台灣光復以來地方自治的發展，從1946 年鄉鎮區民代表、村里長的直接民選、1950 年縣市長、縣市議員的直接民選、1954 年省議員的直接民選、1994 年北高兩直轄市市長的直接民選、地方制度法的實施、以至於2010 年底即將完成的「5 都17 縣」之地方行政區劃格局，雖然逐步完善了許多制度面與法治面的建設，但還是有許多政治面、管理面、以及法制面等未盡完善事宜，直接間接導致台灣地方政府目前普遍存在的體制僵化、治理能力不足等窘境。本文因此透過英國地方治理轉型脈絡及其政策對於英國整體地方治理的影響進行綜合性評述，歸納提出五點經驗學習課題：（1）改革思維需要不斷的政策反省與倡議、行動理想與實踐的調和；（2）治理體制的革新應持續深化民主經驗的運作，不應引發反民主效果；（3）行政區劃應兼顧政治利益與理性制度效能考量，合理化落實；（4）地方政府體制改革應建立民主化績效指標，防範治理失靈；（5）不斷創造公民參與的制度空間，培力公民社會。期能啟發台灣地方治理的革新思路，創造出具有本土特色的地方治理模式。

The development of local self-government in Taiwan has undergone many
events since the restoration of Taiwan, such as direct popular elections of village and township representation and neighbor principal in 1946, direct popular elections of county mayor and councilman in 1950, direct popular election of state councilman in 1954, direct popular election of city mayors for both Taipei and Kaohsiung municipalities, the
implementation of Local Government Act,and rescheduling Taiwan’s administrative division into ｀5 municipalities and 17 counties＇at the end of 2010. Although these events have consummated many institutional and legislative issues, there are still many issues involved with
political, managerial, and legal problems left behind. And which hence cause,directly and indirectly, lots of problems - for example,
institutional rigidity and short of governance capacity - universally existed within the Taiwan government system.This paper is therefore aimed at exploring the transformation of British’s local government and reviewing the effects of related transformation policies on local governance in British overall. And it is found five lessons to be learned: (1)innovations in governance institutions should be helpful for deepening democracy and not lead to effects of anti-democracy; (2) the reschedule of administrative division should take into account both the political interests and institutional performance reasons and make it rational and reasonable; (3) it is necessary to devise a system of bureaucratic performance indicators which is good to prevent governance failure; (4) it is positive to create space for citizen participation, which is good for fostering civil society; and (5) the idea of reform
needs to be strengthened through the actions of policy reflection and advocacy and actions between ideals and practice. It is also hope that these lessons can bring us more fresh ideas about the reform of local governance in Taiwan and that a local governance model with Taiwan’s characteristic will be formed soon.