:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:性別角度之代表性官僚研究:以台北市政府為例
作者:林依依
作者(外文):Lin, YI-YI
校院名稱:世新大學
系所名稱:行政管理學研究所(含博、碩專班)
指導教授:彭渰雯
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2021
主題關鍵詞:代表性官僚描述代表性實質代表性性別主流化性別比例原則Representative BureaucracyDescriptive RepresentationSubstantive RepresentationGender MainstreamingPrinciple of Gender Quotas
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:1
我國從行政院到臺北市政府積極推動性別主流化計畫已超過10年,其中「落實性別比例原則」可說性別主流化的重點政策之一,亦直接影響政府體制運作情況。以代表性官僚的角度分析,目前在臺北市女性文官與主管比例逐漸增加,滿足了描述代表性之餘,是否能夠實質影響到我們政策的產出?本研究目的在於了解目前臺北市政府各機關女性文官的描述代表性與性別落差情況,以及影響描述代表性之因素,更進一步探討女性文官的「量變」能否會產生「質變」的效果。
本研究採次級資料分析途徑,透過2003年至2020年的臺北市政府之人事性別結構統計資料,分析臺北市政府女性文官之代表性指數、性別落差指數與性別比率,並與北市府辦理的「性平工作獎勵計畫」之機關得獎結果,進行描述代表性與實質代表性之分析。從描述代表性之變動趨勢可發現全體女性文官近18年來成長幅度並不大,但在各層級的女性主管皆有逐步成長的趨勢,中階主管的代表性已呈現過高,但高階主管仍呈現代表性不足。至於北市府32個機關女性文官的代表指數,因機關屬性不同,導致偏陰柔型機關女性文官代表性過高,陽剛型機關則偏向代表性不足;進一步交叉分析可發現部分陽剛型機關的女性主管反而呈現代表性過高的情況。再者,「女性首長」的存在對於該機關的女性文官與主管的代表性是具有正向的影響力;而中階與高階女性主管對於機關女性主管的代表性亦具有正向的影響力。
本研究對於描述代表性與實質代表性的關係有不一致的發現。根據研究結果顯示,「機關規模員額人數」與機關的「女性文官」越多,就會提升機關整體女性文官的實質代表性;但「女性主管」的增加並未展現實質代表性。因此,有待後續研究針對實質代表性提出更有效度的指標之後,做進一步檢證。
Our government has actively promoted the “Principle of Gender Quotas” plan for more than 10 years from the Chinese Executive Yuan to the Taipei City Government. The "implementation of the principle of gender ratio" can be seen as one of the initial policy actions designed to implement gender mainstreaming. It can also affect the operation of the government system directly. The ratio of female civil servants to supervisors in Taipei City is gradually increasing when analyzed from the perspective of representative bureaucracy. For this change to have an impact however, it must satisfy more than the descriptive representation of the workforce gender balance. It must also demonstrate real change in workplace policies and programs. The purpose of this research is to understand the current descriptive representation and gender gap of female civil servants in various agencies of the Taipei City government, as well as the factors that affect descriptive representation, and to further explore whether the increase in female civil servants “quantitative change” can produce “qualitative change”.
This research analyzes the representative index, gender gap index, and gender ratio of the Taipei City Government’s female civil servants from 2003 to 2020 on the gender structure of personnel in Taipei City Government. The results of the “Taipei City Committee of Women’s Rights” will be analyzed by descriptive representation and substantive representation. From describing the change trend of descriptive
representation, it can be found that the total number of female civil servants have not grown much in the past 18 years, but there is a gradual growth trend for female managers at all levels. The representativeness of mid-level managers has been too high, but senior managers are still under represented. As for the representation index of female civil servants in 32 agencies of the Taipei City Government; due to different agency attributes, female civil servants in feminine agencies tend to be over-represented, while masculine agencies tend to be under-represented. Further cross-analysis reveals that female leaders in some masculine agencies tend to be under represented. Furthermore, the existence of “female chiefs” has a positive influence on the representativeness of female civil servants and supervisors in the agency, and middle-level and high-level female supervisors also have a positive influence on the representativeness of female officers in the agency.
This study has inconsistent findings between the relationship between descriptive representativeness and substantial representativeness. According to the research results, the greater the number of “agency personnel quotas” and the number of “female civil servants” in the organization, the greater the substantive representation of female civil servants in the organization as a whole. However, the increase in “female executives” did not show substantial representation in line with these findings. Therefore, further verification is needed after subsequent studies put forward more effective indicators for substantive representativeness.
