自日本福島核能災變以來，我國為了回應公民參與監管核能安全的聲浪，2005年由原能會成立「核四安全監督委員會」，2013年則由新北市成立「核能安全監督委員會」。本文從「資訊公開」、「公眾諮商」、「跨部門合作」與「地方自主治理」等四項公民參與指標分析上述兩項核安機制的成效，研究結果顯示：兩項機制在公民參與的成效都仍有進步空間，在初期也都面臨「議題發散」與「資訊不充足」的問題。值得一提的是，由於中央主辦的「核四安監會」對納入在地風險觀點和開展互動討論較為抗拒，因此其運作雖能滿足「資訊公開」與「公眾諮商」的形式要求，卻難以進行「跨部門合作」與「培養地方治理能力」。反觀「新北市核安會」雖然因為缺乏專業編制與預算而在前兩項指標表現較為遜色，卻能透過創意機制合作協調，提升對話者信心，促進地方在核安風險治理的自主性與獨立性。本文結論認為：而在核安議題中，政府機關應當擺脫以往僅將公民參與視為點綴程序的思維，而地方政府基於地緣利害關係和選舉誘因，加以具有制度彈性與在地脈絡的優勢，似乎有更高的潛力能讓公民參與邁向「合作」與「自主決定」，因此如何給予地方政府更多的制度性支持，似也是未來核安治理能否獲得公眾信任的關鍵。

Owing to Fukushima nuclear accident, in order to respond to the public, Taiwan's Atomic Energy Council (AEC) established ＂ the Fourth Nuclear Plant Safety Monitoring Council ＂ (FNPSMC) in 2005, and the New Taipei City government also formed its Nuclear Safety Monitoring Council (NSMC) in 2013. Both organizations aimed to facilitate collaborative monitoring among civil experts and governmental branches via public participation. This article examines the effectiveness of public participation in these two mechanisms by adopting the parameters of ＂information openness＂, ＂public consultation＂, ＂trans-sectoral collaboration＂, and ＂local self-governance＂. The research findings suggest: Both mechanisms share common problems of overly dispersed issues and a lack of information transparency at early stages. Having said that, while the FNPSMC could general ly meet the requirements of ＂information openness＂ and ＂public consultation＂, the AEC's aversive attitude in incorporating local perspectives and launching interactive dialogues could hardly have achieved ＂trans-sectoral collaboration＂ and ＂local self-governance.＂ In contrast, the more inclusive NSMC, formed by local government, might not have performed well on above two parameters for it institutional shortage on budgets and staffs, but the problem-solving orientation rendered itself a more active body facilitating coordination among sectors and sustaining local autonomy. This article thus concludes that the government, instead of treating citizens' participation as administrative red tape, should sincerely consider it a window of diverse opinions. Owing to both local offcials' higher incentives in dealing with local political stakes and their advantage exercising institutional flexibility through local connections, local governments seem to have higher potential to boost citizens' participation to the level of ＂cooperation＂ and ＂autonomy＂. Therefore, how to strengthen institutional supports of local governments may be the key for future nuclear governance in terms of earning public trust.