臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：政務領導、國會監督與官僚自主：臺灣全民健保政策「否決者」之研究，1986~2004
書刊名：行政暨政策學報
作者：王光旭 引用關係／陳敦源 引用關係
作者(外文)：Wang, Guang-xu／Chen, Don-yun
出版日期：2010
卷期：50
頁次：頁107-157
主題關鍵詞：政務領導；國會監督；官僚自主；否決者；否決點；全民健保；Veto players；Veto points；National health insurance；NHI；Executive leadership；Congressional oversight；Bureaucratic autonomy
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(7) 博士論文(3) 專書(2) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:6
  • 共同引用共同引用:192
  • 點閱點閱:282
【研究目的】 本文藉由整合理性選擇制度論（rational choice institutionalism）中「否決者」(veto players) 與歷史制度論 (historical institutionalism) 中「否決點」(veto points) 的概念，透過對「行動者與決策影響時機」的闡釋與分析，討論「制度否決者」(institutional veto players) 在政策產出過程中的互動，及這種互動與政策產出的影響。為了討論這樣的關聯性，本文選擇臺灣全民健保政策的三個經驗案例，作為驗證理論的關鍵個案，並從這個驗證的過程中同時回答前述公共政策研究傳統的核心：「誰掌控政策產出」問題。 【研究方法】 本文以理論發展為始，從否決者與否決點的角度，建構一個觀察經驗世界的理論基礎。從這個基礎上，本文以立意選擇的方式，找出三個全民健保政策的關鍵事件，作深入的分析，分別是「全民健保法規劃及審議」的過程、「軍人納保」事件、以及「健保雙漲」事件等，從其中以大個案當中三個小個案的分析方式，討論前述的理論問題，最後據此作出結論。 【研究結論】 本文的結論有三：一、本文理論上整合否決者與否決點的觀點，希望能提供一個政治可行性的評估架構，然由於制度環境的不同，應用於台灣的經驗研究仍只具有部份的解釋力；二、雖然否決者的觀點在預測決策的產出結果是有力的分析工具，然在經驗上，卻必須面對定位否決者間意識型態相對位置的問題；三、在三個健保個案中，最具否決權的否決者仍是以國會為主，顯見即使在專業性高的政策場域，仍有政治介入的空間，平衡官僚的自主性。
Scholars in public administration often study the policy-making process through three major approaches: formal institutional procedure, interest group politics and rational decision-making model. However, none of these approaches can help us to grasp the constant changes of “power map”. Beginning in the 1990s, a series of comparative studies on “veto players” and “veto points” seem to shed the light to supplement the gap. According to the new approach, the crucial veto players and their ideologies on policy spaces could be identified to depict and classify the power maps under different veto points. This study attempts to follow this idea to study the changing relations of forces between three major veto players: executive leaders (elected and appointed politicians), congress, and bureaucracy in Taiwan’s National Health Insurance policy. Three cases are to be studied to test the political feasibility in the empirical study and three research outcomes will be demonstrated as well. First, in spite of the fact that it can offer a unified approach to predict the policy outcome, it still has the difficulty in identifying the veto players’ idea points and relative locations on the policy space. Second, for those who are searching for “localized power map” to analyze political feasibility in Taiwan, this study is a primary but useful beginning. Lastly, with regard to the most powerful veto player of Taiwan’s National Health Insurance policy from 1986~2004, there is no doubt that the congress shows critical influence in the policy making process.