參考文獻
一、中文部分
Eki, N. 譯(2008)。R. M. Kanter原著。公司男女 (Men and Women of the Corporation)。台北:群學。(原書於1993年再版)
Phoebe (2020)。無性別閣員又怎樣?唐鳳:我其實沒有變性,一直都是我自己的樣子啊!性別力,2020年11月15日,取自:https://womany.net/read/article/23481。
Thomas, P.(2014)。 特別報導:2014全球男女平等狀況。BBC NEWS(中文版)。2020年11月1日,取自 https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/world/2014/10/141029_100_women。
孔凡宏 (2015)。西方代表性官僚制的研究理路。陜西行政學院學報,第4卷,頁5-11。
包正豪(2013)。台灣原住民立法委員代表行為之研究:2002-2012之質詢內容分析。選舉研究,第20卷,第2期,頁103-136。
全國婦聯婦女研究所(2007)。韓國的婦女地位和社會性別主流化進展。研究信息簡報,第73卷,頁7-17。
地球圖輯隊、泥仔(2018),年輕人、女性變多 盧安達新內閣新氣象,2020年9月22日,取自:https://dq.yam.com/post.php?id=10236。
行政院性別平等會(2020),重要性別統計資料庫,2020年10月1日,取自: https://www.gender.ey.gov.tw/gecdb/Stat_International.aspx。
行政院性別平等會(2020),重要性別統計資料庫,2020年5月20日,取自: https://www.gender.ey.gov.tw/gecdb/Stat_International.aspx。
考試院(2014),高階文官培訓飛躍方案(修正版),2020年3月10日,取自:http://www.nacs.gov.tw/NcsiWebFileDocuments/top/top-development-training.pdf。
余致力(2000)。論公共行政在民主治理過程中的正當角色--黑堡宣言的內涵、定位與啟示。公共行政學報,第4卷,頁1-29。
余致力(2007)。性別差異對公共管理者任用之影響:代表性文官體系的理論省思與實證探索。國家菁英季刊,第3卷,第4期,頁99-141。
吳嘉麗(2012)。性平政策更上層樓-民間參與政府性平諮詢機制的功能。婦研縱橫,第97卷,頁92-106。
吳嘉麗與彭渰雯(2017)。公務人員選用的性別主流化:以警察招考之核心職能為例。黃淑玲主編,性別主流化:台灣經驗與國際比較,頁193-214。台北:五南。
李俊達(2013)。性別多元化與組織績效之研究:女警比例會影響犯罪發生率嗎? 行政暨政策學報,第56期,頁85-116。
李琴(2013)。社會性別與政治代表意願:女性代表能代表女性嗎?婦女研究論叢,2月,頁5-11。
尚榮安 譯(2001)。K.Yin原著。個案研究法(Case Study Research: Design and Methods)。台北:弘智文化。(原書於1994年出版)
林思怡(2017, 12月15日),3個月內80萬人亡盧安達大屠殺最新報告:法國是幫兇,上報,2020年6月22日,取自: https://www.upmedia.mg/news_info.php?SerialNo=31205。
邱子修(2010)。台灣女性主義批評三波論。女學學誌:婦女與性別研究,第27期,頁251-273。
俞彥娟(2004),第二波美國婦女運動之社會主義女性主義初探(II),2020年4月22日,取自:https://reurl.cc/v55ble。
俞彥娟(2004),第二波美國婦女運動之社會主義女性主義初探(II)。2020年3月10日,台北:行政院國家科學委員會,取自:https://reurl.cc/v55ble。
姜貞吟(2011)。男性不在場:台灣女性參政的性別階序格局。台灣社會研究季刊,第83期,頁 179-240。
姜貞吟(2016)。桃竹苗客家地區宗親政治下的女性參政。婦研縱橫,第104期, 頁19-30。
施能傑(2016)。政府部門女性公務人員的代表性分析。台灣政治學刊,第20卷,第1期,頁169-227。
紀俊臣與魏早炳(2010)。地方公務員職等調整之研究(政策建議書RDEC-RES-098-018)。行政院研究發展核委員會,未出版。
范磊嶸(2019)。空中的性別平權:男女空服員的勞動處境與職涯發展比較。國立中山大學碩士論文,未出版,國立中山大學。
孫煒(2010a)。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。
孫煒(2010b)。設置族群型代表性行政機關的理論論證。臺灣政治學刊,第14卷,第1期,頁105-158。
張瓊玲(2014)。文官制度中性別平等之研究-性別主流化觀點。中國行政評論,第20卷,第4期,頁77-103。
莊文忠 譯。Robert L. Miller et al.原著。2011,SPSS在社會科學的應用(二版)(SPSS for Social Scientists)。台北市:五南。(原書於2002年出版)
連翊(2019年4月24日),「國家女性主義:進入政府體制內促成性別平等,有何爭議?」,2020年9月22日,取自:https://www.thenewslens.com/article/117755。
陳文學(2011)。政府機關於原住民族特考提列職缺的探討。台灣原住民族研究季刊,第4卷,第1期,頁117-144。
