臺灣PM_(2.5)跨界風險知識觀點下決策與治理困境

A Trans-boundary Risk Knowledge Perspective on PM_(2.5) Governance Stalemate and Policy-making in Taiwan

王瑞庚(David Walther) ； 周桂田(Kuei-Tien Chou)

《第十屆發展研究年會　台灣經驗2.0：在地與全球的發展研究與實踐》 2018 (2018/10) Pp. 909-1005

https://doi.org/10.6392/ACDS.201810.0036

摘要

2017年政府提出改善PM_(2.5)與空氣品質提升的「14+N措施」到2018年6月「空氣污染防制法」修訂，民眾對於空氣品質政策包括：空氣品質改善的認知與效果存在社會爭議。民眾關心風險治理效果的地區差異和課責正當性問題，重視牽涉到價值理性的複雜議題。綜觀本文分析，政府PM_(2.5)風險治理與決策困境，主要來自缺乏風險建構論的知識觀。決策上偏重實證科學而較少處理價值歧異知識問題。採用群體共構知識來處理複雜風險問題的能力不足，僅靠官方與專家政治決策進行決策與溝通。僵化、給定、制約的規範，無法擔保處理風險治理問題，風險溝通與政府信任都困難重重。導致民眾感知與政府政策間的落差，此為目前臺灣PM_(2.5)風險治理與決策的主要困境。

關鍵字

PM_(2.5) ； 跨界風險知識 ； 空氣污染 ； 空氣品質 ； 預警原則

並列摘要

In 2017, government put forward the ＂14+N＂ which is aimed to improve PM_(2.5) and air quality. In June 2018, ＂Air Pollution Control Act＂ was revised and people's air quality policy includes: there is the social dispute on the cognition and effect of improvement of air quality. People care for the regional difference of risk governance effect and accountability legitimacy and attach importance to the complex issues involving value rationality. Throughout the analysis in this paper, government PM_(2.5) risk governance and decision dilemma mainly lack the epistemology view in constructionism of risk. The decision focuses on the empirical science and rarely deals with the value difference knowledge condition. The ability to adopt the group co-construction knowledge to deal with the complex risk problems is insufficient and government only relies on the official and expert political decision to make decisions and communicate. The rigescent, given and restricted regulation cannot guarantee to deal with the risk governance problem and it has great difficulties to achieve risk communication and government trust. As a result, people will perceive the gap with governmental policy. This is the main dilemma currently faced by Taiwan in PM_(2.5) risk governance and decision.

並列關鍵字

PM_(2.5) ； air pollution ； air quality ； trans-boundary risk ； risk governance ； risk knowledge