地方政府跨域合作研究--日美與我國經驗之比較

A Study of Cross-Boundary Cooperation-Contrasts between Japan,America,and Taiwan

林慈玲(Tsyr-Ling Lin)

指導教授 ： 許介鱗

共同指導教授 ： 趙永茂

國立臺灣大學/社會科學院/政治學研究所/碩士(2005年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2005.02047

摘要

1980年代以來，地方分權的治理模式已成為全球化的浪潮，為實現具有特色與活力的地方社會，提升地方政府行政效能，促進資源的有效運用，觀察日、美等民主先進國家經驗，推動地方政府間跨域合作是不可或缺的一環，而且幾乎都有百年的發展歷程。反觀台灣社會，雖然自民國82年起，相繼推動各階段的政府改造措施，但大抵局限於中央層次，地方自治長期面臨著公民社會的民主理念及參與不足，中央與地方政治共識不夠，行政區域調整不易，地方行政組織僵化，自治財源不足等困境，亟待突破。如果能夠嘗試建立本土化的地方政府跨域合作體制，不但可以促進國家資源的有效運用，改善地方政府財政危機，更可以協助真正落實地方分權之理念。

日本有關地方政府間跨域合作稱之為「廣域行政」，研析日本廣域行政之發展，係以地方分權為主軸，為建構有效能的地方政府，以承接中央在地方化的趨勢下權限之委讓，政府積極推動行政改革，鼓勵廣域行政之推進等措施，其中廣域行政則包括：一、市町村行政區域合併；二、劃定廣域行政圈，推動生活圈共同規劃；三、廣域事務的共同處理等三大面向。另美國係聯邦制國家，各州地方政府間跨域合作的態樣相當多元，惟經分析歸類，大致也包含落實行政革新，聯邦或州政府提供地方財政協助，推動行政區域調整，進行區域合作規劃，廣域事務的共同處理等措施。但美國因為有強烈的地方自治傳統及自由民主的文化背景，有關大幅推動行政區域調整，不論民眾或學界均持保留態度，故自1970年代以來即很少被採行。

本研究經參考日本及美國有關地方政府間跨域合作的推動成果，對國內地方政府跨域合作體制之建立，提出下列政策規劃建議：
一、前置作業階段
應先確立擬推動地方政府跨域合作的整體內涵；更深入了解日本的具體配合措施；由行政院研考會總其成，設置「推動地方政府跨域合作委員會」，並分設「行政區劃小組」、「共同生活圈規劃小組」及「地方政府間事務共同處理小組」。
二、實際作業階段
（一）加強觀念宣導及說明，擬訂宣導、訓練或舉辦說明會計畫。
（二）擬訂分期推動計畫，包括法規研訂、試辦計畫及分期推展計畫之細部規劃期程。有關地方政府間事務的共同處理部分，建議分期推動計畫如下：
１、短程目標
（1）有關區域性地方自治體間的聯繫協調機制如協議會，及非法人性質之事務共同處理機制，包括公共設施之區域外設置及其他團體公共設施之利用、機關、職員之共同設置、事務之委託、職員之派遣等跨域合作方式，均可先行於地方制度法中另立專章予以規範。
（2）由各相關部會就其業務屬性自行檢討，參考害災防救法明定地方政府應簽定相互支援協定之體例，於各該專業行政作用法予以規範。
（3）鼓勵組成各級地方政府首長、議長之全國性相關協會，促成相互間對地方共同議題的討論與合作，避免因為政黨或個人因素而錯置資源的運用。
２、中長程目標
（1）設立公法人性質、辦理跨區域業務之特別地方自治團體，因尚需社會中持續討論，以獲致共識，建議以另行制定特別法方式處理。
（２）局部試辦，擇定目前亟待廣域化的特定業務，諸如垃圾處理、流域管理，以制定特別暫行條例方式，先行試辦設立公法人性質之特別地方自治團體，俟檢討其得失，並加以改善之後，全面推廣。

在行政區劃部分，宜再行檢討行政區劃法草案內容，並參考日本「中核市」、「核心市」制度，制定特別條例，試行提高國內縣轄市及市之自治權限及財源分配，或能解決長期以來縣市要求升格改制為直轄市之爭議，如有具體成效，再列入地方制度法中明定。

關鍵字

特定目的特區政府 ； 廣域連合 ； 廣域生活圈 ； 市町村合併 ； 廣域行政 ； 地方政府跨域合作

並列摘要

Since 1980, regional decentralization has become a global trend. In order to realize a regional community with characteristics and vivacity, to enhance the effectiveness of regional government, and to promote the efficiencies of resources, it is necessary to learn from the experiences of advanced countries such as United States and Japan in their near centennial coordination of regional governments. In comparison, even though different stages of governmental reform in Taiwan have been underway since 1993, most of the modification is confined to the central government. In Taiwan, local self-government bodies needs to overcome the lasting problems of insufficient democratic commitment and participation in citizenship society, limited common consensus between central and regional governments, arduous adjustments of administration regions, inflexibility of regional government, deficient financial resources. By establishing a system of cross-boundary cooperation, we would not only be able to more efficiently allocated national resources to advance financial situations of regional governments, but also be able to better substantiate the ideal of regional decentralization.

