低碳城市治理之實踐：新北市坪林低碳旅遊政策執行之研究

Abstract

自1987年聯合國布朗特蘭報告揭示經濟發展與地球環境承載力應取得協調後，隨之出現地球高峰會、京都議定書等對氣候變遷影響、環境永續做出規範的國際組織或條約。隨著全球化程度升高，公共事務、網絡的日益複雜卻也使國家權力縮減。相較之下，站在第一線面對民眾、回應環境衝擊地方政府或城市政府不但應變能力高、影響力強，逐漸在環境治理領域上扮演重要角色。於1990年成立的城市減碳國際組織ICLEI（地方環境行動國際委員會）至今也已有超過1200個國際城市加入會員，響應相關行動。 台灣在2008年開始有對於氣候、環境、低碳相關政策有較明顯的行動，包括通過永續能源政策綱領、設立行政院節能減碳推動會等等。雖然再生能源發展條例、溫室氣體減量法等具有強制力的中央法規尚未完備，但環保署也已著手進行「低碳城市」方案之推動，顯示中央政府對城市在相關領域上的治理有所肯定與期待。實際上，新北市政府先於中央政府，早在2007年就對環境議題有所關注，當時台北縣成立全台灣第一個減碳專責單位─「低碳社區發展中心」整合處理全府低碳事務，同時推動四大旗艦計畫期望透過觀光與環境永續的結合達到「低碳城市」的目標。種種的行動當中又以「坪林低碳旅遊」政策特別受到矚目，一推出即受各界關注，並成為其他縣市推動低碳旅遊的標竿。本文期望透過對坪林低碳旅遊政策內容、執行方式之了解，進而探索低碳城市治理的運作情形。 本文使用「文獻分析」與「深度訪談」作為主要研究方法了解政策背景脈絡與相關行為者，以「政治支持」、「政策工具」、「權責關係」、「溝通協調」、「資源動員」和「在地結合」作為觀察案例執行之動態變化與治理情形的六個分析面向，分析坪林低碳旅遊政策目前面臨的挑戰，提出政策建議；並更試圖歸納出當前低碳城市治理所面臨的困境。 本研究發現，城市內部低碳相關政策能否推動，「政治支持」為最關鍵的影響因素。政治支持包括高層地方政治首長，與基層政策標的團體的支持。而低碳、環境相關政策具有公共性、外部性、利弊平衡、管轄空白及專業性等特徵，一般民眾或私人企業較缺乏誘因與資金主動從事，因此大多由政府作為領航者，由上而下推動、執行政策。坪林的情況為，升格前地方自有財源就少，升格之後自有財源取消，必須完全依靠新北市政府的經費行事；由於以傳統農業為主要產業型態，坪林年輕人口大量外移，當地人口老齡化嚴重，因此思維較趨保守、傳統，難有自發性的產業轉型；另一方面，坪林區地域廣大行政上就區分為七個里，除此，又存在許多不同派與小團體，不存在具有擴及全區影響力且強力的地方性組織匯集、整合或帶領地方發展，因此目前無論在資源上或心理上都相當依賴新北市政府的資助與規畫。缺乏由下而上民間自發性的政策執行，地方高層政治首長就成為政策資源配置、政策持續與否的決定性角色。也因為目前為止，坪林仍缺乏地方性強力組織與非營利團體的介入，筆者認為，此政策往後無論是由新北市政府繼續挹注資源、或由當地民眾接手經營，都是相當大的困難與挑戰。 透過案例的觀察，本文也發現低碳城市治理的幾項挑戰：（1）由於「低碳」涵義的不明確，導致低碳城市治理實際操作上的困難；（2）低碳政策由政府帶頭、挹注無可避免，不過要在政府監督的前提下，適當導入私人機制與私人資金，即民眾或標的團體的響應、支持才能使政策長久持續，同時避免資源被少數團體壟斷、剝削；（3）升格直轄市之精神為地方自治、多元文化、公平正義之追求，但實際操作上卻導致國家權力向下、鄉鎮區級政府單位權力向上集中於地方政府，非但無法縮短中心與邊陲之發展差距，鄉鎮區級政府單位形同被削能，一旦補助經費、專業人力等資源無法進入，邊陲區域將更被忽視且無力扭轉，而這些資源的進入則有賴地方決策單位，尤其是政治首長對政策的支持度而定；（4）目前地方政府的政策，技術性細節大部份外包給公關顧問公司執行，政府內部主要負責行政執行，一來政府對於自身政策執行不但不了解，而且不具有執行政策能力；二來，由顧問公司作為標的團體與政府間的溝通橋樑形成民眾與政府間的隔閡與不信任感。因此決策者在由上而下下達意志的同時也必須親身參與執行工作，減少溝通層級以提升互動效率與效果，並注意反饋機制之形成。最後，本研究認為透過本案例反映出，低碳城市治理的實踐中，政府的補助或計畫僅是領航或助力，主要仍然有賴地方自身的觀念覺醒，或非營利團體從旁協助等由下而上的自發性行動，才能使地方的發展與環境品質的兼顧永續維持。

