由於府際間的協調是涉及許多各自擁有不同偏好的參與者，各級政府的組織結構 也經常呈現片斷化和鬆散組合，以及府際間的權力型態是相當分散而且不對稱的。在此一情 況下，過度依賴正式權威或層級節制的整合，自然無法避免政策執行的困難、拖延和高度不 確定等問題。有鑒於府際間的協調已無法經由階層管理的技術來達成，本文比較分析財政補 助、衝突管理以及組織間網路的設計等三種途徑，用於促進府際間協調的可行性。 本研究的主要發現如下：府際間協調的問題經常起因於，結構片斷化、本位主義作祟以及認 知失調的影響。有關促進府際間協調的途徑方面，雖然在潤滑府際關係的運作上各有所長， 但仍遺留部分的問題等待解決。具體言之，補助制度除具有調節各級政府財政盈虛的功能之 外，補助款所伴隨的誘因和管制規範，理論上是可以誘導地方機關趨向於合作。然而，財政 補助的管制標準若淪於模糊、僵化或朝令夕改等問題，則將會削弱補助制度應有的規範功能 。再者，衝突管理的途徑主張，協調是透過交互依賴的參與者，相互的議價和協商來求取共 識。由於府際關係架構下的參與者，經常各自懷抱不同的偏好和目標，參與者須能對達成決 策具有互蒙其利的共識，才有助於應用衝突管理途徑來化解府際間的協調問題。最後，組織 間網路的設計途徑，提出縱向調解式協調、水平調解式協調以及志願式協調等三種網路組織 。當中屬於水平調解式或志願式協調的公私部門聯結概念，是近來較為人矚目的府際管理途 徑。這種著重公私部門聯結的府際管理途徑，正呼應「後官僚典範」（ post-bureaucratic paradigm ）時代所強調， 將民間的企業精神注入政府部門管理，並擴大民間參與公共事務 執行等趨勢。

　　　　　Intergovernmental coordination, most often, involves multiple actors with diverse preference, fairly fragmented structures, dispersal and asymmetry power relations among different levels of government. Under such circumstances, therefore, it is hardly possible to achieve coordinated actions through formal authority and hierarchical control. This article addresses several coordination issues under the intergovernmental framework and evaluates the feasibility of the three alternative approaches to enhancing intergovernmental coordination. Based on some critical observations, this study reveals that the problems of intergovernmental coordination occur typically due to the presence of structural fragmentation, parochial concerns, and cognition discordance. As to the ways to tackle these problems, this study suggests that each alternative carrier its own strengths and weaknesses in facilitating coordinated actions under intergovernmental framework. By providing certain economic incentives, the grant-in-aids approach has advantages of inducing localities to follow the mandates from te central government. However, if the strings on grant-in-aids are vague and change frequently, the regulatory functions of grant-in-aids will be quite limited. In addition, the conflict management approach argues that intergovernmental coordination can be achieved through bargaining and negotiation among participants. Finally, the interorganizational network design suggests that there are three different types of network arrangements in accordance with the corresponding mechanisms.