (2014). Setting up, managing and evaluating EU science and technology parks—An advice and guidance report on good practice. Brussels: European Commission, Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy.
Radosevic, S., & Myrzakhmet, M. (2009). Between vision and reality: Promoting innovation through tech- noparks in an emerging economy. Technovation, 29(10), 645–656.
Rodríguez-Pose, A., & Hardy, D. (2014). Technology and industrial parks in emerging countries.Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Saxenian, A., & Hsu, J. Y. (2001). The Silicon Valley–Hsinchu connection: technical communities and industrial upgrading. Industrial and corporate change, 10(4), 893-920.
Siegel, D. S., Westhead, P., & Wright, M. (2003b). Science parks and the performance of new technol- ogy-based firms: A review of recent U.K. evidence and an agenda for future research. Small Busi- ness Economics, 20(2), 177–184.
Salvador, E. (2011). Are science parks and incubators good “brand names” for spin-offs? The case study of Turin. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(2), 203–232. Salvador
Sofouli, E., & Vonortas, N. S. (2007). S&T Parks and business incubators in middle-sized countries: The case of greece. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 32(5), 525–544.
Shearmur, R., & Doloreux, D. (2000). Science parks: Actors or reactors? Canadian science parks in their urban context. Environment and Planning A, 32(6), 1065–1082.
Soete, L., Verspagen, B., & ter Weel, B. (2009). Systems of innovation. Working Paper no 2009-062. Maastricht: UNU-MERIT.
Squicciarini, M. (2008). Science parks’ tenants versus out-of-Park firms: Who innovates more? A dura- tion model. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(1), 45–71.
Squicciarini, M. (2009). Science parks: Seedbeds of innovation? A duration analysis of firms’ patenting activity. Small Business Economics, 32(2), 169–190.
Su, Y.-S., & Hung, L.-C. (2009). Spontaneous vs. policy-driven: The origin and evolution of the biotech- nology cluster. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(5), 608–619
Tsamis, A. (2009). Science and technology parks in the less favoured regions of Europe: An evaluation of their performance and the parameters of success (PhD thesis). London School of Economics and Political Science, London.
Tödtling, F., & Kaufmann, A. (2002). SMEs in regional innovation systems and the role of innovation support--The case of upper Austria. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 27(1), 15-26.
Todtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2005). One size fits all?: Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Research Policy, 34(8), 1203–1219.
Uzzi, B. (1996). The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. American Sociological Review, 61, 674–698.
Vaidyanathan, G. (2008). Technology parks in a developing country: The case of India. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(3), 285–299.
van der Borgh, M., Cloodt, M., & Romme, A. G. L. (2012). Value creation by knowledge-based ecosys- tems: Evidence from a field study. R&D Management, 42(2), 150–169.
van Winden, W., & Carvalho, L. (2016). Urbanize or Perish? Assessing the urbanization of knowledge locations in Europe. Journal of Urban Technology, 23(1), 53–70.
Wonglimpiyarat, J. (2010). Commercialization strategies of technology: Lessons from Silicon Valley. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(2), 225–236.
Wasim, M. U. (2014). Factor for Science Park Planning.World Technopolis Review (WTR),3(2), 97-108.
Walcott, S. M. (2002). Chinese industrial and science parks: Bridging the gap. The Professional Geogra- pher, 54(3), 349–364.
Yang, C.-H., Motohashi, K., & Chen, J.-R. (2009b). Are new technology-based firms located on science parks really more innovative?: Evidence from Taiwan. Research Policy, 38(1), 77–85.
Yigitcanlar, T., Edvardsson, I. R., Johannesson, H., Kamruzzaman, M., Ioppolo, G., & Pancholi, S. (2017). Knowledge-based development dynamics in less favoured regions: insights from Australian and Icelandic university towns. European Planning Studies, 25(12), 2272-2292.
Zukauskaite, E., Trippl, M., & Plechero, M. (2017). Institutional thickness revisited. Economic Geography, 93(4), 325-345.
Zhang, Y. (2004). Critical factors for science park management: The North American and European experi- ence. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 4(6), 575–586.

三、網路資料
中華民國教育部(2019)。108年15歲以上人口教育程度。取自全國人口資料庫統計地圖:
http://statis.moi.gov.tw/micst/stmain.jsp?sys=100&kind=10&type=1&funid=c01104&rdm=lheeJ7py，109/03/22瀏覽。
中華民國勞動部(2019)。108年各縣市總就業人口。取自中華民國統計網:
https://statdb.dgbas.gov.tw/pxweb/Dialog/Saveshow.asp，109/03/22瀏覽。
中華民國勞動部(2019)。108年各年齡照縣市人口數。取自內政部戶政司全球資訊網:https://www.ris.gov.tw/app/portal/346，109/03/24瀏覽。
縣市重要統計指標。取自中華民國統計資訊網:
https://statdb.dgbas.gov.tw/pxweb/Dialog/CityItemlist_n.asp，109/03/22瀏覽。
Eckardt, F., & Eade, J. (Eds.). (2011). The ethnically diverse city (Vol. 4). BWV Verlag.
