English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 71437/104396 (68%)
造訪人次 : 19139798      線上人數 : 609
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧:
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號",以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋,建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位,可獲得較完整資料
  • 進階搜尋
    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/59674


    題名: 原住民代表性官僚的理想與現實─以溪洲部落拆遷事件為例
    The ideal and reality of aboriginal representative bureaucracy: An example of Shijou Tribe
    作者: 劉湘琦
    Liu, Hsiang Chi
    貢獻者: 莊國榮
    劉湘琦
    Liu, Hsiang Chi
    關鍵詞: 溪洲部落
    代表性官僚
    基層行政人員
    都市原住民
    社會運動
    Shijou Tribe
    Representative Bureaucracy
    street-level bureaucracy
    urban Aboriginal
    social movement
    日期: 2010
    上傳時間: 2013-09-03 11:58:13 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 本研究以溪洲部落拆遷政策變遷為個案研究,瞭解「代表性官僚」在實務上如何運作,以及他們在現實的政策環境中如何自處,藉由深入的探討來發掘「代表性官僚」的更多可能,讓他們發揮積極代表性的功能。研究方法以深度訪談為主,在不足處再佐以官方新聞稿及國內報紙新聞資料,進行5位受訪者,共計6次訪談,研究範圍自2007年9月至2011年5月止。
    本研究結果發現,因個案牽涉層級太高,臺北縣原民局的行政決策空間有限,在個人因素方面,「代表性官僚與代表團體間擁有共享的價值觀與信念」、「代表性官僚改變政策標的之行為」、「代表性官僚本身對其代表性的認同程度」等對代表性官僚的決策與執行有影響;在結構因素中「行政裁量權的多寡」與「外在政治環境」對代表性官僚的決策與執行有影響,較具體是反映在專業與資源不足、社會運動蓬勃、媒體與政治力介入、學者專家介入等因素。除了上述的影響因素之外,本研究亦發現不同行政人員的信仰、生活經歷、工作經歷等亦會影響行政人員處理相關事務的態度。此外,研究發現認為原住民族身分的行政人員如與政策標的屬於同一族群,則較能發揮文化、語言等優勢進行溝通協調工作,而原民住族在有困難時,也會習慣向自己的原民行政體系尋求協助,顯見「代表性官僚」的存在有其功能。但值得一提的是,非原住民族的行政人員也能夠透過與族人的長期互動來獲得族人的認同,因此,從處理原住民族事務的觀點來看,不論行政人員是否屬於原住民族,培養「原民意識」皆是必須的。
    此外,本研究建議:第一,原民體系應增加人力與專業等資源,在政策推動上爭取主導權,避免成為自我限縮的官僚;第二,處理原住民族事務需要「原民意識」的培養,增加行政人員的內在動力;第三,為因應愈來愈多的都市原住民人口,中央原民會應主動進行全盤的政策規劃和立法相關準備工作,讓原住民族的利益能夠獲得立法保障,減少政黨輪替所帶來的影響,最後應有原住民族公共利益的產生制度,並增加族人對於原住民族代表性官僚的課責管道,以回應政策需求。
    This study is a case study about the relocation policy negotiation with Shijou Tribe, in order to understand how "Representative Bureaucracy" works in practice, as well as the real policy environment, and to discover the "representative bureaucracy" more likely to enable them to play an active representative functional . the main research method is in-depth interviews, the five respondents, a total of six interviews, and then combined with the official press releases and newspapers from September 2007 to May 2011 only.
    The study found that because the case involves high-level, Council of Indigenous Peoples Bureau, Taipei County executive decision-making space is limited. In personal factors, "between representative bureaucrats and representative groups with shared values and beliefs," "representative bureaucrats to change its policy subject of conduct "," representative bureaucracy itself, the recognition of their representative, " influence representative bureaucrats on the decision-making and implementation. In the structure factors, "the amount of administrative discretion" and "external political environment" influence representative bureaucrats on decision-making and implementation, more specifically reflected in the lack of expertise and resources, social movements, media and political forces involved, scholars expert intervention.
    Except the above factors, the study also found that the administrative staff of different beliefs, life experiences, work experience and other administrative staff will also affect the attitude of dealing with relevant affairs. In addition, the study found that Aboriginal identity and policy underlying executive officer of the same ethnic group, are more able to play culture, language and other advantages of communication and coordination, and the original people also used to their own administrative systems of Indigenous Peoples for assistance, which shows that the existence of "representative bureaucracy" has its functions. But it is worth mentioning that non-Aboriginal executives can also via the long-term interaction with the tribe to get the tribe recognized, therefore, deal with Aboriginal affairs from the point of view, regardless of whether they are Aboriginal administrative staff, developing a "sense of the original people" are necessary.
    In the end, this study suggests that the original system should increase professional ability and other resources, to avoid becoming a self-limited reduction of bureaucracy; In addition, increase administrative personnel intrinsic motivation; Finally, in response to an increasing number of urban Aboriginal population, Council of Indigenous Peoples, Executive Yuan should adjust overall policy planning and legislation related to preparatory work for the interests of indigenous peoples to obtain legislative protection, reducing the impact of politics. On the other hand, indigenous peoples should have the system for the public interest and increase the representative bureaucrats accountability.