陳文學(2012)。台灣原住民族代表性官僚:消極代表與積極代表的實證分析。國立臺北大學博士論文,未出版,國立臺北大學。
陳文學(2013)。原住民族公務人員會比較關心原住民嗎?台灣原住民族積極代表性的實證分析。行政暨政策學報,第57期,頁129-171。
陳文學(2015)。文化職能與代表性官僚-原住民族地區鄉公所公務人員的實證分析。台灣原住民族研究學報,第5卷,第1期,頁129-156。
陳正昌、程炳林、陳新豐與劉子鍵(2003)。多變量分析方法-統計軟體應用(三版)。臺北市:五南。
陳雅馨 譯(2017)I. M. Young原著。正義與差異政治 (Justice and the Politics of Difference)。台北:商周。(原書於2011年再版)。
彭渰雯(2008)。當官僚遇上婦運:台灣推動性別主流化的經驗初探。東吳政治學報,第26卷,第4期,頁1-58。
彭渰雯(2008)。當官僚遇上婦運:台灣推動性別主流化的經驗初探。東吳政治學報,第26卷,第4期,頁1-58。
彭渰雯(2012)。婦運與政治。黃淑玲與游美惠主編,性別向度與台灣社會 (第二版),頁209-232。台灣:巨流。
彭渰雯(2018a)。婦運與政治。黃淑玲與游美惠主編,性別向度與台灣社會 (第三版),頁149-169。台灣:巨流。
彭渰雯(2018b)。從「關鍵多數」到「關鍵行動者」:女性參政運動的下一步,2020年10月22日,取自:http://bongchhi.frontier.org.tw/archives/38776。
彭渰雯、林依依與葉靜宜(2009)。女性在陽剛職場內的樣板處境:以海巡與消防單位為例。東吳政治學報,第27卷,第4期,頁115-169。
黃長玲(2001)。從婦女保障名額到性別比例原則-兩性共治的理論與實踐。問題與研究,第40卷,第3期,頁 69-82。
黃長玲(2012)。差異政治的形成:1946年婦女保障名額制訂的歷史過程。政治科學論叢,第52期,頁 89-116。
黃淑玲(2008)。性別主流化-台灣經驗與國際的對話,研考雙月刊,第32卷,第4期,頁3-12。
黃淑玲(2014)。全球典範!?瑞典性別主流化實施模式。公共治理季刊,第2卷,第1期,頁69-82。
黃淑玲與伍維婷(2016)。當婦運衝撞國家:婦權會推動性別主流化的合縱連橫策略。台灣社會學,第32期,頁 1-55。
黃煥榮(2007)。公務人員升遷的衡量模式:兼論性別差異之比較分析。考銓季刊,第50卷,頁216-237。
黃煥榮(2007)。突破玻璃天花板-女性行政菁英事業生涯發展的問題與展望。國家菁英季刊,第3卷,第4期,頁85-108。
黃煥榮、方凱弘與蔡志恒(2011)。公務人力資源管理之性別議題與對策:組織建築模式之分析。文官制度季刊,第3卷,第2期,頁49-80。
黃煥榮與方凱弘(2013)。台灣文官人力資本,生涯選擇及目標與升遷狀況的性別差異: 以 2008 年台灣文官調查為例。台灣政治學刊,第17卷,第2期,頁231-282。
楊婉瑩(2001)。性別差異下的立法院,政治科學論叢,第15期,頁 135-170。
楊婉瑩與藍文君(2008)。關鍵性別比例與權力行使的關係-對立法院委員會召集委員的觀察。,政治學報,第46期,頁 1-43。
董旭英與黃儀娟 譯(2001)。D. W. Stewart & M. A. Kamins原著。
次級資料研究法(Secondary Research)。台北:弘智文化。(原書於1992年再版)
管婺媛(2011),性別平等綱領 馬:打造兩性平等社會,中時電子報,2014年9月17日,取自:https://reurl.cc/2bbA2E。
臺北市政府網站,臺北市統計資料庫查詢系統,2020年5月20日,取自:https://statdb.dbas.gov.taipei/pxweb2007-tp/dialog/statfile9.asp。
銓敘部(2014),全國公務人員按官等分,2020年4月22日,取自:https://reurl.cc/0DDb59。
劉松宏 譯(2019)。A. L. Coleman原著。「多元交織性」正在對美國主流女性主義提出思想挑戰。Time。2020年10月17日,取自: https://www.thenewslens.com/feature/timefortune/117004。
蔡秀涓與林宗憲 (2010)。台灣代表性官僚分析:以「2008台灣文官意見調査」為例。「循證調查與文官制度研究:理論與實務」學術研討會,2010年12月18日,台北:國立政治大學。
鄭麗嬌(2012)。超越形式化性別平等:美國女性政經影響力與女性權益關係之研究。社會政策與社會工作學刊,第16卷,第1期,頁 59-86。
鮑彤、莊文忠與林瓊珠(2014)。從四分之一到三分之一?婦女保障席次的選舉效應評估。東吳政治學報,第32卷,第1期,頁99-141。
聯合國新聞(2019/03/12)。2019婦女參政地圖:全球每五名政府部长中就有一名是女性,2020年10月1日,取自:https://news.un.org/zh/story/2019/03/1030121。
謝佩玲(2019年8月7日)。環評委員性別嚴重失衡!環保署性平委員集體請辭抗議。新頭殼newtalk,,2020年10月1日,取自:https://newtalk.tw/news/view/2019-08-07/282904。
顏詩怡 譯(2010)。 聯合國女人: 性別平等與女性賦權的聯合國單位。 國際性別通訊, 第4卷,頁4。
顏詩怡 譯(2010)。聯合國女人:性別平等與女性賦權的聯合國單位。國際性別通訊,第4期,頁4。

二、英文部分
