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J的區別，另方面則忽略了國氏黨和私人資本的共榮關係，其後采是1980年代伊始國營事業次「氏營化」而「黨營事業J的規模均持續擴大(擴大投資範囡但降低持股比。心。「黨營事業」的概念失去了分析能力;[官商資本」的概念則困在所有權上未區分「黨有」和「黨官僚所有」'也無法通用於現實的分析。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-merchantcapital' prevailingly used in analyzing the intervention and engagement of the KMTstate in economic activities_ The concept of‘partly-owned enterprise' on the one hand blurs 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 ‘partybureaucrat-owned'and hence it is incapable of tackling the concrete object it indicates. The author comgines the respective merits of the emphasis of ‘party-ownedenterprise' 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 ‘thehistorical formation of party capital' as an approach for further research.