期刊論文
1.Shepsle, K.、Weingast, B.(1984)。When Do Rules of Procedure Matter?。Journal of Politics，46(2)，206-221。  new window
2.Tullock, G.(1981)。Why So Much Stability?。Public Choice，37(2)，189-202。  new window
3.McKelvey, Richard D.(1976)。Intransitivities in Multidimensional Voting Models and Some implications for Agenda Control。Journal of economic Theory，12(3)，472-482。  new window
4.Weingast, Barry R.、Moran, Mark J.(1983)。Bureaucratic Discretion or Congressional Control? Regulatory Policymaking by the Federal Trade Commission。Journal of Political Economy，91(5)，765-800。  new window
5.Hammond, T. H.(1986)。Agenda Control, Organizational Structure, and Bureaucratic Politics。American Journal of Political Science，30，379-420。  new window
6.Riker, W. H.(1980)。Implications from the Disequilibrium of Majority Rule for the Study of institutions。American Political Science Review，74(2)，432-446。  new window
7.林國明(20010200)。歷史、制度與政策--臺灣醫療保險體系部份負擔與轉診方案的政策轉折。國立臺灣大學社會學刊，29，111-184。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.Moe, Terry M.(1984)。The New Economics of Organization。American Journal of Political Science，28(4)，739-777。  new window
9.Meltsner, Arnold J.(1972)。Political Feasibility and Policy Analysis。Public Administration Review，32(6)，859-867。  new window
10.Hotelling, Harold(1929)。Stability in Competition。The Economic Journal，39(153)，41-57。  new window
11.Wood, B. Dan、Waterman, Richard W.(1991)。The Dynamics of Political Control of the Bureaucracy。The American Political Science Review，85(3)，801-828。  new window
12.Cobb, R. W.、Ross, J. K.、Ross, M. H.(1976)。Agenda Building as a Comparative Political Process。American Political Science Review，70(1)，126-138。  new window
13..李源德(2005)。〈全民健保的明天：一位醫學工作者的憂心〉。《康健雜誌》，76，104-105。  延伸查詢new window
14..高森永、白璐、陳育忠(2000)。〈國軍官兵對於加入全民健保之意願調查〉。《國防醫學》，31（5），415-425。  延伸查詢new window
15..健保局企畫處(2004)。〈健保費率及部分負擔調整過程之回顧與省思〉。《全民健保雙月刊》，50，21-24。  延伸查詢new window
16..黃源協(1998)。〈從制度論觀點論英國對全民健康保險的捨棄（英文）〉。《暨大學報》，2（1），161-187。  延伸查詢new window
17..Bendor, J. and T. M. Moe.(1986)。“Agenda Control, Committee Capture and the Dynamics of Institutional Politics.”。American Political Science Review，80(4)，1187-1207。  new window
18..Eavey, C. L. and G. J. Miller.(1984)。“Bureaucratic Agenda Control: Imposition or Bargaining？”。American Political Science Review，78(3)，719-733。  new window
19..Hammond, T. H. and G. J. Miller.(1987)。“The Core of Constitution.”。American Political Science Review，81，1155-74。  new window
20..Immergut, E. M.(1990)。“Institutions, Veto Points, and Policy Results: A Comparative Analysis of Health Care.”。Journal of Public Policy，10(4)，391-416。  new window
21.Kitschelt, H.(2000)。Citizens, Politicians, and Party Cartellization: Political Representation and State Failure in Post-industrial Democracies。European Journal of Political Research，37，149-179。  new window
22..Levine, M. E. and C. R. Plott.(1977)。“Agenda Influence and Its Implications.”。Virginia Law Review，62(4)，561-604。  new window
23..Rae, D. W.(1971)。“Political Democracy as a Property of Political Institutions.”。American Political Science Review，65(1)，111-119。  new window
24..Romer, T. and H. Rosenthal.(1979)。“Bureaucrats vs. Voters: On the Political Economy of Resource Allocation by Direct Democracy.”。Quarterly Journal of Economics，93，563-587。  new window
25..Shepsle, K A.(1979)。“Institutional Arrangements and Multidimensional Voting Models.”。American Journal of Political Science，23，27-60。  new window
26..Shepsle, K. A. and B. R. Weingast.(1981)。“Structure-induced Equilibrium and Legislative Choice.”。Public Choice，37，503-15。  new window
27..Shepsle, K. A. and B. R. Weingast.(1984)。“Uncovered Sets and Sophisticated Voting Outcomes with Implications for Agenda Institutions。American Journal of Political Science，81，85-104。  new window
28..Shepsle, K. A. and B. R. Weingast.(1987)。“The Institutional Foundation of Committee Power.”。American Political Science Review，81，85-127。  new window
研究報告
1..陳敦源(2006)。《全民健保組織體制未來改革方向之回顧性評估》。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.詹金月(1995)。我國全民健康保險政策合法化過程之研究(碩士論文)。國立陽明大學。  延伸查詢new window
2.劉宜君(2000)。我國全民健康保險政策之執行評估--國家機關、政策網絡與財務管控能力之分析(博士論文)。國立臺北大學。new window  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.陳敦源、余致力、郭昱瑩(2001)。政策分析的政治可行性評估 : 一個從「空間理論」的初探。公共政策分析的理論與實務。臺北：韋伯。  延伸查詢new window
2.Bonoli, Guiliano(2001)。Political Institutions, Veto Points, and the Process of Welfare State Adaptation。The New Politics of the Welfare State。Oxford：Oxford University Press。  new window
3.Dye, Thomas R.(1988)。Understanding Public Policy。Understanding Public Policy。Englewood Cliffs, NJ：Prentice-Hall, Inc.。  new window
4.Brinkerhoff, Derick W.、Crosby, Benjamin L.(2002)。Managing Policy Reform: Concepts and Tools for Decision-Makers in Developing and Transitioning Countries。Bloomfield：Kumarian Press。  new window
