:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:臺北縣推動「準用直轄市」策略之理性決策分析
書刊名:中華行政學報
作者:詹立煒 引用關係
作者(外文):Chan, Li-wei
出版日期:2014
卷期:15
頁次:頁27-49
主題關鍵詞:理性行動者模式決策樹分析敘事個案研究因果程序追蹤Rational actor modelDecision treeAnalytic narrativesCase studyCausal process-tracing
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(1) 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:572
  • 點閱點閱:226
本文從Graham Allison和Philip Zelikow(1999)所提出的「理性行動者」(RAM)決策分析模式為主,採用分析敘事的方法,以解釋性個案研究,透過決策樹為分析工具,探討蘇貞昌與周錫瑋兩位前後任的決策者,在面對臺北縣的治理困境其決策系絡之異同。從研究結果發現,第一,雖然蘇、周兩位縣長從政背景與經歷有所不同,但是處理上述問題時,確實以有限理性的滿意決策為判準,抉擇成本較低、效益較高的準用選項,而非執意採取直接改制的方式以解決治理問題。因此個案之中的決策者行為與RAM的命題相符,並能夠複現RAM的意涵。第二,準用策略提出的時間點,與當時總統大選等重要時序性政治事件有所關聯,希冀利用議題設定的方式引起相關行動者的重視。第三,綜合政策理念與政治現實、現實成本與實際利益的考量,「準用」是在各項情境與選項中能夠得到決策滿意之可行策略。從後續客觀數據的變化顯示,「準用直轄市」規定對於解決臺北縣的問題產生一定程度的正面效果。第四,既有制度讓兩位決策者必須面對由中央主導改制議題的局面,並且侷限其策略範圍。但是同樣也提供機會,使其能夠與選區立委建立委託-代理關係得以進入立法院集體決策的場域,進而改變原本不利的情況。
This article used the "Rational Actor Model (RAM)" of the Graham Allison and Philip Zelikow (1999) and employed the case study method of "analytic narratives" to analysis Taipei County's strategy of choosing "mutatis mutandis" status between 1999 and 2007. The purpose of this research is to test the hypothesis of RAM and to answer four questions: First, why do the former Magistrates of Su Tseng-chang and Chou Hsi-wei make the same decision to resolve the personnel and financial difficulties in Taipei County? Second, are their decisions influenced by the political events in time chart? Third, do the two Magistrates' decisions fit the theoretical hypothesis? Fourth, how does the institutional context affect the decision makers? The results of the research verified the theoretical hypothesis and: 1) The behavior of Su and Chou conformed with the RAM in this case. 2) The presidential election in 2000 and other political events in the time chart influenced the Magistrates' decision. 3) The option of "mutatis mutandis" is a "satisficing option" for the decision makers in this case. 4) The existing institution provided opportunities for the Magistrates to build principle-agent relations with Legislatures and also gave the limitation to who select the strategies.
