隨著過去十餘年民主改革的持續深化,台灣公部門治理機制的體質產生重大變化。民選政治人物將「回應性」視為施政的首要目標,讓公共管理者在「聽命令」與「專業責任」之間,面臨痛苦的抉擇。因此,公共管理者急需一套新思維,以重新建構政策決策過程中,公民與專家之問的互動關係。本文將這個過程,視為公共管理者處理「治理知識困境」的政治過程。本文先從民主理論當中程序性民主(procedural democracy)與認識性民主(epistemic democracy)的困境出發,討論公部門政策知識管理者的三個核心問題:(一)如果人民的集體政策偏好是重要的決策知識,它是如何產生的?誰擁有這知識?(二)缺乏專家知識的公民,參與公共決策的意義到底在哪裡?(三)如何整合專家與人民的意見? 本文站在民主理論的基礎之上,提出「參與式知識管理」概念,作為公共管理者處理「治理知識困境」的指導方針。就內涵而言,參與式知識管理是公部門著重「社會審視」與「民主審議」的一個決策過程;在目的方面,參與式知識管理要達成降低外部成本的共識治理、真實彰顯的事實認識、以及權力制衡的目的;而就實行方面,本文提出平等參與、對話學習、審議判斷、效率平衡、以及透明課責等五項原則,這些原則可以作為政策參與程序設計的原則,也可以作為發展參與知識管理之績效評估標準的理論基礎。 在後續的研究方面,本文可以作為評估公部門各種參與機制的基礎,從民主「治理知識困境」出發的理論架構上,後續研究可以繼續發展出可供測量的指標,針對目前國內外所發展出不同的參與機制,從參與式知識管理的角度,加以評估,這種評估的結果,可以為台灣下一階段的民主深化,提供完整及堅實的改革知識基礎。
In the past decade, government in Taiwan has gone through a dramatic transformation in its governing nature. For public managers, the value of professional responsibility has been gradually dominated by the value of responsiveness. A new viewpoint is needed to handle the so-called ”dilemma in governing knowledge” to ease the conflict between citizens and experts in public policy making process. In this article, the author first traces the dilemma back to its root in the theories of democracy. By reviewing the philosophical unrest between ”procedural democracy” and ”epistemic democracy,” author establishes a theoretical base for the so-called ”participatory knowledge management (PKM).” Finally, the author proposes five principles to implement the PKM in the public sectors. They are equal inclusion, dialogical learning, deliberative judgment, efficient balancing, and transparent accountability. Based on these principles, future research is needed to build an evaluating framework to access the performance of various kinds of participatory policy processes now on the market. The outcome can be a needed base for writing guidelines for public managers in handling citizen participation in various policy arenas.