透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.89.163.120
  • 學位論文

政府風險溝通之研究-以日本福島核災事故後調整特定地區食品輸台管制措施為例

The Study of Governmental Risk Communication-The Case of Adjusting the Control Measures of importing food to Taiwan from Japan in Specific Areas after the Fukushima Nuclear Accident

指導教授 : 洪美仁
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


2011年日本福島核災事故後,我國政府對福島、茨城、櫪木、群馬、千葉等5縣生產製造之食品啟動暫停輸台管制措施,直至2016年重啟研議將管制措施由原先「地區食品管制」調整為「風險食品管制」,並因應立法院社會福利及衛生環境委員會決議之決議召開十場公聽會,以促進社會大眾對政策的理解。鉅料行政部門卻急於當週週末三日內於全台各地召開十場公聽會,此舉反而引起社會大眾對政策的恐慌與質疑,更引發政治性論爭與強烈抗爭。 政府因此意識到傳統的行事做法與輕忽公民參與意識的重要性將導致社會大眾對政府的信任瓦解與對政策措施的誤解,更將引起政治性對立,故政府經過反思檢討後,一改以往陳舊的官僚思維與固有做法,宣布於2016年12月25日及2017年1月2日、1月8日重新召開三場公聽會,並求助民間第三方「推動公民參與專業小組」協助設計公聽會的程序與運作,由第三方公正人士擔任主持人,期以公共諮詢模式重啟社會對話。然而,2016年12月25日首場公聽會卻因與會者與部分政治團體強烈爭議會議程序瑕疵而屢屢爆發多起口角與肢體衝突,導致會議難以進入實質議題的對話與討論,由於非理性的抗爭與衝突不斷,故主持人在取得與會者的共識下,於當日宣布該場公聽會改為座談會,行政院亦於隔日發布新聞稿宣布後續兩場公聽會將延期舉行。 本文以政府調整日本福島核災特定地區食品輸台管制措施所進行的風險溝通為研究個案,探討我國政府對於日本食品輸台現況管制措施以及2016年重啟調整特定地區食品輸台管制措施之背景緣由與政策內涵,經由政府部門、公民團體、專家學者與新聞媒體的深度訪談分析,進而探究政府在此事件中如何與訊息接收者進行風險溝通?而當中政府進行風險溝通所遇困境為何?應如何進行檢討改善,以促進溝通成效等研究問題,而政府進行的溝通策略情形及所遇困境,本研究發現聚焦於四個面向:訊息設計內涵與框架、政治力介入與利益交換說、反思後的對話參與平台及資訊公開呈現傳遞的限制。最後針對以上研究發現,建議政府進行政策風險溝通時,應精確掌握訊息完整度與正確性,強化媒體報導正解、建立政治風險與健康風險雙邊平衡、落實雙向溝通對話參與平台,奠定社會理性對話的基石以及確保資訊揭露,實現公開透明,希能藉由此研究成果對未來政府治理與風險溝通提供建議良策。

並列摘要


After the Fukushima Nuclear Accident in Japan, our government has started the suspension of the control measures of food production from five counties, Fukushima, Ibaraki, Tochigi, Gunma and Chiba. Until 2016, our government resumed adjusting the control measures from "regional food control" to "risky food control" ,and held ten public hearings in response to the resolution of the Legislative Yuan's Social Welfare and Environmental Hygiene Committee to promote the community's understanding of the policy. However, the administrative department was anxious to hold ten public hearings within three days of the weekend in Taiwan, which has caused not only the community’s panic and challenge to the policy, but also led to political debate and strong protest. Therefore, the government was aware that the traditional behavior and ignoring the importance of civic participation would lead to the collapse of the community's trust in the government and the misunderstanding of policy, moreover, it would lead to political opposition.Thus after reviewing, the government has changed the antiquated bureaucratic thinking and traditional behavior, announced that three public hearings would be held on December 25th, 2016, January 2nd and 8th, 2017, and searched for help from the third party "to promote the participation of citizens in the professional group" to assist in the design and operation of the public hearings, which the third party will be the maoderator in order to restart the social dialogue with a public consultation mode. However, on December 25th, 2016, the first public hearing had trouble in entering the dialogue and discussion of the substantive issues because of the controversy between the participants and some political groups. Due to irrational protests and conflicts, the moderator and the participants reached a consensus about announcing that the public hearing would be changed to a forum. Meanwhile, the Executive Yuan also issued a press release on the following day announcing that the two hearings would be postponed. This paper is the study of government risk communication based on the case of adjusting the control measures of importing food to Taiwan from Japan in specific areas after the Fukushima Nuclear Accident. This research aims to explore current control measures of importing food from Japan, to think about in 2016 the background and policy why the government resumed adjusting the control measures in specific areas and to discover through the government departments, civic groups, experts and scholars and the news media in-depth interview analysis, how the government in this incident communicates with the recipient of the risk? What is the plight of the government's risk communication? How should the government review the problems it has been facing and improve the communication effectiveness and other research issues? This study has shown that the government's communication strategy and the difficulties encountered focus on four aspects: Information design conception and framework, political force intervention and interest exchange theory, the participation platform after reflection of the dialogue and the restrictions on freedom of information transferring. Lastly, as above mentioned, the study suggests when the government conducts policy risk communication, it is necessary to grasp the information integrity and correctness, to strengthen the media for reporting positive information, to establish the balance between the political risk and health risk, to implement two-way communication participate platform, to build up the foundation of social rational dialogue, and to ensure information disclosure and freedom of information. This research hopes to provide useful advice of good policy for government governance and risk communication in the future.

參考文獻


丘昌泰,2010,《公共管理》,台北:智勝文化。
周桂田,1998,〈現代性與風險社會(Modernity and Risk Society)〉,《臺灣社會學刊》,21:89-129。
周桂田,2003b,〈從「全球化風險」到「全球在地化風險」之研究進路:對Beck理論的批判思考〉,《臺灣社會學刊》,31:153-188。
周桂田、徐健銘,2015,〈評風險社會〉,《傳播研究與實踐》,5(2):235-244。
陳敦源、劉宜君、蕭乃沂、林昭吟,2011,〈政策利害關係人指認的理論與實務:以全民健保改革為例〉,《國家與社會》,10,1-65

延伸閱讀