期刊論文
1.魯炳炎(20091200)。從多元流程觀點談蘇花高興建決策之議程設定與政策選擇。東吳政治學報,27(4),171-240。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.張其祿(20000300)。Decision Making in Public Organizations: An Integrated Framework。中國行政評論,9(2),73-90。new window  new window
3.Liu, Xinsheng、Lindquist, Eric、Vedlitz, Arnold、Vincent, Kenneth(2010)。Understanding Local Policymaking: Policy Elites’ Perceptions of Local Agenda Setting and Alternative Policy Selection。Policy Studies Journal,38(1),69-91。  new window
4.呂育誠(2010)。建構與營造新北市的組織治理體制。中國地方自治,728,20-35。  延伸查詢new window
5.林水波、莊順博(20080500)。制度移植VS.制度吸毒--以臺北縣改制準直轄市對財政資源配置的影響為例。國會月刊,36(5)=421,29-53。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.徐吉志(2008)。由都市治理析論新生直轄市之組織模式設計。中國地方自治,704,11-39。  延伸查詢new window
7.紀俊臣(2007)。準直轄市的組織規模與財源分配。中國地方自治,697,25-45。  延伸查詢new window
8.紀俊臣(2008)。準直轄市與地方自治--以臺北縣為例。中國地方自治,709,3-24。  延伸查詢new window
9.紀俊臣(2010)。五都對中央與地方關係之衝擊與因應。中國地方自治,733,3-17。  延伸查詢new window
10.陳志瑋(20100700)。從策略觀點論臺北縣地方治理的契機與挑戰。政策研究學報,10,39-59。new window  延伸查詢new window
11.趙永茂、王皓平(20111200)。提升我國直轄市治理能力之策略:以當前六都治理困局因應為例。研考雙月刊,35(6)=286,9-18。  延伸查詢new window
12.黃正雄(2009)。地方制度法之制定施行與展望。中國地方自治,713,37-62。  延伸查詢new window
13.Bendor, Jonathan、Hammond, Thomas H.(1992)。Rethinking Allison's Models。American Political Science Review,86(2),301-322。  new window
14.Forester, John(1984)。Bounded Rationality and the Politics of Muddling Through。Public Administration Review,44(1),23-31。  new window
15.Eissler, Rebecca、Russell, Annelise、Jones, Bryan D.(2014)。New Avenues for the Study of Agenda Setting。The Policy Studies Journal,42(1),71-86。  new window
16.Gallagher, Maryann、Allen, Susan H.(2014)。Presidential Personality: Not Just a Nuisance。Foreign Policy Analysis,10(1),1-21。  new window
17.Gerber, Elisabeth R.、Hopkins, Daniel J.(2011)。When Mayors Matter: Estimating the Impact of Mayoral Partisanship on City Policy。American Journal of Political Science,55(2),326-339。  new window
18.Rutledge, Paul E.、Price, Heather A. Larsen(2014)。The President as Agenda Setter-in-Chief: The Dynamics of Congressional and Presidential Agenda Setting。The Policy Studies Journal,42(3),443-464。  new window
19.羅清俊、廖健良(20090600)。選制改變前選區規模對立委分配政策提案行為的影響。臺灣政治學刊,13(1),3-53。new window  延伸查詢new window
20.Diermeier, Daniel、Krehbiel, Keith(2003)。Institutionalism as a Methodology。Journal of Theoretical Politics,15(2),123-144。  new window
21.Maltzman, Forrest、Smith, Steven S.(1994)。Principles, Goals, Dimensionality, and Congressional Committees。Legislative Studies Quarterly,19(4),457-476。  new window
22.盛治仁(20080500)。縣市長連任關鍵何在?--影響縣市長選舉因素探討。選舉研究,15(1),1-18。new window  延伸查詢new window
23.林繼文(20011200)。創設、選擇與演化--制度形成的三個理論模式。政治學報,32,61-94。new window  延伸查詢new window
24.江大樹、張力亞(20090600)。縣市長的領導力與地方治理--一個標竿學習的實證研究。臺灣民主,6(2),61-125。new window  延伸查詢new window
25.陳一新(20000100)。台海飛彈危機柯林頓政府決策分析。遠景季刊,1(1),87-138。new window  延伸查詢new window
26.Lijphart, Arend(1971)。Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method。American Political Science Review,65(3),682-693。  new window
研究報告
1.陳陽德(2000)。臺北縣、桃園縣及臺中縣市升格直轄市相關問題之探討。臺北:行政院研考核會。  延伸查詢new window
2.周育仁、陳志華、張四明、吳秀光、呂育誠、張育哲、陳耀祥(2009)。臺北縣政府組織職掌與效能提升之研究。板橋:臺北縣政府。  延伸查詢new window
3.席代麟(2009)。我國行政區劃之研究。臺北:行政院研究發展考核委員會。  延伸查詢new window
4.蕭全政、江大樹、孫同文、劉淑惠(2003)。健全地方自治圖貌。臺北:行政院內政部。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.黃瑋菱(2009)。台北縣升格準直轄市之過程與影響評估:議程設定的研究途徑(碩士論文)。國立暨南國際大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Yin, Robert K.、尚榮安(1994)。個案研究。臺北:弘智。  延伸查詢new window
2.史全生、高維良、朱劍(1992)。南京政府的建立。臺北:巴比倫出版社。  延伸查詢new window
3.Peterson, Paul E.(1981)。City Limits。Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press。  new window
4.郭昱瑩(2002)。公共政策:決策輔助模型個案分析。臺北:智勝文化。  延伸查詢new window
