臺灣入侵紅火蟻防治機制之研究：2003-2020

入侵紅火蟻（以下簡稱紅火蟻）由於繁殖迅速、傳播能力強、對生物多樣性與人類活動產生嚴重影響，故被國際自然保護聯盟物種存續委員會列為世界百大有害外來入侵種之一。自從2003年於我國桃園境內確認第一件紅火蟻發生案例迄今十數年，在未能於入侵初期有效控制其蔓延的情況下，對生態環境、農業經濟以及公共安全等領域造成的影響，已成為全民都必須正視的重要課題。本論文以臺灣之入侵紅火蟻防治機制為研究主題，採「歷史-結構」之研究途徑，研究期間涵蓋2003〜2020年。首先，探討臺灣之紅火蟻防治法令、組織、策略、經費與執行情形，並分析桃園市政府之防治情形，再闡述紅火蟻防治之特殊性、重要性與防治機制之特徵，據以提出本研究之核心命題；其次，鑑於他山之石可攻錯，故本研究接續探討美國與澳洲之紅火蟻防治經驗，並進行美、澳、臺三國之比較分析；最後，針對四大核心命題：防治策略（目標）之重行評估、防治體制之通盤檢討、農委會與桃園市政府之協力關係、防治效能提升之對策-公私協力關係等，逐一進行探討。研究發現，臺灣之紅火蟻防治機制目前所存在的問題，主要有：1.私有土地是紅火蟻防治的大漏洞。2.紅火蟻防治之權責機關眾多，不易整合防治。3.紅火蟻之跨域治理似乎是流於形式。4.紅火蟻之防治經費不足，執行難以到位。5.紅火蟻之防治廠商能量不足以及委外防治勞務履約條款存有漏洞。本文之研究目的，主要是探討臺灣紅火蟻防治機制所存在之問題，並嘗試提出合於現行政治、經濟、社會與行政法令體制下之改革建議，據以提供後續執行評估之參考。研究建議簡要說明如下：一、私有土地之防治責任應重新界定，並將民間的力量有效的拉進防治網絡中因政府財政日益緊縮，且部分私人土地難以管理，成為防疫大漏洞，故建議在重新評估防治策略時，應先界定私有地之防治責任，採取符合當下環境的新措施，例如：增修植物防疫檢疫法或另立專法，使加強私有土地之自主防治責任，並彈性運用政策工具，或許可對違反者處以較高的罰鍰，或增加獎勵誘因（或獎金）之機制，以將民間無窮的防治力量，有效的拉進紅火蟻的防治網絡中。二、局部調整紅火蟻防治之權責分工方式臺灣之紅火蟻防治權責機關為數眾多，且責任區依業務屬性分工複雜，不僅造成各單位經常陷入權責劃分之爭議，並有多頭馬車、事權不統一之批評，故建議局部調整紅火蟻防治之權責分工方式，建議重點：1.防治紅火蟻之中央主管機關為行政院農委會，協辦機關為土地利用之目的事業主管機關，執行機關為地方政府。2. 苗木、建築剩餘土方、砂石和其他移動性感染源統一由農委會依法公告管理，並由各目的事業主關機關協助辦理。3. 國家紅火蟻防治中心增列執行根除計畫之任務。三、重行研議紅火蟻防治之法源依據與專責機構我國之植物防疫檢疫法係針對一般疫病蟲害而制定之防治法規，而紅火蟻名列世界一百大惡性有害生物之一，實非該法所稱之疫病蟲害。故為突破目前之防治困境，爰建議政府成立外來種中心，並編列專法及預算，以有效解決紅火蟻防治經費不足，以及私有土地成為防疫死角等問題。四、強化紅火蟻防治之跨域治理（央地協力與區域聯防）由「中央防治紅火蟻工作會報」以及「紅火蟻防治督導權責分工表」可知，我國之紅火蟻防治係採跨機關、跨部門，以及跨中央與地方政府之跨域治理模式；惟經研究發現，中央與地方之協力關係，以及區域聯防策略似乎流於形式，故建議行政院農委會強勢主導紅火蟻之防治業務，以克服「不易整合防治」之困境，並採用全區聯合防治之概念，以強化紅火蟻防治之跨域治理。五、將「公私協力關係」運用於政府之紅火蟻防治任務桃園市政府在紅火蟻防治工作上面臨：防治預算有限、人力資源與專業能力較不足、府內事權不統一以及防治勞務履約條款存有漏洞等問題，故建議桃園市政府改弦易轍，將目前由各區公所向共同供應契約廠商下單的傳統作法，變更為「公私協力關係」之新模式，並將防治的處理層級拉高到市政府的位階，重新構建一個有效的防治網絡，以提升紅火蟻防治的效能。

