在電子化政府推動數位轉型下，ICT的運用明顯增加政府推動政策的效率，除降低管理之交易成本外，政府推動公民參與平臺提升公民、企業和社會在各種不同政策制定前的參與。政府面臨大數據、人工智慧及雲端機算等新興科技來臨的挑戰，以轉型之最新型態，重新界定任務與目標，同時擺脫行政官僚文化束縛，以發展包含決策、權力共享與的電子參與。
本研究主要目的在於瞭解並探討公民參與平臺規劃與設計時應具備關鍵之因素。研究分析過程中主要先釐清公民參與式平臺為電子化政府的一環，並以此為基礎，透過以政府為主體以界定出政府與多元利害關係人間關係角色與範圍，並試圖闡述政府因應電子化政府推動數位轉型，進而評析政府與多元利害關係人之間的互動關係與發展策略。最終，探索國際性具代表之關鍵，擬定公民參與式平臺應具備的政策方向及建議。本研究以文獻探討蒐集與分析為主要研究方法，藉由整理並檢閱現有相關文獻以深入的探討與釐清研究相關議題。文獻檢閱執行，則進行全面性的文獻回顧，藉由廣泛的蒐集並從中進行分析，以探討公部門、私部門及社會性組織等行動者，在電子化政府的整體架構中所體現之關係型態及各自利害關係人角色功能的變遷與調適。據此，以進一步的釐清政府如何與整體社會中多元利害關係人建立夥伴之關係，並透由國際指標評比，提出前瞻性的平臺建置之規劃與分析，以建置符合期待之平臺。

Under the government’s digital transformation initiative, the use of Information and Communication Technology has significantly increased the responsibilities and influence of government agencies. In addition to the low management cost, the government promotes an electronic-participation platform to enhance the engagement of its citizens, businesses, and society in politics and government. The government responds to the challenges of the era with a new organizational structure and operational style, redefining tasks and goals. At the same time, it gets rid of the shackles of bureaucratic culture by developing an e-participation platform that involves decision-making, power-sharing, and coordination.
The main purpose of this study is to clarify and discuss the structure and key factors of an e-participation platform. In the research and analysis process, it is imperative to clarify that the e-participation platform is part of the e-government. Using this as a foundation, the government is responsible for defining the role and scope of the relationship between the different stakeholders. Thus, the government is promoting a digital transformation initiative in the e-government. Furthermore, it analyzes the fluid relationships and development strategies between the government and multiple stakeholders. Finally, as a key to expanding international representation, it formulates and recommends policies for e-participation platforms. The principal method of this research is a structured approach consisting of analysis and collection of literary resources. Its primary purpose is to explore and clarify research-related issues by reviewing and performing an in-depth analysis of existing relevant literature. The process begins with research of the available literature, followed by a systematic review, and, through the extensive collection and analysis performed, explores the public, private, and social organizations involved, including the changes in the relationships and functions of their respective roles, which are embodied in the overall structure of e-governance. Based on this, to further clarify how the government builds partnerships with diverse stakeholders in society as a whole, and through the evaluation of international indicators, it proposes forward-looking planning and analysis of platform construction to build a platform that meets expectations.

中文文獻
1.江明修、陳敦源、黃東益、莊國榮、蕭乃沂（2004）。運用資訊與通訊科技實現 『全民參政』之規劃研究。財團法人資訊工業策進會委託研究報告。
2.何全德（2012）。改變與感動的力量—電子化政府服務創新策略。研考雙月刊。
3.丘昌泰（2010）。公共政策基礎篇（四版）。台北：巨流。
4.林伯峰（2007）。Web 2.0之創新應用服務與經營模式之研究。高雄：國立中山大學企業管理學系研究所碩士論文。
5.蕭乃沂 （2003），〈各國推動電子化政府之比較：整理資訊建設指標的觀點〉，《中國 行政評論》，（1），1-28。
6.項靖（2008），〈數位化民主及其基礎條件〉，《電子治理：理論與實務的臺灣經驗》，台北：五南圖書。
7.國家發展委員會（2008）。〈第一階段電子化政府計畫〉（87年至89年度），國家發展委員會。
8.國家發展委員會（2007）。〈第二階段電子化政府計畫〉（90年至93年度），國家發展委員會。
9.國家發展委員會（2009）。〈第三階段電子化政府計畫〉（97年至100年度），國家發展委員會。
10.國家發展委員會（2013）。〈第四階段電子化政府計畫〉（90年至93年度），國家發展委員會。
11.國家發展委員會（2016）。〈第五階段電子化政府計畫-數位政府〉（106年至109年度），國家發展委員會。
12.行政院研究發展考核委員會（1983）。全國行政資訊體系規劃報告。台北：行政院 研究發展考核委員會。
13.行政院研究發展考核委員會（2004）。電子化政府報告書（九十二年度），2008 年1 月16 日，取自：http：//www.rdec.gov.tw/public/Data/711615145871.pdf。
14.行政院研究發展考核委員會（2004）。電子化政府。台北：行政院研究發展考核 委員會。
15.行政院研究發展考核委員會（2007）。優質網路政府計畫（九十七至一百年度）， 2008 年 1 月 16 日，取自：http：//www.rdec.gov.tw/public/Data/ 7531115871.doc。 行政院資訊發展推動小組（1993）。政府業務電腦化報告書。台北：行政院研究發展考核委員會。