    參考文獻: 一、中文部分
    丘昌泰(2004)。公共政策基礎篇。臺北:三民。
    江一豪(2009)。取法乎外:「違建社區」如何成為反攻土地商品化的號角。臺灣社會研究季刊,第76期,頁459-467。
    伊凡諾幹(2004)。文官制度改革與原住民族發展:對於建構多元並具有民族特色之考銓制度的初步努力與檢討。考銓季刊,第40期,頁1-19。
    呂育誠(2001)。現代政府運作過程中基層公務員的定位與功能。新世紀的行政理論與實務─張潤書教授榮退紀念論文集。臺北:三民。
    林鍾沂(2004)。行政學。臺北:三民。
    林易蓉(2009)。溪洲部落空間尋根─與原鄉部落的空間模式。國立台灣大學建築與城鄉研究所碩士論文。
    施正鋒(1999)。臺灣政治建構。臺北:前衛。
    施正鋒(2004)。行政體系中的原住民族─由「優惠待遇」到「積極行動」。考銓季刊,第40期,頁47-61。
    柯賢城(2002)。都市邊緣原住民家庭生活之考察:以三鶯部落阿美族為例。東吳大學社會工作學系碩士論文。
    孫煒(2010)。我國族群型代表性行政機關的設置及其意涵。臺灣民主季刊,第7卷第4期,頁85-136。
    財團法人原住民族文教基金會(1998)。跨世紀原住民族政策白皮書。台北:財團法人原住民族文教基金會。
    翁興利、陳文學(2008)。我國原住民族文官之研究:消極代表性官僚的測量。國家菁英季刊,第4卷第1期,頁1-15。
    夏鑄九(1999)。幽靈社區,三鶯橋下野草花。新故鄉雜誌季刊,第1期,頁122-131。
    陳向明(2002)。社會科學質的研究。臺北:五南。
    陳永龍(2010)。河岸邦查部落再生成與漂流族群生計重建:阿美族「都市原住民」自立家園的社會安全涵義。臺灣社會研究季刊,第77期,頁135-175。
    許國賢(2001)。少數權利與民主。政治科學論叢,第15期,頁63-82。
    彭渰雯(2007)。婦運與政治。黃淑玲、游美惠編,性別向度與台灣社會。臺北:巨流。
    楊智偉(2004)。「新夥伴關係」下的原住民族考用問題。考銓季刊,第40期,頁74-85。
    廖慧美(2004)。我國基層行政人員行政裁量之研究─以轉換型領導之觀點。國立政治大學公共行政研究所碩士論文。
    銓敘部(2009)。銓敘統計年報。於2011年1月5日瀏覽網頁:http://www.mocs.gov.tw/index.htm
    趙俊祥、李郁強(2008)。都市原住民部落之拆遷與法治問題探析。臺灣原住民族研究季刊,第1卷第3期,頁93-127。
    蔡良文(2004)。考試院研議原住民族文官考銓問題與對策過程之評析。考銓季刊,第40期,頁20-46。
    蘇文賢、江梓吟譯(2010)。M. Lipsky (1980), 基層官僚:公職人員的困境(Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individuals in Public Service )。臺北市:學富文化。
    羅任鎗(2009)。都市原住民:速寫臺北縣三鶯部落。臺北文獻,第169期,頁88-134。
    顧慕晴、盧姵緁(2008)。我國公部門原住民工作權保障之研究。國家菁英,第4卷第1期,頁19-42。
    二、西文部分
    Candler, R. C. & Plano, J. C. (1988). The Public Administration Dictionary, 2nd Ed. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
    Evans, J. W. (1974). “Defining Representative Bureaucracy,” Public Administration Review, Vol. 34, No. 6, pp. 628-631.
    Grissom, J.A.; Jill Nichlson-Crotty & Sean Nichlson-Crotty.(2009). “Race, Region, and Representative Bureaucracy,” Public Administration Review, Vol. 69, No. 5, pp.911-919.
    Lim, H. H. (2006). “Representative Bureaucracy: Rethinking Substantive Effects and Active Representation,” Public Administration Review, Vol. 66, No. 2, pp.193-204
    Meier, K. J. & Nigro, L. G. (1976). “Representative Bureaucracy and Policy Preferences: A Study in the Attitudes of Federal Executives,” Public Administration Review, Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 458-469.
    Meier, K. J. & Stewart, J. (1992). “The Impact of Representative Bureaucracies: Educational Systems and Public Policies,” American Review of Public Administration, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 157-171.
    Nigro, L. G. (1974). “Defining Representative Bureaucracy: A Response from Prof. Nigro, ” Public Administration Review, Vol. 34, No. 6, p. 631.
    Rehfuss, J. A. (1986). “A Representative Bureaucracy? Women and Minority Executives in California Career Service,” Public Administration Review, Vol. 46, No. 5, pp. 454-460.
    Riccucci, N. M. & Saidel, J. R. (1997). “The Representativeness of State-Level Bureaucratic Leaders: A Missing Piece of the Representative Bureaucracy Puzzle,” Public Administration Review, Vol. 57, No. 5 , pp. 423-430.
    Saltzstein, G. H.(1979). “Representative Bureaucracy and Bureaucratic Responsibility: Problems and Prospects,” Administration and Society, Vol. 10, No.4, pp.465-475.
    Sowa, J. E & Selden, S.C.(2003). “Administrative Discretion and Active Representation: An Expansion of the Theory of Representative Bureaucracy,” Public Administration Review , Vol. 63, No. 6 , pp. 700-710.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    公共行政研究所
    96256004
    99
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0096256004
    資料類型: thesis
    顯示於類別:[公共行政學系] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 大小格式瀏覽次數
    600401.pdf1319KbAdobe PDF272檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