營造業作為國家基礎建設的重要支柱，隨著產業結構變遷與工程技術演進，其法制規範已顯得力有未逮。特別是近年來「統包工程」數量快速增加，現有法規對其相關規定卻屈指可數，且現行「評鑑制度」亦難以有效反映營造廠的真實專業實力與統包能力。此外，營造業公會作為產業自律的重要羈絆，其職能與定位在現行法中仍模糊不清，無法完整發揮參與「產業治理」的角色。因此，本研究認為有必要從評鑑制度、統包制度，以及公會權責等三大核心面向，進行系統性的法制改革探討。 為此，本研究擬定三項研究目的：首先，探討現有營造業評鑑制度的執行成效，並建構更具效能的評鑑方式，以建立反映廠商真實實力的具體指標模型與修法方向。其次，分析設置「統包營造業」制度的必要性與法源需求，並制定相關的資格與延伸規範。最後，界定營造公會的角色與職能，透過《營造業法》的修訂，將其定位從模糊的「協助」提升至更明確的「專業自治」地位。本研究將採文獻分析、問卷調查與深度專家訪談法，以期提供全面性的分析結果，為營造業的永續發展提供堅實的法制支持與修法參考。 研究成果方面，本研究於於評鑑制度面，研提評鑑功能轉型、指標重構與分流分級之改革架構，並導入第三方稽核機制以提升評鑑客觀性與公信力；於統包制度面，提出於《營造業法》增訂「統包專章」之漸進式修法路徑；於公會權責面，提出增訂「公會專章」以系統性提升公會法源位階之建議。本研究結合修正式德菲法與國外比較法之引介，期能為《營造業法》之系統性修正提供具體研究基礎與政策參考。;The construction industry′s legal framework has grown misaligned with structural change and technological evolution. Design-build (turnkey) projects have proliferated yet remain under-regulated; the current evaluation system fails to reflect firms′ genuine capabilities; and construction industry associations remain ambiguously positioned despite their self-regulatory role. This study therefore undertakes systematic legal reform across three core dimensions: the evaluation system， the design-build framework， and associations′ powers and responsibilities. The study pursues three objectives: (1) to examine evaluation outcomes and develop more effective indicator models; (2) to analyze the necessity and legal basis for a "design-build construction enterprise" system; and (3) to redefine associations′ role， elevating their positioning from ambiguous "assistance" to clearer "professional self-governance" through amendments to the Construction Industry Act. The study integrates literature analysis， questionnaire surveys， and in-depth expert interviews. Key findings include: a reform framework for the evaluation system comprising functional transformation， indicator reconstruction， tiered classification， and a third-party auditing mechanism; a gradual legislative pathway adding a "Dedicated Chapter on Design-Build" to the Construction Industry Act; and a "Dedicated Chapter on Associations" to elevate associations′ statutory standing. Integrating the Modified Delphi Method with foreign comparative legal frameworks， this study provides a research foundation for the Act′s systematic amendment.
