以桌長視角看臺北市參與式預算公民審議之困境

本研究旨在探討以桌長視角看臺北市參與式預算公民審議之困境。我國參與式預算制度，最早由臺北市長柯文哲於2015年提出。本研究以第一線在公民參與服務的資深桌長為研究對象。因為資深桌長具備豐富的公民參與經驗，並且對於政策規劃有較多理解。因此希望透過他們幾年下來在參與式預算豐富的服務經驗，去了解此政策發展之今的困境與解方。依據研究目的，本研究採取深度訪談和參與觀察兩項方式進行，以中正區、大安區、北投區三個行政區作為研究場域，透過訪談三個區內的資深桌長與實地參與觀察住民大會的進行，作為資料分析的來源。本研究所獲得之結論如下：一、公民參與高齡化：臺北市參與式預算的主要參與者為年長者居多，使得提案類型長期為特定年齡層所偏好，少數的散客提案較難取得支持。二、公民參與扭曲化：住民大會在提案投票設計採複數票的用意便是希望更多好的提案能被看見，而非只支持自己的案子。可惜的是，實際上前來的民眾因為多是鄰里動員的群眾，開始出現部分里與里之間結盟與配票的文化，可能造成少數者的提案被犧牲，沒有得到公平競爭的機會。三、公民參與形式化：在住民大會上，許多經常參與的民眾對於提案的流程及通過提案的標準都已經熟悉，卻也可能出現有參與者事先準備好提案，及幫忙投票的成員後，幾乎是勢在必得，導致提案人有時已經不太願與桌內成員深入討論該提案，而是僅僅希望將形式走過後便可以等待投票階段。

關鍵字

桌長；參與式預算；審議式民主；公民參與

並列摘要

The purpose of the study was to discuss the difficulties of participatory budget in Taipei City from the perspective of the Facilitators. The system of participatory budget in Taiwan was first proposed by Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je. In this thesis, we took senior Facilitators on the front line of citizen participation as the research subject. Due to the fact that senior Facilitators had rich experience in citizen participation and policy formulation, we were able to understand the difficulties and solutions of policy development. The research was conducted by interview and observation. The three administrative district of Zhongzheng, Da-an and Beitou were considered as the target regions. By Interviewing the Facilitators in above districts and observing the progress of citizen assembly, the results of the study were found as follows: 1. The main participants of participatory budget in Taipei City were mostly elderly which resulted in biased proposal types. 2. The purpose of multi-votes system for citizen assembly was to promote more proposals to be noticed. However, most of the participants were the masses convened by their own neighborhood, it was discovered that the atmosphere of vote allocation among neighborhoods was getting prosperous, and this affair might lead to neglect of other few proposals. 3. The members who frequently attended citizen assembly had been familiar with the procedures and standards for passing the proposals, sometimes the person who made the proposal did not have the will to discuss with other members. Due to the above reason, the assembly became a mere formality.