本文之目的為從事「臺北市政府公教員工退休互助制度」之研究，探討的方法係採政策終結理論與文獻及內容分析法，筆者在整理過去關於政策終結的文獻時，發現組織、政策的終結往往有其一套理論背景，根據這些看法將使一般人瞭解終結何以發生，何以會有障礙出現，以及有那些方法可供運用等，換句話說，政策終結之目的主要在觀察決策者如何運用策略來互動，蓋政策終結並非在研究各方角力的結果，而是把焦點放在它的過程。
筆者發現學者們喜好輔以個案探討政策終結，基此，本文乃引介「臺北市政府公教員工退休互助制度」，作為國內本土性的研究案例，藉由瞭解臺北市政府公教員工退休互助制度的發展與功能、承辦機關面臨的問題，以及臺北市政府如何從事改革行動，建議終結的時機和採納較優方案，以資用來印證政策終結理論的可行性。
最後，筆者亦發現政策終結的成敗是在於政治氣氛及時機的運用，因此本文主張決策者考慮政策終結實施時應注意的重點，例如，必須掌握環境變化，選擇有利於終結的契機，重視互動的策略而不是計劃的擬定，不要拘泥於直線式的思考邏輯和僵化作法，應消弭反終結聯盟的心理抗拒，找到動員支持的方法，並藉機建構一個有共識的願景及雙贏的局面，如此一來終結的勝利果實，垂手可得。

The objective of this dissertation is to conduct a research study on the mutual aid retirement system of civil servants of the Taipei City Government by adopting the theories on policy termination, researching the relevant literature and using content analysis as the primary research methods. In my previous experiences in organizing and sorting through past literature on policy termination, I have come to the realization that the termination of organizations and policies usually had a set of theoretical backgrounds that could account for what took place. By examining these views, even ordinary people unfamiliar with technical knowledge would be able to understand the causes for such terminations, factors that led to obstacles and the solutions that could have been taken in response. In other words, the most fundamental goal of policy termination is to observe how decision makers manipulated strategies in their interactions, and we can thus safely assume that the study of policy termination is not about the results of contests of strength between various parties; instead, we should be focusing on the processes that led to what came to be.
I have found that scholars prefer to use case studies to illustrate their points in the discussion of policy termination. Therefore, the mutual aid retirement system of the civil servants of the Taipei City Government has been selected in this dissertation as the subject of the case study on a domestic agency. By learning about various facts regarding the mutual aid retirement system of these civil servants, such as the system’s development and its functions, the difficulties faced by the governing authorities, how the Taipei City Government engaged in reformative actions, and the occasions where it recommended for termination and accepted better solutions, we can use these facts to determine the feasibility of the policy termination theory.
Lastly, it is also discovered that the success and failure of policy termination rest upon the political atmosphere and the manipulation of chance moments. Therefore, in this dissertation, it is suggested that decision makers should pay attention to a number of key points when they consider implementing policy termination, such as their grasp of the changes of environment, the choice of junctures that would be beneficial to policy termination and their emphasis on interactive strategy instead of dwelling on the drafting of plans or limiting themselves in a straightforward trend of thought and rigid ways. Decision makers should work to eliminate the mental resistance in the anti policy termination alliance camp and look for ways to rally support to create a vision of consensus and a win-win situation to ensure victories in the efforts for policy termination.