關鍵字

紅火蟻防治；跨域治理；中央與地方協力；公私協力；事權統一

並列摘要

The red imported fire ant (Solenopsis invicta), also known as the red fire ant and hereinafter referred to as RIFA, due to the rapid reproduction and strong transmission capacity, it impacts on biodiversity and human activities tremendously. The IUCN Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG), organized under the auspices of the Species Survival Commission (SSC) has listed it in “100 of the World's Worst Invasive Alien Species”. Since Taiwan’s first case of RIFA was confirmed in Taoyuan in 2003, the ecological environment, agricultural economy, public security and other fields had been affected a lot after the failure to effectively control its spreading in early stage of the invasion. RIFA has become an important issue that all people must face squarely. This study took Taiwan’s RIFA control mechanism as the theme- based on the research and survey from 2003 to 2020 in Taoyuan- and adopted the approach of "history-structure" method. First, the reasearcher discussed the laws and regulations, organizations, strategies, funds and implementation of RIFA control in Taiwan, and analyzed the case in Taoyuan. Followed by explicating the particularity, importance and characteristics of the RIFA control mechanism in Taiwan to bring up the core propositions of this research. Secondly, the researcher continued to introduce the RIFA control policies in the United States and Australia to find out what we can learn, and conducted a comparative analysis among the cases of those two countries and Taiwan. Finally, the researcher elucidated the core propositions: the reassessment of RIFA control strategies and targets in Taiwan, an overall review and improvement of the whole control system, the cooperative relationships between the Council of Agriculture and Taoyuan City Government, and the response strategy to increase efficiencies-“public-private partnership”. The researcher found that the current problems of Taiwan's RIFA control mechanism included: 1. private lands management is a big loophole; 2. too many authorities are responsible for the control of RIFA, and it is not easy to integrate their programs; 3. the cross-boundary governance of RIFA seemed merely to be a superficial formality; 4. deficient funds for the prevention and control makes the assignment difficult to implement; 5. inadequate capabilities of RIFA prevention and control companies and breaches in contracts between government agencies and contractors. This study intended to propose programs applicable to our current political, economic, social, legal and administrative system so it could be used as references for subsequent evaluation. The practical proposals are explained as follows: 1. Redifining the responsibility for RIFA control on private lands and effectively introduce non-government source into the prevention network: As a result of the government spending reduction, and insufficiency of related regulations, the difficulties to manage private lands have become a major loophole for RIFA control. Therefore, it’s suggested to redefine the responsibility for pest control of private lands and adopt new measures that keep up with time——such as amending the Phytosanitary and Quarantine Law or enacting another special law to define the land owners’ legal liability for RIFA control, and use policy tools flexiblely to impose high fines on violators or increase incentives ( such as bonuses ) to utilize the non-government vitality for RIFA control. 2. Rediscussing the sources of law and the specialized agency of RIFA control: Taiwan’s Phytosanitary and Quarantine Law is a prevention and control law formulated for general pests and diseases. Listed as one of the world’s top 100 pernicious pests, RIFA’s damage to the environment far exceeds that of general pests. Therefore, in order to break through the current predicament, the researcher suggested that the government establish an invasive species research center, and formulate a special law and dedicated budget to effectively solve the problems of insufficient funds and prevent private lands to be the dead angle for RIFA control. 3. Modifying the division of authorities and responsibilities for RIFA control: In Taiwan, there are quite a few government agencies involving with RIFA control, and the division of responsibilities is very complicated according to the functions of each agencies. This causes conflics between those agencies, and makes hydra-headed bureaucracy. Therefore this study suggested to gradually modify the division of authorities and responsibilities for RIFA control. 4. Strengthening the cross-boundary governance of RIFA control (the cooperation of central and local governments, and regional joint projects): RIFA control in Taiwan adopts a cross-agencies, cross-sectors, and central-local government cooperation network system. The Council of Agriculture is the central competent authority for RIFA control and the core hub of the whole network. So it’s recommended that the Council of Agriculture adopts the concept of holistic governance and strongly dominate the nationwide RIFA control assignment to overcome the obstacles to integrate all the agencies and organizations. If we can strengthen the spirit and the implementation of cross-boundary governance, we shall surmount the hurdles to integrate and consolidate the whole system. 5. Applying the "public-private partnership" to the government's RIFA control mission: The Taoyuan City Government is faced with problems such as limited prevention budget , insufficient human resources and inadequate professional capabilities, tangled jurisdictions of government authorities, and breaches in submitting stipulations of contracts between institutions and contractors. Therefore, it’s suggested that the Taoyuan City Government strike out a new path——change the current traditional way of outsourcing RIFA control programs to pest control operators into a new model of "public-private parnership", and raise the level of programs from local offices to the municipal government. In order to eradicate RIFA or at least reduce its populations, this effective control network has to be established.