本研究以中華民國環境教育學會為例，藉由Habermas溝通行動理論的架構與內涵，檢視其參與並促成環教法立法過程中理性溝通內涵，並探討其學術型環境組織特質構成的溝通行動策略型態，以及對溝通行動策略產生的影響與限制。本研究採質性個案研究法，透過參與觀察、深度訪談及文本分析等方法收集資料，並以Habermas的溝通行動理論作為分析架構進行資料分析。分析後發現，行動者在進入政策倡導的理性溝通行動之前，經歷了從信任行政官僚體系到自我解放與學習及採取行動解決問題的轉化歷程，亦是構成後續理性溝通行動的必要條件。在溝通的有效性要求上，發現組織成員的學者身分，以及身兼行政官、民間環境組織核心幹部的多重身分，是滿足此次溝通行動「可理解性」、「真實性」、「真誠性」與「正確性」四項有效性要求的基礎條件，也是使本次環教法倡導理性溝通行動變成可能的關鍵要素；然而，個案學術型組織的本質亦限制了溝通的界域、論題及其解決程度。

This study was a case study of the Chinese Society for Environmental Education to examine the organization's communications and advocacy concerning the Environmental Education Act. The purpose was to explore the academic environmental organization's communicative action strategies and assess their influences and limitations. Qualitative case study methods (observations, text analysis, and in-depth interviews) were used to collect data. Data analysis was carried out, using Habermas' communicative action theory as an analytical framework. The analysis found that before rational communicative actions were taken for policy advocacy, activists had gone through the processes of trust in administrative bureaucracy, self-liberation and learning, and problem-solving.. In terms of the requirements for communicative validity, it was found that the organization members' multiple professional positions as academics, administrative officials, and civil environmental organization leaders were necessary to satisfy the four basic requirements of communication validity-"comprehensibility," "truth," "rightness." and "truthfulness." These four requirements also were key factors to the success of rational communicative advocacy in behalf of the Environmental Education Act. However, the nature of the academic organization also created boundaries and limited it communicative options.