In Japan, cross-boundary cooperation is known as “Regional Cooperative Administration,” which is centered on regional decentralization. In order to establish an efficient local government that is capable of subsuming further authority from decentralization, Japanese government progressively advocates the reform of administration by upholding the principles of Regional Cooperative Administration.
The three principles of Regional Cooperative Administration are:
1. Promoting municipal mergers.
2. Delineating the Regional cooperative administration boundaries and conducting living zones designs.
3. Establishing joint management of regional Administrations.

Moreover, United States, as a federal government, demonstrates a diversity of interlocal cooperation in various States. Through analytical classification, cross-boundary cooperation in America similarly pertains to administrative reformation, federal or state financial assistances to regional government, adjusting municipal administrations, conducting regional cooperation, and joint management of regional affairs. Due to America’s strong tradition of local autonomy and its long history of democracy and freedom, drastic administrative redistribution has rarely been adopted after 1970s; in fact, both the public and academic forums have regarded such measures with incessant reservation.

Consulting the experiences and results of interlocal cooperation in Japan and America, this research offers the following measures for establishing interlocal cooperation between regional governments in Taiwan:
I. Preliminary Phase:
First, attempt to identify the overall issues involving interlocal cooperation in Taiwan; Second, observe how the Japanese government overcame similar problems with standing regulations and procedures; Third, the Research, Development and Evaluation Commission (RDEC) of the Executive Yuan should supervise the overall procedure and establish a “Regional Administration Cooperation Committee,” with the following subdivisions: “Regional Administration Redistribution Division,” “ Living Zone Design Division,” and “Regional Cooperative Administration Joint Management Division.”
II. Operation Phase:
A. Reinforce and propagandize Cross-Boundary Cooperation through publication, training, and seminars.
B. Determining the steps of the whole grand project, including legislation, detailed planning of experimental projects and step-by-step projects. As to the joint management of regional administrative affairs, it is advisable to follow these steps:
1. Short Term Goals
a. Legislation on Local Government Act should assign a chapter specifically for governing Cross-Boundary Cooperation in order to commission a communications council for regional governments and other cooperations of affairs, which may include the outlay of public areas, the uses of public facilities, allocation of administrative affairs, and personnel management within regional governments.
b. Institute specialized administrative regulations in various fields through self-reevaluation of individual partaking departments and committees and by consulting the Disaster Prevention and Response Support Agreement among local governments.
c. Encourage cooperation among the chairs of regional government and council to discuss and contribute to issues pertaining to regional commonwealth in order to avoid negligence or abuse of resources due to political or personal agendas.
2. Mid and Long Term Goals
a. Establish the system of Special Purpose District Governments. As consensus is still yet to be reached through public debate, it is plausible to appeal to the application of legislative addendum.
b. Experiment Cross-Boundary Cooperation in selected areas with operations that require broad regional cooperation, for example, garbage disposal and drainage management, through the institution of provisional regulations.

To refine regional administration redistribution, it is advisable to review the Administration Distribution Draft. By consulting the Japanese “Central Core City” and “Core City” models and instigating provisional regulations, major advancements can be made in both the regional revenue distribution and administrative power within cities and county jurisdictional municipalities, in addition, this might inadvertently resolve the dilemma of municipalities constantly and viciously competing to promote their status to be under the direct jurisdiction of the central government. If substantial results are yielded from such regulations, the provisional status should than be lifted via direct legislation of the Local Government Act.

並列關鍵字

Regional Cooperative Administration ； Wide Area Union ； Special Purpose District Government. ； Municipal Mergers ； Regional Living Zone ； Cross-Boundary Cooperation

參考文獻

陳立剛、李長晏，2003，＜全球化治理：臺灣都會治理的困境與體制建構：地方政府跨區域合作探究＞，「兩岸地方政府管理比較研究學術」研討會論文（1月10日），台中：私立東海大學政治學系、地方自治研究中心。

傅岳邦，2001，＜全球化與大陸政策＞，《中國行政評論》，10（3）：121-148。

葉俊榮，2004，＜政府再造與區域治理＞，《研考雙月刊》，28（5）：13-24。

鄒克萬，2004，＜新國土計畫法下都會區域發展的基本議題與規劃策略＞，《研考雙月刊》，28（5）：66-75。

彭錦鵬，2000，＜英國政署之組織設計與運作成效＞，《歐美研究季刊》，30（3）：89-141。