放假或不放假?：氣候變遷衝擊下極端高溫假在熱治理架構下之探討

Abstract

隨著全球暖化、極端氣候事件頻發與都市熱島效應交織加劇，極端高溫事件已由單純之氣象現象轉化為涉及勞動安全、公共健康、基礎設施及社會運作之複合型治理風險。本研究探討將極端高溫納入我國災害治理框架之必要性，並以「極端高溫假」之政策可行性作為切入點，深入剖析我國現行防救災體系之結構性缺口。本研究整合氣候變遷調適、災害治理、熱治理與職場友善治理等多維理論模型，藉由跨領域專家實務見解、現行法規條文與美、法、西、澳、日等多國制度經驗進行多維三角互證，提出兼具科學基礎與行政可行性之本土化熱治理體系藍圖。 本研究之核心研究發現主要開展為以下四個維度：第一，實證極端高溫對勞動現場、救災一線與校園教職員生之生理機能與職場安全構成立即且持續擴大之「慢發性災害」威脅；引進組織行為學之「工作要求—資源模型（JD-R）」，論證高溫調適措施並非企業福利，而是國家與雇主依法必須建構之法定安全工作資源。第二，揭示我國災害防救法制在「有寒害、無高溫」下存在顯著之「制度不對稱性」；剖析《天然災害停止上班及上課作業辦法》因缺乏法定高溫災害定義，導致基層行政首長面臨「無實體物理通勤阻礙」下之行政法源不足、科學判準困難與執行權責分散之決策困境。第三，指出全面一刀切之強制性高溫假在私部門面臨「交期與工期罰限」及「巨額社會經濟機會成本」之零和衝突阻力；透過跨國工時與職場防護制度比較，實證國際實務多偏向「以 WBGT（綜合溫度熱指數）為核心之風險分級調適」而非單一氣溫門檻。第四，證實 COVID-19 期間所累積之遠距辦公（WFH）經驗具備高度之「政策移轉與轉譯」可行性，引導可遠距辦公之行政與白領產業於極端高溫警戒時遠距出勤，能實質降低受僱者於正午高熱時段之通勤與曝曬風險，同時維持經濟產能，化解安全與經濟效率之對立。 基於上述發現，本研究之學術與政策實踐貢獻如下：在理論貢獻上，本研究將「極端高溫假」重新定位為熱治理體系中的「最後手段（last resort）」，與常態性之帶薪工作—休息循環、彈性工時排班及遠距辦公形成動態互補，化解高溫放假可行性不足之理論僵局，為臺灣氣候調適治理提供新型態的政策工具組合。在政策貢獻上，本研究具體提出本土熱治理體系（Heat Governance System）之四大制度創新：（1）推動科學標準化，建立以 WBGT 為核心之多指標熱風險分級預警制度；（2）成立行政院層級之跨部會（行政院災害防救辦公室和跨部會高溫治理平臺）雙核心協調平臺，整合分散於氣象、勞動、衛生與教育部門之碎片化資源；（3）落實差異化勞動保護與校園彈性作息，將預防資源優先配置於戶外勞工、學童與高齡者等脆弱族群，以實踐氣候正義；（4）增訂《天然災害停止上班及上課作業辦法》之高溫配套，設計「必要工作者例外保障」與法制化之「高溫勞資協商機制」，保障勞工之危險退避權與工資給付原則。本研究之成果可作為臺灣邁向「熱治理韌性社會」之長期法制化基礎。

As global warming, the frequent occurrence of extreme weather events, and the urban heat island effect interweave and intensify, extreme heat events have transitioned from mere meteorological phenomena into complex governance risks affecting occupational safety, public health, infrastructure, and societal operations. This study evaluates the necessity of integrating extreme heat into Taiwan’s disaster prevention framework and, focusing on the feasibility of the "Extreme Heat Leave" policy, dissects the structural gaps in current legislative systems. Integrating multi-dimensional theoretical frameworks of climate change adaptation, disaster governance, heat governance, and workplace friendly governance, this study conducts empirical triangulation utilizing expert perspectives, legal texts, and international comparisons across the USA, France, Spain, Australia, and Japan to formulate a blueprint for a localized heat governance system. The core empirical findings of this research are fourfold: First, it substantiates that extreme heat poses an immediate, substantial, and expanding threat as a "slow-onset disaster" to the physiological well-being and safety of outdoor workers, emergency responders, and school personnel. Utilizing the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model, the study demonstrates that heat protective measures are not discretionary corporate welfare, but rather mandatory safety resources that the state and employers are legally obligated to establish. Second, it exposes a distinct "institutional asymmetry" in Taiwan's disaster management legislation, which includes "cold surges" but excludes "extreme heat". The lack of statutory heat indicators in the Regulations on the Natural Disaster Suspension of Offices and Schools traps grass-roots administrative leaders in a decision-making dilemma characterized by a lack of legal authorization and scattered interagency responsibilities. Third, it demonstrates that a universal, mandatory heat leave policy faces severe opposition in the private sector due to "production and engineering deadline penalties" and immense socioeconomic opportunity costs. Cross-national comparison reveals that international practices favor "graded risk-based adaptation" centered on the Wet Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT) index rather than single temperature thresholds. Fourth, it verifies that the remote work (WFH) models established during the COVID-19 pandemic possess high feasibility for "policy transfer and translation". Guiding telework-compatible sectors to work remotely during extreme heat warnings effectively eliminates commuting and peak-hour heat exposure risks while maintaining economic productivity, thereby resolving the zero-sum conflict between safety and efficiency. Ultimately, the academic and practical contributions of this study are presented: Theoretically, this study successfully re-conceptualizes "Extreme Heat Leave" as a "last resort" within the broader heat governance framework. It operates in dynamic complementarity with daily work-rest cycles, flexible shifts, and remote work, breaking the theoretical impasse regarding the feasibility of heat leave. Practically, this study proposes four institutional innovations for Taiwan's localized Heat Governance System: (1) establishing a scientifically standardized, multi-indicator heat risk grading warning system based on the WBGT index; (2) establishing a cabinet-level, dual-core (Disaster Prevention Office & Ministry of Environment) coordination platform to integrate fragmented departmental resources; (3) implementing differentiated protection measures for outdoor workers, students, and the elderly to ensure climate justice; and (4) amending current suspension regulations to mandate heat-related labor-management negotiation mechanisms and exception clauses for essential workers, thereby legally safeguarding workers' wage protection and the right to refuse hazardous work under extreme temperatures.