英文文獻
1.Albert Gore（1993）. Reengineering Through Information Technology： Accompanying Report of the National Performance Review. National Performance Review
2.Arnstein, S. R.（1969）. A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35, pp.216-224.
3.Arnstein, S.R.（1977）A Ladder of Citizen Participation in the politics of technology, Journal of the American Planning Association,,pp.230-243.
4.Baum, Christopher H., and Andrea Di Maio. 2000. Gartner’s Four Phases of E-government Model. www.gartner.com. Accessed October 15, 2003.
5.Churchill, N. C, and K. J. Hatten.（1987） "Non-Market Based Transfers of Wealth and Power： A Research Framework for Family Businesses." American Journal of Small Business 12,pp.53-66.
6.Coursey, David, and Donald F. Norris. 2008. Models of E-Government： Are They Correct? An Empirical Assessment. Public Administration Review 68（3）,pp. 523-536
7.Darrell M. West, “Improving Technology Utilization in Electronic Government around the World”, Brookings Institution Press, Washington DC, 2008.
8.Dean, Joshua. （2000）.“E-government Evolves.” Government Executive, Vol. 32, Nov, pp. 3-12.
9.Freeman, R. E.（1984）. Strategicmanagement： A stakeholder approach. Boston： Pitman.
10.Freeman, R. E.（2003）. Lecture-Stakeholder management revisited： What’s the state of the art? Leuven, 20, November.
11.Friedman, Andrew & Samantha Miles.（2006）. Stakeholders: Theory and Practice. New York: Oxford University Press.
12.Garson, G.D.（2006）. Public information technology and e-governance： Managing the virtual state. Jones & Bartlett Learning.
13.Hiller, Janine S., and France Belanger. （2001）. Privacy Strategies for Electronic Government. In E-Government 2001, edited by Mark A. Abramson and Grady E. Means. Boulder, CO： Rowman and Littlefield.
14.Layne, K., and Lee, J.（2001）. Developing fully functional e-government： a four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18, pp.122-136.
15.Mitchell, Ronald K., Bradley R. Agle and Donna J. Wood.（1997）. “Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts.” The Academy of Management Review, pp.853-886.
16.Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development （2006）. Proposal for work on an Inventory of E-Government Business Case Indicators.
17.Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development（2003）.The e-Government Imperative. in http：//www.oecd.org/. Accessed2020/4/20.
18.Portulans Institute（2019）. Network Readiness Index 2019, Washington D.C., USA.
19.Rowe, Gene, Roy Marsh, and Lynn J. Frewer（2004）. “Evaluation of a Deliberative Conference.” Science, Technology & Human Values, Vol. 29, No. 1,pp.88-121.
20.Sakowicz, Marcin（2004）.How Should e-Government Be Evaluated? Different Methodologies and Methods, in： NISPAcee occasional papers, Volume V, No. 2, Spring, S. pp.18-26.
21.Savage, G. T., Nix, T. W., Whitehead C.J., & Blair J.D.（1991）. Strategies for assessing and managing organizational stakeholders. Academy of Management Executive, pp. 61-75.
22.United Nations（2018）E-Government Survey 2018, United Nations.
23.United Nations.（2008）. UN E-GOVERNMENT SURVEYS. in https：//publicadministration.un.org/en/Research/UN-e-Government-Surveys. Accessed 2020/4/26.
24.United Nations.（2008）. UN E-GOVERNMENT SURVEYS： 2018 E-Government Survey. in https：//publicadministration.un.org/en/Research/UN-e-Government-Surveys. Accessed 2020/4/26.