參考書目
壹、中文部分
石之瑜(2003)，《社會科學方法新論》，臺北：五南。
丘昌泰(1995)，《公共政策：當代政策科學理論之研究》，臺北：巨流。
丘昌泰(2000)。《公共政策基礎篇》，臺北：巨流。
吳定(2003a)，《公共政策辭典》，臺北：五南。
林水波(1984)，《政策分析評論》，臺北：五南。
林水波、張世賢 (1991)，《公共政策》，臺北：五南。
林水波、張世賢(2001)，《公共政策》，臺北: 五南。
林威廷(2004)，《農漁會信用部體制改革之研究-政策終結理論與內容分析法之應用》，未出版碩士論文，國立東華大學公共行政研究所，花蓮。
洪昭榮(1996)，《人力資源管理》，臺北，哈佛企管公司。
許禎元(1997)，《政治研究方法與統計－SPSS for Windows 的實例操作》，臺北：五南。
張紹勳(2004)，《研究方法》，臺北：滄海。
葉至誠、葉立誠(2002)，《研究方法與論文寫作》，台北：商鼎文化。
孫同文（2000）〈治理能力與行政革新：香港行政革新的經濟與啟示〉，《行政管理論文選輯》第14輯，頁460。
曾惠絹(2000)，《從政策終結理論探討精省過程（1996-1998）》，未出版碩士論文，國立台灣大學政治學研究所，臺北。
楊孝濚（1989） ，《內容分析》，收錄於楊國樞等主編社會及行為科學研究法，國立東華大學，花蓮。
蔡良文(1999)，《人事行政學：論現行考銓制度》，臺北：五南。
蔡祈賢孝(2003)，《公務福利制度》，臺北：商鼎。
蔡秉燁、蘇俊鴻（2002）〈策略人力資源管理之彈性福利制度分析〉，《產業論壇》，第3卷第2期，頁45-66。
繆全吉等(1990)，〈人事行政〉，臺北：國立空中大學。
謝俊義（1998），〈公共政策遺失的環節－政策終結理論〉，《人事月刊》，第35卷第7期，頁23-35。
劉博誠(1998)，《從政策終結理論探討我國公共電視之演變》，未出版碩士論文，私立東海大學公共行政研究所，臺中。
羅清俊、陳志瑋譯(1999)，(Dye, Thomas R著，1999)，《公共政策新論》，臺北市：韋伯文化，。

貳、英文部分
Bardach, Eugene( 1976),“Policy Termination as a Political Process,” Policy Sciences 7:123∼131.
Bauer, Raymond A., Pool, Ithiel de Sola & Dexter, Lewis Anthony (1963),
American Business and Public Policy. Cambridge, Mass.: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Behn, Robert D( 1975), Termination: How the Massachusetts Department of Youth Services Closed the Public Training Schools. Duke University,Institute of Policy Sciences and Public Affairs.
Behn, Robert D (1976) ,“Closing the Massachusetts Public Training School,”Policy Sciences 7: 151∼171.
Behn, Robert D (1978),“How to Terminate a Public Policy: A Dozen Hints for the Would-be Terminator,” Policy Analysis 4/3: 393∼413.
Biller, Robert P( 1976),“On Tolerating Policy and Organizational Termination:Some Design Considerations,” Policy Sciences 7: 133∼149.
Bothun, Douglas & Comer, John C( 1979),“The Politics of Termination:
Concepts and Process,” Policy Studies Journal 7/3: 540∼553.
Brewer, Garry D.& DeLeon, Peter( 1983), The Foundations of Policy Analysis Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.
Cameron, James M( 1978),“Ideology and Policy Termination: Restructuring California’s Mental Health System,” In The Policy Cycle, ed.Judith V.May & Aaron B. Wildavsky, pp. 301∼328. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Docenzo, D. A. & Holoviak, S. J(1990), Employee benefit. Englewood Cliffs N.J.:Prentice Halll.
Daniels, Mark R( 1995),“Organizational Termination and Policy Continuation:Closing the Oklahoma Public Training Schools,” Policy Sciences 28: 301∼316.
Daniels, Mark R( 1997a),“Symposium: Public Policy and Organization
Termination,” International Journal of Public Administration 20/12: 2043∼2066.
Daniels, Mark R( 1997b), Terminating Public Program: An American Political Paradox. NY:Sharpe.
Daniels, Mark R (2001), “Policy and Organizational Termination,” International Journal of Public Administration, 24:3: 249-262.
DeLeon, Peter( 1978a),“A Theory of Policy Termination,” In The Policy Cycle, ed.Judith V. May & Aaron B. Wildavsky, pp. 279∼300. Beverly Hills, CA:Sage.
DeLeon, Peter( 1978b),“Public Policy Termination: An End and a Beginning,”Policy Analysis 4/3: 369∼392.
DeLeon, Peter (1983),“Policy Evaluation and Program Termination,” Policy Studies Review 2/4: 631∼647.
DeLeon, Peter( 1987),“Policy Termination as a Political Phenomenon,”in
Dennis Palumbo（ed.）The Politics of Program Evaluation, Newbury Park,California:Sage. pp. 173∼199.
DeLeon, Peter, and Hernandez-Quezada, J. M., (2001) “The Case of the National Solidarity Program in Mexico: A Study in Comparative Policy Termination.” International Journal of Public Administration, 24:3: 289-309.
Franklin, A. B. March 8, (1982).“Weather Posts Given a Reprieve” New York Times, P. A1 and A11.
Frantz, Janet E( 1992),“Reviving and Revising a Termination Model,” Policy Sciences 25: 175∼189.
Gargan, John J.,( 1998),“The public administration community and the search for professionalism,”in Handbook of Public Administration,Jack Rabin, W.Bartley Hildreth, & Gerald J. Miller, eds., NY: Marcel Dekker, pp.1089∼1161.
Greenwood, Justin( 1997)“The Succession of Policy Termination,” International Journal of Public Administration 20/12: 2121∼2150.
Geva-May, Iris(2001), “When the Motto is ‘Till Death Do Us Part’: The Conceptualization and the Craft of Termination in the Public Policy Cycle. International Journal of Public Administration, 24:3: 263-288.
Greenwood, ,Justin(1997), “The Succession of Policy Termination.” International Journal of Public Administration, 20:12: 2121-2150.
Harris, Michael( 1997),“Policy Termination: Uncovering the Ideological
Dimension,” International Journal of Public Administration 20/12: 2151∼2175.
Heidenheimer, A. J., Heclo, H. & Adams, C.T( 1975), Comparative Public Policy:The Politics of Social Choice in Europe and America. NY: St.Martins.
Hogwood, Brian W., & Peters, B. Guy (1982),“The Dynamics of Policy Change:Policy Succession,”Policy Sciences 14: 225∼245.
Hogwood, Brian W., & Peters, B. Guy( 1983), Policy Dynamics. NY: St.
Martin's press.
Hogwood, Brian W.& Gunn, Lewis( 1984), A Policy Analysis for the Real World.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jones, Charles O.,( 1984), An Introduction to the Study of Public Policy. Monterey,CA: Brooks/Cole.
Kaufman, Herbert (1976), Are Government Organizations Immortal? Washington,DC: Brookings.
Kaufman, Herbert( 1987), Time, Chance and Organizations: Natural Selection in a Perilous Environment. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
Kirkpatrick, Susan E., Lester, James P. & Peterson, Mark R. Spring( 1999), “The Policy Termination Process: A Conceptual Framework and Application to Revenue Sharing,” Policy Studies Review 16/1: 209∼236.
Lynn, L. E Jr. (1987), Managing Public Policy. Boston: Brown.
Lambright, W., Henry & Sapolsky Harvey M.( 1976),“Terminating Federal
Research and Development Programs,” Policy Sciences 7: 199∼213.
Lasswell, Harold D.,( 1963),“The Decision Process: Seven Categories of Functional Analysis,” reprinted in Nelson W. Polsby et al., eds. Politics and Social Life.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Levine, Charles H. et al.( 1982) The Politics of Retrenchment. Newbury Park, CA：Sage.
Roberts, N. C., (1991) “Policy Entrepreneurs: Their Activity, Structure and Function in the Policy Process. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,1:2: 147-175.
Sato, Hajime (2002), “Abolition of Leprosy Isolation Policy in Japan: Policy Termination Through Leadership.” Policy Studies Journal, 30:1: 29-46.
Schattschneider, E.E.,( 1975), The Semisovereign People. Hinsdale, Ill.: The Dryden Press.
Shubik, Martin( 1978),“On Concepts of Efficiency,” Policy Sciences 9:121∼126.
Shulsky, Abram N.,( 1976),“Abolishing the District of Columbia Motorcycle Squad,” Policy Sciences 7: 183∼197.
Tarschys, Daniels( 1983),“The Scissors Crisis in Public Finance,”Policy Sciences15: 205∼224.
Wallerstein, Mitchel B.,( 1976),“Terminating Entitlements: Veterans’ Disability Benefits in the Depression,” Policy Sciences 7: 173∼182.
Yin R. K. (1985), Case Study Research Design and Methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.