Andrews, R. & K. J. Miller (2013). Representative Bureaucracy, Gender, and Policing: The Case of Domestic Violence Arrests in England. Public Administration, 91: 998-1014.
Bradbury, M. & J. E. Kellough (2007). Representative Bureaucracy: Exploring the Potential for Active Representation in Local Government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18, 697-714.
Bradbury, M. & J. E. Kellough. (2011). Representative Bureaucracy: Assessing the Evidence on Active Representation. American Review of Public Administration, 41, 157-167.
Braithwaite, M. (2006). Gender sensitive and women friendly public policies: A comparative analysis of their progress and impact, Equapol. A 5th Framework Programme Research Project, European Commission, Luxembourg.
Brown, Wendy (1995). States of Injury: Power and Freedom in Late Modernity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Brudney, J., T. Hebert & D. S. Wright (2000). From Organizational Values to Organizational Roles: Examining Representative Bureaucracy in State Administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10: 491-512.
Bunderson, J. S. & K. M. Sutcliffe. (2002). Comparing Alternative Conceptualizations of Functional Diversity in Management Teams: Process and Performance Effects. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5): 875-893.
Campbell, R., C. Sarah & J. Lovenduski (2009). Do Women Need Women Representatives? British Journal of Political Science, 40(1), 171-194.
Celis, K., S. Childs, J. Kantola & M. L. Krook (2008). Rethinking Women's Substantive Representation. Representation, 44(2): 99-110.
Choi, S. & H. G. Rainey (2010). Managing Diversity in U.S. Federal Agencies: Effects of Diversity and Diversity Management on Employee Perceptions of Organizational Performance. Public Administration Review, 70(1): 109-121.
Creswell, J. W. & C. N. Poth (2017). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (4th ed.). London: SAGE.
Dahlerup, D. & P. P. S. D. Dahlerup (2006). Women, Quotas and Politics. NY: Routledge.
Dahlerup, D. (1988). From a Small to a Large Minority Women in Scandinavian Politics. Scandinavian Political Studies, 11(4): 275-298.
Dahlerup, D. (1988). From a Small to a Large Minority Women in Scandinavian Politics. Scandinavian Political Studies, 11(4): 275-298.
Dolan, J. & D. H. Rosenbloom (2016). Representative Bureaucracy: Classic Readings and Continuing Controversies: Classic Readings and Continuing Controversies. LONDON & NY: Routledge.
