本文從概念上和經驗上來檢視目前用於分析「國民黨介入經濟活動」所使用的概 念工具一黨營事業和官商資本，指出：「黨營事業」的概念過於強調企業單位股權結構中的 黨股及其官方色彩，一方面模糊了「黨營」和「國營」的區別，另方面則忽略了國民黨和私 人資本的共榮關係，其後果是 1980 年代伊始國營事業次「民營化」而「黨營事業」的規模 �D持續擴大（擴大投資範圍但降低持股比例）。「黨營事業」的概念失去了分析能力；「官 商資本」的概念則因在所有權上未區分「黨有」和「黨官僚所有」，也無法適用於現實的分 析。本文建議：結合「黨營事業」對所有權、股權結構及市場體制的側重，和「官商資本」 對資本作為一種社會關係和社會權力及黨商共榮關係的強調，以「黨資本」作為分析「國民 黨介入經濟活動」的概念工具，並提出黨資本的歷史形構，作為進一步研究的進路。

　　　　　This paper aims at examining, conceptually and empirically, the concepts of '(political) party-owned enterprise' and 'bureaucrat-merchant capital' prevailingly used in analyzing the intervention and engagement of the KMT-state in economic activities. The concept of 'partly-owned enterprise' on the one hand blure the distinction between the stateowned and the party-owned and, on the other, omits the co-prosperity of KMT and private capital. This dismisses its analytical power regarding the fact that the state-owned enterprises have been stepwise privatized while the party-owned enterprises' increasingly expands sine the late 1980s. The concept of 'bureaucrat-merchant capital' also confuses the distinction between the 'party-owned' and the 'party bureaucrat-owned' and hence it is incapable of tackling the concrete object it indicates. The author comgines the respective merits of the emphasis of 'party-owned enterprise' on property ownership, share-holding structure and market mechanism, with the stress of 'bureaucrat-merchant capital' on capital as a social relation and a social power, as well as the co-prosperity of the Party and private capital, instead suggests the concept of '(political) party-owned capital' or 'party capital' as conceptual instrument for analyzing the engagement and intervention of the KMT-state in economic activities, and proposes 'the historical formation of party capital' as an approach for further research.