實踐公部門線上協力式政策參與之研究：以機關回應態樣與決策行為核心的檢視

The Practices of E-Collaborative Policy Involvement in Taiwanese Public Sector: An Inspection of Agency's Response Patterns and Decision-Making Behaviors

張鐙文(Teng-Wen Chang) ； 吳佩靜(Pei-Ching Wu)

《公共行政學報》 60期 (2021/03) Pp. 47-96

https://doi.org/10.30409/JPA.202103_(60).0002

摘要

當協力式政策參與及制定逐漸躍升為公民參與的圭臬之際，但僅有少數研究關注在此一過程中，政府如何透過資通訊科技回應公眾的政策需求，其中，又以分析機關決策依據與邏輯的實證研究相對稀少。對此，本研究認為Dunn所提出的政策論證之架構及模式，恰好提供一個合適的分析框架，能用於檢視政府決策准駁之論述及依據，而有助於填補當前研究的缺口。因之，我們選擇公共政策網路參與平臺上具備全國性電子連署功能的「提點子」項目作為研究個案，並聚焦於已成案且獲得機關完整回覆之政策提案，嘗試藉由內容分析與集群分析等方法，一方面，說明機關採用之政策論證模式；另一方面，辨識及歸納特定的機關回應態樣，並進一步檢視其與不同提案屬性之間的關聯。本研究發現機關普遍採用的政策論證模式是「方法」，最不常用的則是「通則化」，而依據回應之政策論證模式的組合，則可將之劃分為六種特定的機關回應態樣，且各自具備不同的提案屬性，惟機關回應態樣與提案屬性兩者之間並無顯著的關聯。此外，研究亦針對政策、方案、法律及法規等權威性文件的角色與功能，以及機關線上回覆是否符合法定的回應程序與形式等議題進行探討。相關成果均可以作為後續研究精進與未來實務推動之參考。

關鍵字

協力式治理 ； 協力式政策參與及制定 ； 政策論證模式 ； 電子連署 ； 公共政策網路參與平臺

並列摘要

While collaborative policy involvement and policy-making have become the golden rules of public participation, few studies have focused on how the government responds to the public's policy requests through ICTs in the process of collaborative policy involvement and policy-making, not to mention analyzing the underlying reasons and logic were taken by public agencies. Therefore, we treat the theory of policy argument and its modes mentioned by Dunn as a suitable analytical framework and tool for inspecting the underlying reasons and logic of public policy-making. The 152 cases of e-petition on the JOIN.gov platform were selected for this study. We conducted content analysis and cluster analysis to illustrate the models of policy argument used by the government, and identified their specific response patterns; we also explored the relationship between the different response patterns and the attributions of the petitions. According to current data, ＂Method＂ is the most dominant policy argument mode used by the government, and ＂Generalization＂ is the least dominant. Six different response patterns and their own attributions are identified, although there is no significant relationship between them. This study also discusses the role and function of ＂authority documents＂ (i.e., laws, regulations and policies), and analyzes the procedure and form of the government's response. The results from our study provide follow-up academics and practitioners more insight into the reality of e-collaborative policy involvement in Taiwan.

並列關鍵字

collaborative governance ； collaborative policy involvement and policy-making ； modes of policy argument ； e-petition ； JOIN.gov

參考文獻

王石番（1991）。傳播內容分析法：理論與實證。台北：幼獅文化。Wang, Shihfan (1991). Chuan bo nei rong fen xi fa: Li lun yu shi zheng [Content Analysis in the Field of Communication: Theory and Practice]. Taipei: Youth Cultural Enterprise.

邱皓政（2019）。量化研究與統計分析（六版）：SPSS 與 R 資料分析範例解析。台北：幼獅文化。Chiou, Hawjeng (2019). Liang hua yan jiu yu tong ji fen xi (liu ban): SPSS yu Rzi liao fen xi fan li jie xi [Quantitative Research and Statistical Analysis: Analysis of SPSS and R of the Sample Analytical Data Analysis (6th ed.)]. Taipei: Youth Cultural Enterprise.

原友蘭、劉吉川、何昶鴛（2015）。民眾問什麼？解析玉山國家公園「首長信箱」內容。中華林學季刊，48（3），231-249。Yuan, Yu-lan, Lue Chi-Chuan & Ho Chaang-Iuan (2015). Min zhong wen shi me? jie xi yu shan guo jia gong yuan “shou zhang xin xiang” nei rong [What People Ask? A Content Analysis of Email Messages Sent to Yushan National Park]. Quarterly Jounal of Chinese Forestry, 48(3), 231-249.

張守鈞（2011）。經濟學（I）：全方位攻略本。臺北：高點文化。Zhang, Shou-jun (2011). Jing ji xue: quan fang wei gong lüe ben [Economics (I)], Taipei: Get Publishing.

陳祥、黃伸閔（2009）。民眾不同陳情管道相對效能之比較。公共行政學報，33，83-120。Chen, Hsiang & Huang Shen-Min (2009). Min zhong bu tong chen qing guan dao xiang dui xiao neng zhi bi jiao [Exploration to the Comparative Effectiveness of Petition Channels: Attempts to Solve the Dilemma between Internet Petition and Resources Consumption]. Public Administration & Policy, 33, 83-120.