Dolan, J. &, D. H. Rosenbloom (2016). Representative Bureaucracy: Classic Readings and Continuing Controversies. New York: Routledge.
Dolan, J. (2000). The Senior Executive Service - Gender Attitudes and Representative Bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, 10(2): 513-529.
du Gay, P. (2005). The Values of Bureaucracy. New York : Oxford.
Ely, R. J. (2004). A Field Study of Group Diversity, Participation in Diversity Education Programs, and Performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(6): 755-780.
Gatrell, C. & S. Elaine (2008). Gender and Diversity in Management. London: SAGE.
Graves, L. M. & G. N. Powell (2011). Working in Diverse Teams. In G. N. Powell(Ed.), Women And Men in Management (pp. 103-125). California: Sage.
Hellriegel, D. & L. Short (1972). Equal Employment Opportunity in the Federal, Govemnment: A Comparative Analysis. Public Administration Review, 32(6): 851-858.
Herbert, A. W. (1974). Introduction. A Symposium: Minorities in Public Administration. Public Administration Review, 34(5): 519-520.
Hindera, J. J. & C. D. Young. (1998). Representative Bureaucracy: The Theoretical Implications of Statistical Interaction. Political Science Quarterly, 51 (3): 655-671.
Hindera, J. J. (1993). Representative Bureaucracy: Imprimis Evidence of Active Representation in the EEOC District Offices. Social Science Quarterly, 74 (1): 95- 108.
Huang, C. L. (2013). Strange Bedfellows: State Feminism and the Conservative Governments in South Korea and Taiwan. Conference on Global Gender Equality since the 1960s, Stockholm University, Stockholm, September 10-11.
Johnston, J. M. & S. B. Holt (2019). Examining the Influence of Representative Bureaucracy in Public and Private Prisons. Policy Studies Journal, (October), 1-46.
Johnston, K. & J. Houston (2018). Representative Bureaucracy: Does Female Police Leadership Affect Gender-Based Violence Arrests? International Review of Administrative Sciences, 84(1): 3-20.
Karsten, M. F. (1994). Management and Gender: Issues and Attitudes. Westport: An imprint of Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.
Keiser, L., V. M. Wilkins, K. J. Meier & C. Holland (2002). Lipstick and Logarithms: Gender, Identity, and Representative Bureaucracy. American Political Science Review, 96: 553-565.
Kim, P. S. (1994). A Theoretical Overview of Representative Bureaucracy: Synthesis. International Journal of Administrative Sciences, 60 (3): 385-397.
King, E. B., J. f. Dawson, M. A. West, V. L. Gilrane, C. I. Peddie, & L. Bastin (2011). Why Organizational and Community Diversity Matter: Representativeness and the Emergence of Incivility and Organizational Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 54(6): 1103-1118.
Kingsley, J. D. (1944). Representative Bureaucracy. Yellow Springs, OH: Antioch Press.
Kranz, H. (1974). Are Merit and Equity Compatible? Public Administration Review, 34(5): 434-440.
Kranz, H. (1976). The Participatory Bureaucracy. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Krislov, S. (1974). Representative Bureaucracy. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Lim, H. H. (2006). Representative Bureaucracy: Rethinking Substantive Effects and Active Representation. Public Administration Review, 66 (2): 193-205.
Meier, K. J . & J. Nicholson- Crotty (2002). Gender, Representative Bureaucracy, and Law Enforcement: The Case of Sexual Assault. The 2002 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 29-September 1 , Boston, MA.
Meier, K. J. & J. Nicholson- Crotty (2006). Gender, Representative Bureaucracy, and Law Enforcement: The Case of Sexual Assault. Public Administration Review, 66(6): 850-860.
Meier, K. J. & J. Stewart (1992). The Impact of Representative Bureaucracies: Educational Systems and Public Policies. The American Review of Public Administration, 22 (3): 157-171.
Meier, K. J. (1993). Representative Bureaucracy: A Theoretical and Empirical Exposition. Research in Public Administration, 2: 1-35.
Meier, K. J., M. S. Pennungton & W. S. Eller (2005).Race, Sex, and Clarence Thomas: Representation Change in the EEOC. Public Administration Review, 65 (2): 171-179.
Mosher, F. C. (1968). Democracy and the Public Service. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nachmias, D. & D. H. Rosenbloom (1973). Measuring Bureaucracy Representation and Integration. Public Administration Review, 33(6): 590-597.
Ocon, R. (2006). Issues on Gender and Diversity in Management. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America.