According to the Brundtland Report revealed that economic development should coordinate with the earth's environment carrying capacity, the coming international organization or treatment, such as UNCED and Kyoto Protocol, make some specifications to improve the impact of climate change and environmental sustainability. With the rise of globalization, the increasing complexity of public affairs and the network also reduce the state’s power. In contrast, the local governments or city governments have strong ability to respond to the need of the people, gradually play an important role in the field of environmental governance. The ICLEI, which is an international organization established in 1990, committed to reduce carbon emissions affairs, and now has more than 1200 international cities as members. In 2008, Taiwan began to have more obvious actions for the climate, environment or low-carbon policy, including the adoption of sustainable energy policy programs and establishment of the Executive Yuan to save energy and reduce the emission of carbon dioxide. Although the Renewable Energy Development Act, the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act and other central regulations is not yet complete, the EPA has promoted the “low-carbon city program”, which means that the central government looks forward to the local governance in the relevant fields. In fact, the New Taipei City’s action on environmental issues is earlier than the central government’s. Taipei County has established the first unit, the Low Carbon Community Development Center, to deal with carbon issues in Taiwan, and at the same time, he promoted four major flagship projects which combined with the goal to achieve a low carbon city through tourism and environmental sustainability. Among his various actions, the Pingling’s Low Carbon Tourism Policy received significant attention, and become the benchmark for other cities and counties to promote low-carbon tourism. This article intends to explore the case of the operation of low-carbon urban governance through the Pinglin’s low-carbon tourism policy content and the understanding of the execution. This article uses the in-depth interview and the literature analysis method to depict the political and economic content of this case and the relevant actors, and uses “Political Support”, “Policy Tools”, “Powers and Responsibilities”, “Communication and Coordination”, “Resource Mobilization” and “Local Combination” as perspectives to analyze the dynamic changes in policy implementation. Further, points out the challenges currently facing, makes policy recommendations, and sums up the difficulties faced by low-carbon urban governance. The study found that 'political support', including the support by the head of the local government and grass-roots support of the policy target groups, is the most critical influencing factor. Due to the characteristics of environmental policy, the general public or private enterprises have no desire to engage in, and the government has to be a leader to promote such policies top-down. With insufficient resources, Pingling is more dependent on the New Taipei City government, and the political leader of city government plays the most important role in resource allocation and who has the power to decide whether the policy goes on. In this case, Pingling has no local funding but depends on the New Taipei City’s financial resources. There is a problem of young population outflow, most of the rest of the population is elderly and children, so the thinking of local people is quite conservative. And because of the great region and existence of many small groups of local people, they don’t have a strong local organization as a leader to integrate the people’s opinion. Therefore, Pingling is quite dependent on municipal funding and planning of the New Taipei City government both in resources and psychological aspects. So far, Pinglin still lack the involvement of local strong organizations and non-profit groups to sustain the policy and relevante public affair, the author believes that there are considerable difficulties and challenges on whether policy continuing or by the local people taking over the business. The challenges of low-carbon city governing are (1) the definition of 'low carbon' is not clear, (2) lack of private mechanisms and capital import with the oversight by government, (3) counties upgraded to the contrary, increases the widening gap between urban and rural areas, and also power to the city rather than separation of powers, (4) the policy of outsourcing to private companies led to the government's inability and deepen the distrust of the people and their government. Through this case, in order to sustain the practice of low-carbon city, the most important is the spontaneous activities by local people and non-profit organizations, so that can take both of the local development and environmental quality in to account and maintain.