5.McLean, I.、Urken, A. B.(1995)。Classics of Social Choice。Ann Arbor, MI：Michigan University Press。  new window
6.Melnick, R. S.(1983)。Regulation and the Courts。Washington, D.C.：Brookings Institution。  new window
7..Weissert, C. S. and W. G. Weissert.(1996)。Governing Health: The Politics of Health Policy。Baltimore, MD：The Johns Hopkins University Press。  new window
8.Rochefort, David A.、Cobb, Roger W.(1994)。The Politics of Problem Definition: Shaping the Policy Agenda。Lawrence, Kansas：University Press of Kansas。  new window
9.Weber, Max(1977)。Economy and Society。Berkeley, CA：University of Canfornia Press。  new window
10.Black, Duncan(1958)。The Theory of Committees and Elections。Cambridge, Massachusetts：Cambridge University Press。  new window
11.Kiewiet, D. Roderick、McCubbins, Mathew D.(1991)。The Logic of Delegation: Congressional Parties and the Appropriations Process。University of Chicago Press。  new window
12.Bryner, G. C.(1987)。Bureaucratic Discretion: Law and Policy in Federal Regulatory Agencies。Pergamon Press。  new window
13.Munger, Michael C.(2000)。Analyzing Policy: Choices, Conflicts, and Practices。New York：W. W. Norton & Company。  new window
14.Niskanen, William A. Jr.(1994)。Bureaucracy and Public Economics。Edward Elgar Publishing Limited。  new window
15.Dahl, Robert A.(1961)。Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City。New Haven, Connecticut。  new window
16.Kingdon, John W.(1995)。Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies。Longman。  new window
17.Lasswell, Harold D.(1958)。Politics: Who gets what, when, how?。New York：Cleveland, OH：The World Publishing Co：Meridian Books。  new window
18.張博雅、羅紀琼、劉素芬、楊漢泉(1997)。專業奇蹟VS.民眾迷思：全民健康保險規劃紀實。臺北：桂冠圖書股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
19.Scott, W. R.、Ruef, M.、Mendel, P. J.、Caronna, C. A.(2000)。Institutional Change and Healthcare Organizations: From Professional Dominance to Managed Care。Chicago：University of Chicago Press。  new window
20.Lindblom, C. E.、Woodhouse, E. J.(1993)。The Policy-Making Process。Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey。  new window
21.Arrow, Kenneth J.(1951)。Social Choice and Individual Values。New Haven, CT：Yale University Press。  new window
22.Hill, Michael(1997)。The Policy Process in the Modern State。Prentice Hall。  new window
23.Cobb, Roger W.、Elder, Charles D.(1983)。Participation in American Politics: The Dynamics of Agenda-Building。Johns Hopkins University Press。  new window
24.Wilson, James Q.(1989)。Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do it?。Basic Books。  new window
25.Downs, Anthony J.(1957)。An Economic Theory of Democracy。New York：Harper and Row。  new window
26.Tsebelis, George(2002)。Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work。Princeton University Press。  new window
27.陳敦源(20020000)。民主與官僚：新制度論的觀點。臺北：韋伯文化。new window  延伸查詢new window
28.Stone, Deborah A.(1997)。Policy paradox: The art of political decision making。New York：W. W. Norton & Company。  new window
29..Bonoli, G.(2000)。The Politics of Pension Reform。Cambridge, MA。  new window
30..Cox, G.. W. and M. D. McCubbins.(2001)。“The Institutional Determinants of Economic Policy Outcomes.”。Presidents, Parliaments, and Policy.。New York。  new window
31..Heller, W., P. Keefer and M. D. McCubbins.(1998)。“Political Structure and Economic Liberalization: Cases from the Developing World.”。The Origins of Liberty: Political and Economic Liberalization in the Modern World。Princeton, N.J.:。  new window
32..Immergut, E. M.(1992)。“The Rule of the Game: The Logic of Health Policy-making in France, Switzerland, and Sweden.”。Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis。New York:。  new window
33..Kitschelt, H.(2001)。“Partisan Competition and Welfare State Retrenchment: When Do Politicians Choose Unpopular Politics?”。The New Politics of the Welfare State。State. Oxford:。  new window
34..Meyer, J. W. and B. Rowan.(1991)。Institutionalized Organizations.。The New Institutionalism In Organizational Analysis。Chicago:。  new window
35..Rourke, F. E.(1976)。Bureaucracy, Politics and Public Policy (2nd ed).。Boston。  new window
圖書論文
1.Easton, D.(1993)。Political Science in the United States: Past and Present。Discipline and History: Political Science in the United States。Ann Arbor：University of Michigan Press。  new window
2.Shepsle, Kenneth A.(1986)。Institutional Equilibrium and Equilibrium Institutions。Political Science: The Science of Politics。New York：Agathon Press。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：827（臺灣：814，外國：13） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1498098 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67291479
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上