OECD. (2019). SIGI 2019 Global Report. OECD iLibrary. Retrieved from https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/bc56d212-en/index.html?itemId=/content/publication/bc56d212-en.
OECD. (2019). SIGI 2019 Global Report. OECD iLibrary. Retrieved from https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/bc56d212-en/index.html?itemId=/content/publication/bc56d212-en.
Park, S. (2012). Does Gender Matter? The Effect of Gender Representation of Public Bureaucracy on Government Performance. American Review of Public Administration, 43: 221-242.
Phillips, A. (2019). Descriptive Representation revisited. In R. a. T. Rohrschneider, Jacques (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Representation in Liberal Democracies. UK.: Oxford University Press.
Pitts, D. W. (2007). Representative Bureaucracy, Ethnicity, and Public Schools: Examining the Link Between Representation and Performance. Administration & Society, 39(4): 497-526.
Pitts, D. & E. Jarry (2007). Ethnic Diversity and Organizational Performance: Assessing Diversity Effects at the Managerial and Street Levels. International Public Management Journal, 10: 233-254.
Prügl, E. (2010). Feminism and the Postmodern State: Gender Mainstreaming in European Rural Development. Signs, 35(2): 447-475.
Richard, O. (2000). Racial Diversity, Business Strategy and Firm Performance: A Resource-Based View. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2): 164-27.
Rosener, J. B. (1990). Ways women lead. Harvard Business Review, 68(6), 119-125.
Saidel, J. R. & K. Loscocco (2005). Agency Leaders, Gendered Institutions and Representative Bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 65: 158-170.
Saltzstein, G. H. (1979). Representative Bureaucracy and Bureaucratic Responsibility: Problems and Prospects. Administration & Society, 10 (4), 465-475.
Sarah, C. & L. K. Mona (2008). Critical Mass Theory and Women's Political Representation. Political Studies, 56(3): 725-736.
Selden, S. C. (1997). The Promise of Representative Bureaucracy: Diversity and Responsiveness in a Government Agency. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.
Selden, S. C., J. L. Brudney & J. E. Kellough (1998). Bureaucracy as a Representative Institution: Toward a Reconciliation of Bureaucratic Government and Democratic Theory. American Journal of Political Science, 42: 717-744.
Sowa, J. E. & S. C. Selden (2003). Administrative Discretion and Active Representation: An Expansion of the Theory of Representative Bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 63(6): 700-710.
Thielemann, G. S. & S. Joseph, Jr. (1996). A Demand-Side Perspective on the Importance of Representative Bureaucracy: AIDS, Ethnicity, Gender, and Sexual Orientatio. Public Administration Review, 56 (2): 168-173.
Thomas, D. A. & R. J. Ely. (1996). Making Differences Matter: A New Paradigm for Managing Diversity. Harvard Business Review, Sep/Oct: 79-90.
Thompson, F. J. (1976). Minority Groups in Public Bureaucracies: Are Active and Passive Representation Linked? Administration & Society, 8 (2): 201-126.
Tummala, K. K. (2015). Politics of Preference: India, United States, and South Africa. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Wängnerud, L. (2009). Women in Parliaments: Descriptive and Substantive Representation. Annual Review of Political Science, 12: 51-69.
WEF. (2011). Global Gender Gap Report 2010. World Economic Forum, Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/reports/global-gender-gap-report-2010.
WEF. (2013). The Global Gender Gap Report 2013. World Economic Forum, Retrieved from http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GenderGap_Report_2013.pdf.
Wilkins, V. M. & B. N. Williams. (2008). Black or Blue: Racial Profiling and Representative Bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 68: 654-664.
Wilkins, V. M. & L. R. Keiser (2006). Linking Passive and Active Representation for Gender: The Case of Child Support Agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16: 87-102.
Wilkins, V. M. (2007). Exploring the Causal Story: Gender, Active Representation, and Bureaucratic Priorities. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, 17(1): 77-94.
Williams, A. C., & M. P. Penfield (1985). Development and Validation of an Instrument for Characterizing Food-Related Behavior. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 85: 685-689.
Wise, L. R. (2007). Representative Bureaucracy. In B. G. Peters & J. Pierre (eds.), Handbook of Public Administration: Concise Paperback Edition (pp. 223-233). London: SAGE.
Woodward, A. (2003). European Gender Mainstreaming: Promises and Pitfalls of Transformative Policy. Review of Policy Research, 20(1): 65-88.

 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關期刊論文
 
無相關博士論文
 
無相關書籍
 
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE