臺北縣推動「準用直轄市」策略之理性決策分析

本文從Graham Allison和Philip Zelikow（1999）所提出的「理性行動者」（RAM）決策分析模式為主，採用分析敘事的方法，以解釋性個案研究，透過決策樹為分析工具，探討蘇貞昌與周錫瑋兩位前後任的決策者，在面對臺北縣的治理困境其決策系絡之異同。從研究結果發現，第一，雖然蘇、周兩位縣長從政背景與經歷有所不同，但是處理上述問題時，確實以有限理性的滿意決策為判準，抉擇成本較低、效益較高的準用選項，而非執意採取直接改制的方式以解決治理問題。因此個案之中的決策者行為與RAM的命題相符，並能夠複現RAM的意涵。第二，準用策略提出的時間點，與當時總統大選等重要時序性政治事件有所關聯，希冀利用議題設定的方式引起相關行動者的重視。第三，綜合政策理念與政治現實、現實成本與實際利益的考量，「準用」是在各項情境與選項中能夠得到決策滿意之可行策略。從後續客觀數據的變化顯示，「準用直轄市」規定對於解決臺北縣的問題產生一定程度的正面效果。第四，既有制度讓兩位決策者必須面對由中央主導改制議題的局面，並且侷限其策略範圍。但是同樣也提供機會，使其能夠與選區立委建立委託－代理關係得以進入立法院集體決策的場域，進而改變原本不利的情況。

關鍵字

理性行動者模式；決策樹；分析敘事；個案研究；因果程序追蹤

並列摘要

This article used the ＂Rational Actor Model (RAM)＂ of the Graham Allison and Philip Zelikow (1999) and employed the case study method of ＂analytic narratives＂ to analysis Taipei County's strategy of choosing ＂mutatis mutandis＂ status between 1999 and 2007. The purpose of this research is to test the hypothesis of RAM and to answer four questions: First, why do the former Magistrates of Su Tseng-chang and Chou Hsi-wei make the same decision to resolve the personnel and financial difficulties in Taipei County? Second, are their decisions influenced by the political events in time chart? Third, do the two Magistrates' decisions fit the theoretical hypothesis? Fourth, how does the institutional context affect the decision makers? The results of the research verified the theoretical hypothesis and: 1) The behavior of Su and Chou conformed with the RAM in this case. 2) The presidential election in 2000 and other political events in the time chart influenced the Magistrates' decision. 3) The option of ＂mutatis mutandis＂ is a ＂satisficing option＂ for the decision makers in this case. 4) The existing institution provided opportunities for the Magistrates to build principle-agent relations with Legislatures and also gave the limitation to who select the strategies.