我國地方政府參與式預算之研究-以臺北市與桃園市為例(2016-2019)

在傳統代議民主已無法滿足公民社會需求之際，運用審議式民主的公民參與機制呼聲四起，並成為現代民主的核心精神，參與式預算正是此波浪潮之產物，藉由賦權公民提出需求，並編列預算執行之，讓公共政策不再只把持於傳統專業知識官僚手上，此種將公民鑲嵌於政策網絡之治理模式，也讓公共政策更具正當性。本研究以臺北市與桃園市(下稱兩縣市)參與式預算為案例進行質化分析，探討兩縣市不同的參與式預算模式達成公民參與之程度是否會有不同，以民主立方體檢驗之，並就提案資訊及成果進行分析，藉以瞭解兩縣市參與式預算是否符合學者Brian Wampler提出之核心精神。本研究發現在兩縣市首長各自的考量下，雖實施了模式各異的參與式預算，但皆達到相當程度之公民參與，從提案類型中可以看出與民眾生活經驗相近的具體建設類提案為大宗，顯示參與式預算與公民社會是息息相關的。惟參與式預算所能涵蓋到的公民社會範圍，若僅靠民眾提案實施，恐有所侷限，桃園市政府藉由設定議題之機制，將參與式預算觸角伸及至弱勢團體或非具體建設類議題上，讓參與式預算發揮社會正義與資源重分配之核心精神。我國參與式預算仍處於初步推廣之階段，本研究建議縣市政府可藉由質量並重的探討模式以提升參與式預算意義、建立制度化之培力人才資料庫以協助審議作業、縣市政府應致力於提升提案之可行性與最大限度揭露資訊以符課責原則，在參與式預算作業流程與提案內容上，須不斷地藉由檢視個案，並據以做滾動式修正，以確保其於核心精神的掌握與落實。

關鍵字

參與式預算；審議式民主；公民參與；民主立方體；參與式預算設計原則

並列摘要

When the conventional representative democracy cannot meet the need of civil society. The repeated calls for the usage of mechanism for citizen participation in the system of deliberative democracy have formed the core present of democracy. Participatory budgeting is the fruit of this trend. When the government empowers citizens to identify the need and plan the budget for implementation, the public policy not only allows the majority of citizen’s contribution rather than the minority of officialdom to influence the decision but also becomes more legitimate. In this study, the qualitative analysis of the participatory budgeting of Taipei City and Taoyuan City (hereinafter referred to as two cities) was carried out to examine whether the different participatory budget models used by the two cities caused the different degree of citizen participation. Furthermore, this study used democracy cube model and researched on the proposals and outcome of participatory budget in two cities to know whether these results accord with the core value of participatory budget submitted by Dr. Brian Wampler. Although the models of participatory budgeting are different in two cities because of the disparate consideration of two mayors, they still showed considerable degree of citizen participation. Moreover, the study discovered that construction connected to people’s daily life accounts for majority of proposals, and this indicated that participatory budgeting is closely related to civil society. However, the scope of the participatory budgeting for public policy which only relies on citizens’ proposal may be limited. By the mechanism of setting issues, Taoyuan City has extended the breath of participatory budgeting to vulnerable groups or non-specific construction subjects. This method makes participatory budgeting play a more crucial role in social justice and resource redistribution. In Taiwan, participatory budgeting is still at the promotion stage. This study suggests that local governments can discuss issue in terms of both quality and quantity to optimize the use of participatory budgeting. Also, the local government should advocate the establishment of an institutionalized trained database to assist in the consideration of operations and strive to enhance the feasibility of the proposal and fully disclosure of information to strengthen accountability. As for the process and content of participatory budgeting proposals, local governments need to constantly examine the cases and take rolling-wave planning to ensure its picture and implementation.