政府由於財政拮據因素以及吸引民營企業的執行效率，引進公私合夥參與公共建設(PPP方式)以取得公共建設達成公共利益，此種公私合夥參與公共建設最常見為BOT方式，然而以公私合夥參與區段徵收之模式實屬一創新方式，也成功地完成了台南科學園區的開發，後續的新竹科學園區第三期開發案以及民國101年始推動並完成廠商徵選的桃園國際機場捷運A7站開發案均屬此種性質的投資專案。此種結合BT以及BOO的開發模式，民間初期投入成本高且投資期長，未來之收益係以取得抵價地回收，此種完全自償性之投資案，因在政府規劃階段風險性較高，政府往往給予取得開發案之特許投資人有對於計畫的遞延、擴充或終止決策的選擇權利，以提高計畫的可行性。面對如此不確定極高之投資方案，如以傳統資本預算方式進行評估，將無法有效將投資決策彈性給估計進去，因此常忽略了選擇權價值，錯失了可行的投資方案。本研究以二項式選擇權訂價模式，分析此種開發模式中特許投資人擁有之各項選擇權價值對投資專案的影響，以及針對各項變數作敏感度分析。並舉新竹科學園區第三期開發案為例，先使用現金流量分析法作為財務規劃評估之基礎，發現淨現值為負的投資案，再加入遞延、放棄及擴張選擇權之價值後，其擴張選擇權價值轉為正值，呈現出該投資案之真正價值。

Due to the fiscal factors and with the aim of attracting the private sector, the government has introduced Public-Private Partnership (PPP) into public infrastructures. Infrastructure projects are thus procured and public benefits achieved. This type of Public-Private Partnership and public infrastructure are most commonly seen in BOT. However, applying the Public-Private Partnership into zone expropriation is an innovative method, and it is the reason for the development of Southern Taiwan Science Park being a success. The subsequent development of Hsinchu Taiwan Science Park Phase III and the Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport Access MRT System A7 Station TOD, which was promoted in 2012, both belonged to this type of investment project. By combining the development method of BT and BOO, the initial investment from the public sector is high, and with a longer investment period. The future revenue will come in the form of the acquisition of the Pay-for-Land. The viability of the project may be improved if the host government offers concessional investors the options or rights to wait or expand or terminate the project in response to environmental changes. When facing investment projects with high levels of uncertainty, evaluations using conventional capital budgeting fails to take into consideration the flexibility of investment decisions, therefore, it often neglects the value of the option, which may result in feasible investment projects been left out. The present study applies the Binomial option pricing model. Investors who are entitled to options, which values affect the investment project, are analyzed. Sensitivity analysis on each variable are also performed. Using the Science Park III as an example; when using the cash flow analysis as the foundation for the financial evaluation, the net present value of the investment project turns out to be negative. When adding in the value of the option to wait, terminate or expand, the value of the “expand” option turns positive, reflecting the real value of the investment project.

中文
1.王健安（1999），從等待價值與融資限制的觀點探討不動產投資開發的決策過程，中華民國住宅學會第八屆年會論文集，第221-237 頁。
2.吳秉蓁(2000)，都市更新容積獎勵對開發時機的影響，碩士論文，國立政治大學地政系。
3.吳思穎（2008），區段徵收委外機制之探討，碩士論文，國立政治大學地政研究所。
4.李素蘭（2010），台灣區段徵收制度之政經分析，碩士論文，國立台灣大學社會科學研究院政治學系。
5.梁仁旭（2005），土地選擇權時間價值比之研究，都市與計畫，第三十二卷，第四期，第371-386 頁。
6.郭程元（2010），政府推動區段徵收之財務規劃模式研究—以南科特定區民間參與區段徵收開發案為例，碩士論文，國立中正大學企業管理研究所。
7.陳奉瑤(2003)，可更新土地開發價值之研究，台灣土地研究，第6 卷，第一期，pp.1-16。
8.陳顯道（2010），公私合夥區段徵收開發模式之研究—以南科特定區為例，碩士論文，長榮大學土地管理與開發學系碩士在職專班。
9.黃劉乾、姜堯民(2005)，BOT 案附屬事業放棄選擇權的價值，住宅學報，第14 卷，第2 期，pp.83-106。
10.劉佳侑（2007），實質選擇權對土地開發時機及其價值影響之實證研究，碩士論文，國立政治大學地政研究所。
11.蔡小美 (2008)，實質選擇權在市地重劃上應用之研究---以公辦第54期高雄巨蛋為例，碩士論文，國立中山大學財務管理學系研究所。
12.鄭偉廷（2005），實質選擇權評價供水及污水系統BOT計畫-最低營收保證複式選擇，碩士論文，國立交通大學土木工程系。
13謝劍平，(2002) ，財務管理新觀念與本土化，智勝文化事業公司。
14.謝靜琪、葉昭憲、羅威士、胡博信、謝祐爾、莊慶豐、何岳晉，2001，區段徵收發還土地所有權人抵價地比例準則之研究，內政部委託研究報告。
15.簡莉莎（2003），以公私合作模式推動工業區再生可行方式之研究，碩士論文，國立臺灣大學建築與城鄉研究所。
16.簡龍鳳、賴宗裕，2006，以代理理論觀點探討民間參與區段徵收開發之規模，都市與計劃，第33 卷，第3 期，頁169~188。
17.林建伸(2003)，區段徵收開發新社區之效益評估－以太平新光區段徵收為例，碩士論文，逢甲大學土地管理所。
18.內政部地政司全球資訊網，http://www.land.moi.gov.tw/業務介紹/區段徵收網頁。
19.政治大學台灣房地產研究中心網址：http://www.housing.nccu.edu.tw
英文
1.Black F. and M. Scholes (1973) “The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol.81, pp.637-659Ingersoll 和 Ross (1992)
2.Brennan, M. & E. Schwartz, (1985), “Evaluating Natural Resource Investments,” Journal of Business, Vol. 58, No. 2, pp.23-37.
3.Capozza, D. and Y. Li, (1990), "The Intensity and Timing of Investment: The Case of Land", The American Economic Review, vol.84(8),pp.889-904, Sep.
4.Capozza, D. R. and G. A. Sick,(1994), The risk structure of land markets, Journal of Urban Economics, 35:297-319 Grenadier（1996）
5.Capozza, D. R. and Helsley, R. W.（1990）, “The Stochastic City”, Journal of Urban Economics, Vol.28, pp.187-203.
6.Corrigan, M.B., Hambene, J., Hudnut, W., Levitt, R.L., Stainback, J.,Ward, R., and Witenstein, N.,( 2005), Ten Principles for Successful Public/Private Partnerships, Urban Land Institute.
7.Cox, J. C., Ross, S. A., and Rubinstein, M. (1979), “Option Pricing:A Simplified Approach,” Journal of Financial Economics,Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 229-263.
8.Hull, John C., (1997), Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives, third edition,Prentice-Hall, N.J.
9.Kester(1984)
10.Koller, T., Goedhart, M., and Wessels, D. (2005)., Valuation:Measuring and Managing the Value of Companies, John Wiley & Sons, NJ
11.Kulatilaka, N., (1993), "The Value of Flexibility: The Case of a Dual-Fuel Industrial Steam Boiler", Financial Management, pp.271-280, Aut.
12.McDonald, Robert, and Daniel Siegel, (1986), "The Value of Waiting toInvest", The Quarterly Journal of Economics, pp.707-727, Nov.
13.Myer, S. C. & S. Majd, (1990), “Abandonment Value and Project Life,” Advances in Futures and Options Reserch, Vol.4, pp.78-91.Bernnan
14.Myers, S. C. (1977),“Determinants of Corporate Borrowing＂,Journal of Financial Economics, Vol5, No.2, pp.76-147.
15.Myers, S. C. (1977). Determinants of corporate borrowing. Journal of Financial Economics, 5(2): 147-176.
16.Pindick, (1995), "The Option Approach to CapitalInvestment", Harvard Business Review, pp.105-115, May-June.
17.Pindyck, R.S. (1991) “Irreversibility, Uncertainty, and Investment,” Journal of Economic Literature, Vol.29, pp.1110-1148.Higson and Briginshaw(2000) Zhao,
18.Sagalyn, L.B., (2007), Public/Private Development- Lessons from History, Research, and Practice, Journal of the American PlanningAssociation, Vol.73. 1, pp.7-22.
19.Somerville, C.T. （2001）“Permits, Starts, and Completions: Structural Relationships.
20、Sagalyn, L.B., 2007, Public/Private Development- Lessons from History, Research, and Practice, Journal of the American PlanningAssociation, Vol.73. 1, pp.7-22.
21.Titman, S.（1985）, “Urban Land Prices under Uncertainty”, The American Economic Review, June,pp.505-514.
22.Trgeorgis, L. (1991) “A Log-Transformed Binomial Numerical AnalysisMethod for Valuing Complex Multi-Option Investments,” Journal ofFinancial and Quantitative Analysis ,Vol.26, No.3, pp.309-325.
23.Trigeorgis and Lenos(1991), “An Integrated Options-Based Strategic Planning and Control Model,” Managerial Finance, Vol. 17, No. 2-3, 1991.
24.Trigeorgis, L. and S. P. Mason. (1987). Valuing managerial flexibility. Midland Corporate Finance Journal, 5(1): 14-21.Dixit A. K. and R. S.
25.Trigeorgis, L.(2005), Making use of real option sample an overview and applications in flexible/modular decision making, The Engineering Economist. Norcross, 50(1):25-53.
26.Trigeorgis, L.,(1993), “Real Option and Interactions with Financial Flexibility,” Financial Management, Vol.22, No.3, pp.65-77.
27.Williams, J. T. (1991), Real estate development ax and option, Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 4(2):191-208.
28.Williams, J. T. (1997), Redevelopment of Real Assets, Real Estate Economics,25(3):pp.387-407.