臺灣社區工作的政策典範與治理–社區照顧關懷據點的省思

Community Work in Taiwan: Policy Paradigms and Governance

蕭文高(Wen-Kao Hsiao)

指導教授 ： 黃源協

國立暨南國際大學/人文學院/社會政策與社會工作學系/博士(2007年)

https://doi.org/10.6837/NCNU.2007.00137

摘要

臺灣政府自1960年代開始致力於推動社區發展工作，然而由於行政科層與執政當局過度著重硬體建設，造成社區相當依賴政府的資源，亦喪失其自主性。於是，隨著臺灣邁向工業化與民主化，對於社區參與不足之省思，孕育了另外一股社區政策的思潮，政府亦在1990年代採行了社區營造政策。在此兩種不同的背景脈絡下，相關比較性研究陸續產生，只不過對於政府的角色以及政策之理念基礎，各方看法仍是分歧；此外，對於社區營造所主張的社群主義價值是否能真正地落實在政策的執行，也需要更為詳細的分析與檢視。本研究的目的在於從政策典範的觀點，分析並比較社區發展與社區營造之政策變遷過程，接著藉由瞭解「建立社區照顧關懷據點實施計畫」之治理制度與工具，探討公部門與社區組織進行服務供給之互動與調適行為，以及它在社群主義之價值面向所產生之影響。

為了達成研究之目的，本研究採取文獻分析與質性研究的方法，一方面分析政府文件與相關研究，另一方面則針對地方政府社會行政人員與社區組織領導者進行訪談工作。研究主要發現包括：

一、受到許多政策行動者理念在政策典範形成所扮演的關鍵角色，讓社區營造取代社區發展成為政府目前的政策重心，政府所關注的社區議題亦產生轉變，這不僅促成政策變遷，政策目標與工具之設定也有相當大之差異。然而，部份社區營造之計畫項目並不能與其政策理念相符，亦遭逢過去社區發展所面對的制度性問題。
二、中央政府、地方政府與社區組織間之互動過程，影響了照顧據點運作之機會與限制，即便政策計畫納入許多能力建構的措施，在供給與需求間仍然存在落差，加上相關制度之不完善，社會行政人員將面臨治理失靈的威脅，進而產生不同的因應策略。
三、每個社區組織參與照顧據點計畫之動機，以及網絡建構的策略並不相同，為了促進照顧據點之運作順暢，社區組織領導者必須處理社區居民與組織之不信任，並面對自我治理失靈之挑戰。儘管如此，參與照顧據點仍對社區與組織帶來改變，並形成許多社群主義的價值。

最後，本研究對於社區、社區組織、治理以及社群主義之相關概念與理論進行討論，並就政府與社區組織在互動過程所應扮演的角色，提出下列建議：
一、政府部份：（1）建立地理資訊系統；（2）培養社區組織的中介組織；（3）從效率走向過程的政策評估；（4）思考政策工具的運用與設定；（5）擴大地方公所之合作參與。
二、社區組織部份：（1）建立並經營社區組織的社會資本；（2）避免介入社區權力的衝突；（3）發展組織願景與策略性規劃。

關鍵字

社區發展 ； 社區營造 ； 社區照顧 ； 社群主義 ； 治理

並列摘要

Taiwan government have devoted to Community Development since the 1960s. However, because administrators and leaders of ruling parties have been interested in physical construction, most of the communities have had to rely on government’s resources and, there, lost their autonomy at the same time. Within the process of industrialization and democratization, insufficient community participation was reflected and different ideas of community policies were conceived. Also, Community Building policy was adopted in the 1990s. Between two different contexts, comparative studies on community policies grow in number, but opinions of government’s role as well as policy ideas are still in dispute. Furthermore, it needs to analyze whether or not communitarian values of Community Building have been put into practice. As mentioned above, the purposes of this study are:

1）To analyze and compare policy changing process between Community Development and Community Building with theories of policy paradigms.
2）To investigate interactive and adoptive behaviors between public sector and community organizations in service providing with special reference to governance institutions and policy instruments in the ”Program to Set Up Community Caring-Concern Centers”.
3）To understand value effects of the ”Program to Set Up Community Caring- Concern Centers” in light of communitarian perspective.

Research methods used in this study are:（a）literature review on policy documents and related researches;（b）qualitative interview with social administrators in local government and leaders of community organizations. Main findings of this study include:

1）Because some policy actors’ ideas played a key role in institutionalizing distinct policy paradigms, Community Building replaced Community Development as the principal focus of government now. As a result of this development, the locus of authority over community issues began to shift. Not only were the settings of policy changed but the hierarchy of goals and set of instruments employed to guide policy shifted radically as well. However, parts of Community Building violated its own policy ideas, and also met some institutional problems that Community Development had ever encountered.
2）Interactive process among central government, local government and community organizations influence opportunities and restrictions for running Community Caring-Concern Centers. Even though program devised many capacity-building measures, it also exist gaps between supply and demand sides. In addition, imperfect institutions sink social administrators into threats of governance failure; meanwhile, various coping strategies were utilized.
3）By joining this program, motivations and networking strategies of community organizations are different. For the sake of running Community Caring-Concern Centers successfully, leaders of community organizations need to deal with mistrust from community residents and organizations and face challenges of self-governance failure. Nevertheless, it also makes changes and injects communitarian values into communities and organizations.

Finally, implications for theories and concepts of community, community organization, governance and communitarianism were discussed. Furthermore, suggestions for government and community organizations in the interactive process include:

1）For government:（a）to set up geographic information system;（b）to promote intermediary community organizations;（c）to change its policy evaluation methods from efficient to process oriented;（d）to deliberate settings and applications of policy instruments;（e）to expand collaboration and participation of district government.
2）For community organizations:（a）to build and manage its social capital;（b）to avoid to engage in community power conflicts;（c）to develop its vision and strategic planning.

並列關鍵字

community development ； community empowering ； community care ； communitarianism ； governance

參考文獻

一、中文文獻

中共中央編譯局譯（1869/2001）。《路易．波拿巴的霧月十八日》。北京：人民出版社。（Karl Marx原著）

文建會（1999）。《臺灣社區總體營造的軌跡》。臺北：行政院文化建設委員會。

文崇一（1969）。〈社區發展與現代化問題（座談會記錄） - 社區發展與現代化問題〉《思與言》，第7卷第4期，頁1-3。

王培勳（1971）。〈社區發展工作涵義及今後我國努力途徑〉。《社會建設季刊》，第九號，頁124-133