全球化風險挑戰下發展型國家之治理創新－以台灣公民知識監督決策為分析

Governance Innovation of Developmental State under the Globalized Risk Challenges-Burgeoning Civil Knowledge on Risk Policy Supervision inTaiwan

周桂田(Kuei-Tien Chou)

《政治與社會哲學評論》 44期 (2013/03) Pp. 65-148

https://doi.org/10.6523/168451532013030044002

摘要

本文從全球化風險威脅產生之鉅變角度，探討如何透過治理典範與制度創新，來引領國家與社會朝向系統性的的變革，以促進快速變遷之轉型社會朝向不斷學習的、創新的、參與的發展。作者檢視我國政府治理在發展型國家歷史形構中之轉型能耐的弔詭，並指出專家政治在當今全球化科技與風險不確定性下之決策困境。尤其，透過近年來四個重大政策爭議案例之類型化整理，可以看到，公民認識論在目前我國治理創新的重要性：為確保決策的正當性與挽回公眾的信任，政府應當重新審視風險不確定性下之風險分配與社會公平，並建構透明、開放、民主參與的風險溝通機制將強健的社會監督能量─公民知識與價值論述納入決策的機制。最後，從引介主要國際組織與國家之科技治理典範與制度變革，作者建議政府應從價值、制度與實踐進行系統性的治理變革，透過擬定科技治理白皮書、修訂科技基本法、建立科技對社會影響評估機制來確立治理創新的制度路徑。特別是重大的議題上，政府在政策研議、政策可行性評估、政策執行三階段需即刻進行透明的風險溝通變革，以重構政府與社會共同對抗全球化風險威脅挑戰之夥伴關係，同時彌補過去我國創新遲滯造成的僵局治理鴻溝。

關鍵字

治理創新 ； 創新遲滯 ； 僵局風險治理 ； 反身性治理 ； 全社會學習 ； 社會創新

並列摘要

Based on the perspective of global risk threats, this paper probes into how, by the innovation of regulatory paradigms and institutions, could a country and society moves toward a systemic reform into learned, innovative and participative development from a rapidly changing society. The author not only examines the paradox of our government’s transformative capacity that under the historical construction’s developmental state, but also points out the dilemma of decisionmaking of technocracy in contemporary global with the uncertainties of technology and risk. Especially, through classification of four recent policy controversies, we could see the importance of civil epistemology:for assuring the legitimacy of decision-making and retrieving the trust of public, the government should re-examines the risk distribution and the social fair under uncertain risk. Also, constructs a transparent, democraticparticipatory communication mechanism of risk to include the robotic social surveillance–civil knowledge and value discourses, into decisionmaking mechanism.Finally, by introducing the governance paradigms of technology and institutional reforms from major international organizations and countries, the author suggests that the government should start up form values, institutions and practices to a systemic governance reform. We should study up the governance of technology on a white paper, revise the basic technology law and build the mechanism of social impact assessmentof technology to establish the institutional approach of governance innovation. Particularly on important issues, the government should immediately operates an open reform on the risk of communication in the steps of policy discussions, policy feasibility assessments and policy executions, to re-build the partnership between the government and the society on facing global risk threats and challenges, and recuperates hung governance gap caused by innovative delay.

並列關鍵字

governance innovation ； innovative delay ； hung risk governance ； reflexive governance ； societal learning ； social innovation

參考文獻

吳嘉苓、曾嬿芬(2006)。SARS 的風險治理：超越技術模型。台灣社會學。11，57-109。

陳東升(2006)。審議民主的限制─台灣公民會議的經驗。台灣民主季刊。3(1)，77-104。

周桂田(2008)。全球在地化風險典範之衝突─生物特徵辨識作為全球鐵的牢籠。政治與社會哲學評論。22，101-189。

周桂田(2007)。新興風險治理典範之芻議。政治與社會哲學評論。22，179-233。

Chou, Kuei-Tien(2007).Public Trust and Risk Perceptions: A Preliminary Study of Taiwan's GMOs' 2003-2004.Taiwanese Journal of Studies for Science Technology and Medicine.4,149-176.