在治理衝擊下，公共行政開始重視社區在治理中所扮演的角色。傳統研究社區都將之視為內部同質性甚高，具有相同規範的小型單位，是政策的末端單位。似乎意味著只要有社區存在就能有效治理。然而衡諸目前台灣的社區卻甚少充分發揮治理功能。本研究同意Agrawal與Gibson的看法將社區視為內在與外在互動的開放體系，主張社區較大型行政區域固然是較為有效的治理層級，但社區依然得克服內在與外在的自身困境，才能落實社區治理。社區對於民眾來說是公共財的概念，因此容易發生集體行動的問題，同時目前我國雙軌的地方治理體系也容易造成社區與鄰里的衝突。因此，唯有社區克服這兩項難題之後才能發揮社區的健全功能。有鑒於都會社區較鄉村更容易面臨上述問題，且國內研究對於都會社區甚少著墨，因此本研究採用深度訪談法，以板橋三民社區為例，探討克服困境時所採取的策略，說明社區該如何擺脫發展瓶頸，落實基層治理的功能。

Academics started to turn their views to community during the impacts of “governance”. Community is a small spatial unit, a homogeneous social structure shared some norms, and the basic unit of policy in the traditional analysis. In this approach, it seems community itself to lead to good governance automatically. In fact, there were few cases to proof this view in past year in Taiwan. This essay argues community is better examined in the contexts of internal and external circumstance which influence its development and have to overcome, otherwise could due to failure governance according to Agrawal and Gibson. In internal context, because the community is a public good for community members, there is some collective action dilemma. In the external, because the special development in Taiwan local politics, local elites must share the powers and resources. Thus it easily leads to conflict between local politics and community. I argue the community will not develop until they overcome those key challenges. In fact, the urban communities are much easier to face those obstacles than countryside, and there are few studies focus on urban community in Taiwan. This study interviewed some members of San-Ming community to find out what strategies they adopted could lead community to successful development and put it into basic governance effectively.