新竹科學園區(2020)大新竹園、縣、市合作改善園區交通。取自新竹科學園區網:
https://www.sipa.gov.tw/home.jsp?mserno=201001210001&serno=201001210002&menudata=ChineseMenu&contlink=ap/information_1_view.jsp&dataserno=202005050001，109/04/02瀏覽。
新竹科學園區(2018)。2018年新竹科學園區年報。取自新竹科學園區官網:
https://www.sipa.gov.tw/home.jsp?serno=201001210117&mserno=201001210113&menudata=ChineseMenu&contlink=include/menu03.jsp，109/03/18瀏覽。
經濟部智慧財產局(2019)。108年本國法人專利申請百大排名。取自經濟部智慧財產局官網:
https://www1.tipo.gov.tw/lp.asp?CtNode=6722&CtUnit=3232&BaseDSD=7&mp=1，109/03/18瀏覽。
Ificlaims(2019)。2019年美國IFI專利前50名。取自Ificlaims patent services:
https://www.ificlaims.com/rankings-top-50-2019.htm，109/03/19瀏覽。
經濟部智慧財產局(2019)。智慧局公布108年專利百大排名。取自經濟部智慧財產局官網:
https://www.tipo.gov.tw/tw/cp-87-863837-57284-1.html，109/03/19瀏覽。
https://www1.tipo.gov.tw/lp.asp?CtNode=6722&CtUnit=3232&BaseDSD=7&mp=1，109/03/19瀏覽。
新竹科學園區(2019)。2019竹科廠商及單位名錄。取自新竹科學園區網站:
https://www.sipa.gov.tw/home.jsp?serno=201001210018&mserno=201001210037&menudata=ChineseMenu&contlink=ap%2Fmanufacturers_1_3.jsp&op=1&Qstring=&clanguage=1&type1=1&f_base=&f_kind=0&f_repprod=0000，109/04/11瀏覽。
南部科學園區(2019)。2019南部科學園區廠商及單位名錄。取自南部科學園區網站:
https://www.stsp.gov.tw/web/WEB/Jsp/Page/cindex.jsp?frontTarget=DEFAULT&thisRootID=30，109/04/11瀏覽。
科技部(2019)。全國製造業研究經費。取自科技部統計資料庫:
https://wsts.most.gov.tw/stsweb/technology/TechnologyStatistics.aspx?language=C&ID=10，109/04/12瀏覽。
新竹科學園區(2019)。園區歷年研究發展經費之支出-依產業類別區分。取自新竹科學園區網站:
https://www.sipa.gov.tw/home.jsp?serno=201006180001&mserno=201001210113&menudata=ChineseMenu&contlink=ap/statico_view.jsp&level2=Y&classserno=201002030017&dataserno=201706290001，109/04/11瀏覽。
新竹科學園區(2019)。研究發展經費參考資料。取自新竹科學園區網站:
https://www.sipa.gov.tw/news.jsp?serno=201407070016，109/04/12瀏覽。
科技部(2019)。科學技術統計要覽索引。取自科技部統計資料庫:
https://wsts.most.gov.tw/stsweb/technology/TechnologyDataIndex.aspx?language=C，109/04/12瀏覽。
經濟部統計處(2019)。製造業投資及營運概況。取自經濟部統計處製造業投資及營運概況網:
https://dmz26.moea.gov.tw/GMWeb/investigate/InvestigateEC.aspx，109/04/14瀏覽。
科技部(2019)。各個科學園區開發經費。取自科技部統計資料庫:
https://wsts.most.gov.tw/STSWeb/sciencepark/ScienceParkReport.aspx?language=C&quyid=tqdevelop01，109/04/12瀏覽。
新竹科學園區(2020)。109年重要業務措施施政結果。取自新竹科學園區網站:
https://www.sipa.gov.tw/home.jsp?serno=201001210030&mserno=201001210023&menudata=ChineseMenu&contlink=ap/result.jsp，109/04/20瀏覽。
科技部(2019)。2019年科學園區營業額。取自科技部統計資料庫:
https://www.most.gov.tw/folksonomy/detail/4e3b0669-22d1-45ee-81dd-e8f64501441c?l=ch，109/04/12瀏覽。
科技部(2019)。2019年就業員工按教育程度區分。取自科技部統計資料庫:
https://wsts.most.gov.tw/STSWeb/sciencepark/ScienceParkReport.aspx?language=C&quyid=tqemployees01，109/04/12瀏覽。
科技部(2019)。2019年外籍員工。取自科技部統計資料庫:
https://wsts.most.gov.tw/STSWeb/sciencepark/ScienceParkReport.aspx?language=C&quyid=tqemployees02，109/04/12瀏覽。
https://www.cambridgesciencepark.co.uk/events/，109/03/18瀏覽。