民眾亂丟垃圾行為的研究：政策順服之觀點

垃圾堆頭是市容髒亂的表徵，傳染病的溫床之一，對於都市環境衛生與觀瞻美學有極為不良的影響。本研究的目的係從「政策順服」理論之觀點為操作概念，以99年至109年間「亂丟垃圾包」被裁罰而不服者，所提出來的「訴願理由文本」為對象，檢視亂丟垃圾行為發生之前或當下所處的環境背景，以「詮釋性」研究的角度，試圖解釋並提出這些行為的原因。在文獻回顧的部分，首先梳理國內外亂丟垃圾行為形態，其次整理容易亂丟垃圾的場域，從中編繪出行為與情境等各因素，為影響亂丟垃圾行為的前因，從而形成本研究分析「行為與環境」時之框架結構；另外再探討其他國家對於環境衛生與政策的意義，審視我國現行防治政策以及法令管理體系對於亂丟垃圾行為的治理方式。另外以「情境因素」、「個人因素」、「環境政策工具因素」、「認知因素」、「其他因素」等，再予歸納為「環境因子」、「行為因子」、「其他因子」三大面向為軸心，制定為訪談大綱，與訪談者對話，以佐證24種行為要因背後之脈絡，並探尋出未來可行之建議防治方式或其困境。本研究之特色在於將「訴願理由」文本，轉化為「語境編碼」並契合文獻之觀點，分類為三大因子、五項因素等24種類型行為要因，並經同儕者「合理性審查」，再由文獻與訪談者互相驗證而提出「民眾亂丟垃圾行為要因」。至此回應了本研究之目的，亦充分解釋了亂丟垃圾發生之原因，並在研究過程中發現政策不順服，暫稱為「利他型不順服」之新型態。本研究最後提出四項主要發現如下：一、藉由訴願決定書以發現亂丟垃圾者行為動機，總計歸納出24種引發亂丟垃圾行為原因，描繪製作「亂丟垃圾行為要因圖」，完整解析亂丟垃圾之原因背景。二、透過行為要因及各項資料，藉由Pareto Chart圖表，剖析多數亂丟垃圾行為發生頻率，從而發現亂丟垃圾行為主要類型。三、從政策不順服觀點，發現情境因子建構出亂丟垃圾行為，呈現出中介意義，若能把負向的情境因素導正，則亂丟垃圾亦能減緩。此外針對清潔人員對髒亂點每日清理之工作，研究發現亦必須配合其他稽查措施等，才能避免即清即丟的景況持續，另外透過政策工具的輔助運用，將有效防止該行為發生。四、從政策不順服觀點，發現亂丟垃圾受到行為因子影響，從垃圾排出的規範認知、垃圾處置知覺不足、取得垃圾處理的資訊及稽查法規之限制，甚至罰款額度大小等，均會影響民眾對政策順服之刻度及塑造亂丟垃圾行為態樣。關鍵詞：政策順服、詮釋性研究、亂丟垃圾行為、環境衛生、訴願決定書

關鍵字

政策順服；詮釋性研究；亂丟垃圾行為；環境衛生；訴願決定書

並列摘要

Garbage piles are a symbol of urban filth and a breeding ground for infectious diseases, that they pose an extremely negative impact on urban environment, hygiene and aesthetics. The purpose of this study was to examine the subjects who appealed against the penalty of littering between 2010 and 2020 in the environmental context before or at the moment of occurrence of littering, to explain and present the reasons for such behavior from the perspective of "interpretive" research, using the operational concept of "policy compliance" theory. In the literature review section, we first sorted out the behavior of littering at home and abroad, and then, we identified areas prone to more occurrence, from which we compile the behavioral and situational factors that influence the antecedents of littering behaviors, thus, forming the framework of analysis on "behavior and environment” in this study. Furthermore, we would explore the significance of environmental health and policies in other countries, and examine the impact of our current prevention and control policies and legal management system on littering. In addition, "situational factor", "personal factor", "the factor of environmental policy instrument", "cognitive factor", and "other factors" were categorized into three major aspects, namely "environmental", "behavioral" and "other” dimensions, to set an interview outline for dialog with the interviewees in support of creating appropriate contexts behind the 24 behavioral factors and to find feasible prevention measures or possible problems faced in the future. The characteristics of this study were that the texts of “appeal briefs” were transformed into a "context code" and categorized into 24 types of behavioral factors, including three major aspects and five factors, reasonably investigated by peers, where by literature review and dialog with interviewees, we hopefully would verify and propose the “most probable cause of public littering”. It would be a proper response to the objective of this study and fully explained the causes of littering, while a new form of policy non-compliance, tentatively called "altruistic disobedience", was discovered in the course of the study. The study concluded with four main findings as follows: (1) The petition letters could help to discover the behavioral motives of litterers, that a total of 24 types of reasons of littering behavior were summarized and drawn into a “Littering Behavioral Factors Map”, as a complete picture of why littering in public. (2) The Pareto Chart was used to analyze the frequency of littering behavior, from which we would identify the primary type of littering behaviors through the behavioral factors and various data. (3) From the viewpoint of policy disobedience, we found that the littering behavior due to situational factors could be mediated, such if the negative situational factor at the moment was corrected, the behavior could be reduced. In addition, the study found that in term of daily cleaning of specific filthy locations by the janitors must be carefully checked by auditing measures, to avoid the continuation of littering immediately after the cleanup. Also, the application of policy instrument could effectively prevent the occurrence of this behavior. (4) From the viewpoint of policy non-compliance, it was found that littering behavior was influenced by behavioral factors, such as the awareness of waste disposal regulations, inadequate knowledge of waste disposal method, convenient access to information on waste disposal, and restrictions of inspection regulations, as well as the severity of fines, all of which would affect the degree of policy compliance and shape the behavior of people towards littering.