| 摘要: | 契約兩造常因立場對立而引起爭議，而工程爭議不僅發生於施工階段，亦發生在專案生命週期之其他階段。進一步而言，工程專案之人為疏失亦可能擴大災害所帶來的損失，例如日本福島核電廠事故及新北市破堤淹水案。因此跨領域學者專家紛紛嘗試建立有效解決糾紛的方法。傳統上，工程爭議通常採取訴訟或訴外爭議解決機制(ADR)此兩種主要方式解決。就大陸法系國家而言，訴訟通常涉及民事、刑事及國家賠償，而訴外紛爭解決機制則主要為磋商、和解、調解及仲裁等方式。然而，相似案件同樣處理，向為英美法及大陸法爭議解決方式，而一般人於作成決定或處理日常爭議時，傾向考量類似的經驗值。因此，案例推理法(CBR)得以提供一合理模型解決問題。
本研究評估可行之CBR以輔助解決工程生命週期中所產生之爭議，並藉由國際標準化組織(ISO)之成果設計一使用者為主之爭議解決輔助機制雛型，藉此彈性屬性選擇機制，省卻傳統性案例式推理機制之前置資料庫建制時間及成本。本文首先探討ADR於台灣的適用情形，於探討CBR暨其R5模型後，並應用ISO已建立之概念及ADR發展出一使用者為主之CBR雛型以輔助工程爭議解決。除此之外，本文亦針對現有案例資料庫進行實證研究。
本研究發現結合各種爭議處理方法，有助於達成預定目標。而採逐步ADR處理，則能有效解決爭議。另實證研究證明，動態及重複之系統得以檢索出適合之參考案例，以成功預測目標案件之結果。以往相關研究並未充分考量使用者於爭議解決過程中之需求，而此CBR並未如傳統CBR鎖定屬性及其權重，此彈性機制亦為本研究之主要貢獻之一。此系統性模型得以有效輔助解決未來類似之爭議，即便遭遇如損鄰等大量爭議案件，亦可順利處理。;Construction disputes can occur in any phase of project’s lifecycle, not just during the construction phase. Opposing personalities between the project owner and the contractor often lead to differences of opinion, and human error on a construction project can escalate the spread of damage in cases of natural disaster, as happened during the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster in Japan and during the August 2004 flooding caused by a typhoon in Taipei. Multidisciplinary researchers have attempted to develop methodologies for the effective mitigation of disputes. Disputes could be resolved through one or a combination of these methods.
Dispute settlement methods fall into two main categories, litigation and alternative the resolution of disputes (ADR). In most civil law countries, litigation involves civil, criminal and state compensation. ADR methods include but are not limited to negotiation, amiable conciliation, mediation, and arbitration. In a common law system, disputes are often resolved based on the outcomes of previous cases, whereas resolving disputes according to laws and regulations is a characteristic of the continental legal system. Regardless of the method, all legal systems share a common objective; they are applied to the resolution of disputes.
When making decisions or solving everyday problems, most people take similar previous experiences into consideration. Case-based Reasoning (CBR) is a the resolution of disputes methodology that provides a logical model similar to that used by many people to resolve everyday problems.
This thesis is an investigation of the feasibility of Case-based Reasoning (CBR) as a mechanism to facilitate the resolution of construction disputes. We began with a review of common ADR methods and their application in the settling of claims in Taiwan. After evaluating CBR methodology, particularly the R5 model, we integrated the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (ISO 9241-210) and ADR mechanisms in the development of a user-centered prototype CBR mechanism (UCBR) for the resolution of disputes, applicable at any point in the life cycle of a construction project. We further investigated CBR systems by examining cases associated with the flooding in Taipei in August 2004 and obtained data from the Taipei mediation database and Taiwan official law and regulations database. The prototype system was then tested using the aforementioned cases of conciliation, mediation and litigation. Due to privacy concerns, arbitration cases were excluded.
Previous researchers demonstrated the effectiveness of integrating multiple methods for the resolution of disputes. A stepwise ADR approach has proven effective in resolving construction disputes. Empirical findings have demonstrated the effectiveness of dynamic, recursive ADR systems in the retrieval of suitable reference cases. As a result, this approach is able to predict the outcome of target cases successfully. Unlike traditional methodologies, the CBR mechanism does not establish attributes or their respective weights in advance. Previous investigations of relevant systems have not taken the needs of end users into consideration when formulating mechanisms for the resolution of disputes. One objective of this empirical study was to fill this gap in the research by formulating a systematic dispute resolution process capable of handling the large volume of disputes that commonly arise in the aftermath of disasters. |