5.丘昌泰(2001)。公共政策基礎篇。臺北:巨流。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.張清溪、許嘉棟、劉鶯釧、吳聰敏(2010)。經濟學:理論與實務。臺北:翰蘆。  延伸查詢new window
7.黃建銘(2008)。地方制度與行政區劃。臺北:時英。  延伸查詢new window
8.臺北縣政府(2010)。臺北縣改制實錄。臺北:臺北縣政府。  延伸查詢new window
9.Bates, Robert H.(1998)。Analytical Narratives。Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton University Press。  new window
10.Beach, Derek、Pedersen, Rasmus Brun(2013)。Process-Tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines。Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press。  new window
11.Ordeshook, Peter(1995)。Game Theory and Political Theory: An Introduction。New York:Cambridge University Press。  new window
12.Mintzberg, Henry、Ahlstrand, Bruce、Lampel, Joseph(2005)。Strategy Safari: A Tour Through the Wilds of Strategic Management。New York:Free Press。  new window
13.Rivett, Patrick(1980)。Model Building for Decision Analysis。Chichester:John Wiley & Sons。  new window
14.Smith, Hedrick(1988)。The Power Game: How Washington Works。New York:Ballantine。  new window
15.林錫俊(2000)。地方財政管理:理論與實務。高雄:復文圖書出版社。  延伸查詢new window
16.Carroll, J. S.、Johnson, E. J.(1990)。Decision research: a field guide。Newbury Park, California:Sage Publications。  new window
17.Hill, Michael、Hupe, Peter(2002)。Implementing Public Policy: Governance in Theory and in Practice。London:Sage。  new window
18.Tsebelis, George(2002)。Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work。New York:Russell Sage Foundation Press。  new window
19.Frederickson, H. George、Smith, Kevin B.(2003)。The Public Administration Theory Primer。Westview Press。  new window
20.Scharpf, Fritz W.(1997)。Games Real Actors Play: Actor-centered Institutionalism in Policy Research。Westview Press。  new window
21.Simon, Herbert A.(1997)。Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations。New York:Free Press。  new window
22.Pierson, Paul(2004)。Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis。Princeton University Press。  new window
23.林鍾沂(2001)。行政學。臺北:三民書局。  延伸查詢new window
24.Howlett, Michael、Ramesh, M.(1995)。Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems。New York:Oxford:Toronto:Oxford University Press。  new window
25.Peters, B. Guy(2005)。Institutional Theory in Political Science: The New Institutionalism。Continuum International Publishing。  new window
26.蔡茂寅(20060000)。地方自治之理論與地方制度法。臺北:新學林。new window  延伸查詢new window
27.Rhodes, Robert A. W.(1997)。Understanding Governance: Policy Networks, Governance, Reflexivity and Accountability。Open University Press。  new window
28.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
29.Riker, William H.(1986)。The art of political manipulation。Yale University Press。  new window
30.Stone, Deborah A.(1997)。Policy paradox: The art of political decision making。New York:W. W. Norton & Company。  new window
31.Allison, Graham T.、Zelikow, Philip(1999)。Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis。Addison-Wesley Longman。  new window
32.Schelling, Thomas C.(1980)。The Strategy of conflict。Harvard University Press。  new window
33.Gerring, John(2007)。Case Study Research: Principles and Practices。Cambridge University Press。  new window
34.George, Alexander L.、Bennett, Andrew(2005)。Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences。MIT Press。  new window
圖書論文
1.Fiorina, Morris P.、Shepsle, Kenneth A.(1989)。Formal Theories of Leadership: Agents, Agenda Setters, and Entrepreneurs。Leadership And Politics: New Perspectives in Political Science。Kansas:University Press of Kansas。  new window
2.Peters, B. Guy(2008)。Institutional theory: problems and prospects。Debating Institutionalism。Manchester:Manchester University 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