:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:審議的不平等:臺灣公民會議的言說互動
書刊名:臺灣社會學
作者:林國明 引用關係
作者(外文):Lin, Kuo-ming
出版日期:2014
卷期:27
頁次:頁1-50
主題關鍵詞:審議民主公民會議公共領域參與式民主內容分析法Deliberative democracyPublicdeliberationPublicsphereCitizenparticipationContent analysis
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(11) 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:10
  • 共同引用共同引用:168
  • 點閱點閱:150
很多批評者認為,審議民主崇尚理性的言說模式,使得不擅說理 社會弱勢群體無法平等、有效地參與審議的過程。批評者所指出的審議不平等是否真的存在?本文以台灣舉辦過的六場公民會議為案例,進行量化與質化分析,來檢證審議不平等的論題。本文根據審議民主理論,使用「發言時間」、「發言頻率」、「開啟議題」 、「對話能力」、「說理」和「成為結論」六大面向來測量審議的不平等,並認為,由於程序主義的作用,不同背景的公民,進入公民會議這種程序引導的審議情境,大抵都能說理和影響結論。也就是說,審議不平等只存在於「發言時間」、「發言頻率」、「開啟議題」、「對話能力」四個面向。我進一步指出,這四個面向的不平等程度,是視議題性質而定的。本文認為,審議能力受到「情境知識」所影響;行動者的社會位置,塑造他們的生活經驗,使他們對特定的議題,有不同程度的了解和感受。因此,公民們的情境知識,會因議題性質而不同;他們的審議能力,也就會因為議題性質的不同而有所差異。
Critics have said that the practice of deliberative democracy has not lived up to the norτnative standards of political equality, because members of socially disadvantaged groups often do not have opportunities toeffectively participate in deliberations. The paper uses data from six citizen conferences in Taiwan to empirically examine the thesis of deliberativeinequalities. I use six dimensions in discursiveinteractions to measuredeliberativeinequalities: frequency and time of speech, dialogic capacity, initiating new topics, making rational arguments, and influencingconclusions. 1 argue that hecause of procedural factors instituted to create the ideal situation of speech, deliberative inequalities are not significant in the dimensions of making rational arguments and influencing conclusions. In addition,inequities in four other dimensions of discursive interaction depend on the nature of issues under discussion. For less complex issues that have greater impacts on citizens' daily lives, most citizens have the “ Situated knowledge" needed to participate in discursiveinteractions. Thus, deliberativeinequalities are not significant for these kinds of issues. The analyticresu1ts confirm the arguments.
期刊論文
1.Chambers, Simone(2003)。Deliberative Democratic Theory。Annual Review of Political Science,6(1),307-326。  new window
2.林國明(20090300)。公共領域、公民社會與審議民主。思想,11,181-195。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Karpowit, Christopher F.、Tali Mendelberg、Lee Shaker(2012)。Gender Inequality in Deliberative Participationwenco。Political Science Review,106(3),533-547。  new window
4.Karpowitz, Christopher F(2009)。Deliberative Democracy and Inequality: Two Cheers for Enclave Deliberation among the Disempowered。Politics and Society,37,576-615。  new window
5.Marien, Sofie.、Marc Hooghe.、Ellen Quintelier(2010)。Inequalities in Noninstitutionalised Forms of Political Participation: A Multi-level Analysis of 25 countries。Political Studies,58,187-213。  new window
6.Popp, Danielle、Roxanne A.、Donovan, Mary Crawford.、Kerry L. Marsh、Melanie Peele(2003)。Gender, Race, and Speech Style Stereotypes。Sex Roles,48(7),317-325。  new window
7.Siegler, D. M.、Siegler, R. S.(1976)。Stereotypes of Males' and Females' Speech。Psychological Reports,39(1),167-170。  new window
8.Manin, Bernard、Stein, Elly、Mansbridge, Jane(1987)。On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation。Political Theory,15(3),338-368。  new window
9.Fung, Archon(2003)。Survey Article: Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their Consequences。The Journal of Political Philosophy,11(3),338-367。  new window
10.林國明(20131200)。多元的公民審議如何可能?--程序主義與公民社會觀點。臺灣民主季刊,10(4),137-183。new window  延伸查詢new window
11.林祐聖(20070900)。我們沒有臺上臺下之分--代理孕母公民共識會議中的專家與常民關係。臺灣民主,4(3),1-32。new window  延伸查詢new window
12.范雲(20100300)。說故事與民主討論--一個公民社會內部族群對話論壇的分析。臺灣民主季刊,7(1),65-105。new window  延伸查詢new window
13.林國明、陳東升(20031200)。公民會議與審議民主:全民健保的公民參與經驗。臺灣社會學,6,61-118。new window  延伸查詢new window
14.陳東升(20060300)。審議民主的限制--臺灣公民會議的經驗。臺灣民主季刊,3(1),77-104。new window  延伸查詢new window
15.林祐聖(20100600)。從歧見到共識--公共審議中的網絡平衡。臺灣民主季刊,7(2),177-216。new window  延伸查詢new window
16.林國明(20090600)。國家、公民社會與審議民主:公民會議在臺灣的發展經驗。臺灣社會學,17,161-217。new window  延伸查詢new window
17.黃東益、施佳良、傅凱若(20070900)。地方公共審議說理過程初探:2005年宜蘭社大公民會議個案研究。公共行政學報,24,71-102。new window  延伸查詢new window
18.黃競涓(20080900)。女性主義對審議式民主之支持與批判。臺灣民主季刊,5(3),33-69。new window  延伸查詢new window
19.黃東益、李翰林、施佳良(20070300)。「搏感情」或「講道理」?:公共審議中參與者自我轉化機制之探討。東吳政治學報,25(1),39-71。new window  延伸查詢new window
20.Sanders, Lynn. M.(1997)。Against Deliberation。Political Theory,25(3),347-376。  new window
21.Thompson, Dennis F.(2008)。Deliberative Democratic Theory and Empirical Political Science。Annual Review of Political Science,11(1),497-520。  new window
會議論文
1.Lin, Kuoming.(2005)。Deliberative Inequalities: Experiences from Three Consensus Conferences in Taiwan.。InternationalConference in Deliberative Democracy。  new window
圖書
1.Abers, Rebecca Neaera(2000)。Inventing Local Democracy: Grassroots Politics in Brazil。Boulder, CO:Lynne Reiner Publishers。  new window
2.Baiocchi, Gianpaolo(2005)。Citizens: The Politics of Participatory Democracy in Porto Alegre。Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press。  new window
3.Crawford, M.(1995)。Talking Difference。London:Sage。  new window
4.Crawford, M.(2001)。Gender and Language。New York:Wiley。  new window
5.DeBardeleben, Joan.、Jon H. Pammett(2009)。Activating the Citizen: Dilemmas of Participation in Europe and Canada.。New York:Palgrave Macmillan。  new window
6.Gray, J.(1992)。Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus: The Classic Guide to Understanding the Opposite Sex。New York:Harper Collins。  new window
7.Lakoff, Robin Tolmach(1975)。Language and Woman's Place: Text and Commentaries。New York:Harper & Row。  new window
8.Verba, Sidney Brady(2004)。Political Equality: What Do We Know about It.。New York:Russell Sage。  new window
9.Young, Iris Marion(2002)。Inclusion and Democracy。Oxford University Press。  new window
10.Bohman, James、Rehg, William(1997)。Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics。Cambridge, Massachusetts:The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press。  new window
11.Bohman, James(1996)。Public Deliberation: Pluralism, Complexity, and Democracy。MIT Press。  new window
12.Gutmann, Amy、Thompson, Danis(1996)。Democracy and Disagreement。Belknap Press of Harvard University Press。  new window
13.Habermas, Jürgen、McCarthy, Thomas(1984)。The Theory of Communicative Action。Boston:Beacon Press。  new window
14.Elster, Jon(1998)。Deliberative Democracy。Cambridge University Press。  new window
15.Gutmann, Amy、Thompson, Dennis F.(2004)。Why Deliberative Democracy?。Princeton University Press。  new window
16.Parkinson, John(2006)。Deliberating in the Real World: Problems of Legitimacy in Deliberative Democracy。Oxford University Press。  new window
17.Dryzek, John S.(2000)。Deliberative democracy and beyond: liberals, critics, contestations。Oxford University Press。  new window
其他
1.衛生福利部食品薬物管理署(2010)。民衆對生物技術及基因改造食品的認知及態度調査報告,http://consumer.fda.gov.tw/Pages/Detail. aspx? nodeID=84&pid=371 0。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.Cohen, Joshua(2009)。Reflections on Deliberative Democracy。Contemporary Debates in Political Philosophy。Malden, Massachusetts:Wiley-Blackwell。  new window
2.Gutmann, Amy.、Dennis Thompson(1991)。The Structural Transformation of Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society.。Translated by Thomas Burger.。Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.。  new window
3.Young, Iris Marion(1997)。Difference as a Resource for Democratic Communication.。Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics。Cambridge, MA:MIT Press。  new window
4.Young, Iris Marion(2003)。Activist challenges to deliberative democracy。Debating Deliberative Democracy。Blackwell Publishing。  new window
5.Fraser, Nancy(1994)。Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy。Habermas and the Public Sphere。Cambridge, Mass.:MIT 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