Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/68104
Full metadata record
???org.dspace.app.webui.jsptag.ItemTag.dcfield??? | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 蘇彩足(Tsai-Tsu Su) | |
dc.contributor.author | Yi-Ru Hsieh | en |
dc.contributor.author | 謝怡茹 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-17T02:12:42Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2021-01-04 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2018-01-04 | |
dc.date.issued | 2017 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2017-12-20 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 壹、中文部分
申劍敏、朱春奎,2015,〈跨域治理的概念譜系與研究模型〉,《北京行政學院報》,4:38-43。 丘昌泰、蘇瑞祥,1999,〈破解選票正治、回饋情節公共政策的三角難題:以環保基層建設為觀察焦點〉,《法商學報》,35。 丘昌泰,2002,〈從「鄰避情結」到「迎臂效應」:台灣環保抗爭的問題與出路〉,《政治科學論叢》,17:33-56。 沈建中,2014,〈建立公共治理協調會報跨域合作平臺功能〉,《公共治理季刊》,2(3):140-147。 李永展,1996,〈鄰避設施對社區環境品質之影響:以台北市三個焚化廠為例〉,《國立政治大學學報》,72:263-297。 李永展、陳柏廷,1996,〈從環境認知的觀點探討「鄰避」設施的再利用〉,《建築與城鄉研究學報》,8:53-65。 李永展,1998,〈臨避設施衝突管理之研究〉,《國立臺灣大學建築與城鄉研究學報》,9:33-44。 李長晏,1999,〈我國中央與地方府際關係分析:英國經驗之學習〉,政治大學公共行政學系博士論文。 李長晏,2008,〈臺灣地方自治團體跨區域管理機制之探析〉,《研習論壇精選》,123-141。 李長晏、曾淑娟,2009,〈北臺與高高屏區域聯盟治理營運之比較〉,《臺灣民主季刊》,6(2):1-60。 李長晏,2013,〈地方政府跨域治理績效管理模式之研究—以新北市高風險家庭整合型安全網及幸福保衛站計畫為例〉,網址,http://www.rad.gov.tw/UIPWeb/wSite/public/Attachment/f1402645499586.pdf,最後檢索日期:2016/12/03。 吳濟華、葉晉嘉、朱俊德,2006,〈地方永續發展跨域治理操作機制研究--以高高屏地區為例〉,城市發展,1:28-53。 呂育誠,2002,〈跨域治理概念落時的挑戰與展望〉,《文官制度季刊》,4(1):85-106。 林水波、李長晏,2005,《跨域治理》,台北:五南出版社。 邱崇原、湯京平,2015,〈公民投票與鄰避困境-台灣低放射性廢棄物貯存場的選址經驗及南韓之啟示〉,《臺灣民主季刊》,11(4):1-36。 紀俊臣,2004,〈地方自治團體跨區域事務合作〉,《中國地方自治》,57(8):4-18。 侯錦雄,1997,〈由居民態度觀點探討不寧適公共設施的環境衝突:以台中市垃圾焚化廠設置過程為例〉,《中國園藝》,43(3):208-224。 家戶垃圾與事業廢棄物妥善處理分區預備會議資料,行政院環境保護署,2015年3月,網址,http://enews.epa.gov.tw/enews/enews_ftp/105/0302/102516/1050302%E6%96%B0%E8%81%9E%E9%99%84%E4%BB%B6-%E6%9C%83%E8%AD%B0%E8%B3%87%E6%96%99.pdf。最後檢視日期:2016/11/05。 陳敦源,1998,〈跨域管理:部際與府際關係〉,《公共管理》,台北:商鼎出版社,226-269。 陳立剛,2001,〈府際合作關係研究:跨區域管理合作模式之分析極其策略〉,收錄於東吳大學政治學系、暨南國際大學公共行政與政策學系、內政部主辦之府際關係學術研討會,2001年6月9日。 陳一夫、林建元、鄭安廷,2015,〈跨域治理模式的建構與評估〉,《都市與計劃》,42(2):153-170。 黃錦堂,2004,《垃圾處理設施興建及區域性合作機制之規劃調查》,行政院環境保護署委託報告書。 湯京平,1999,〈鄰避性環境衝突管理的制度與策略─以理性選擇與交易成本理論分析六輕建廠及拜耳投資案〉,《政治科學論叢》,10:355∼382。 湯京平、陳金哲,2005,〈新公共管理與鄰避政治:以嘉義縣市跨域合作為例〉,《政治科學論叢》,23:101-132。 楊國樞等,1992,《社會及行為科學研究方法》,台北:東華出版社。 萬文隆,2004,《深度訪談在質性研究中的應用》,《生活科技教育月刊》,37(4):17-23。 蔡宗珍,2001,〈跨區域事務合作之法制模式探討〉,「府際關係學術研討會」論文(6月9日),1-16。 劉明德、徐玉珍,2001,〈地方政府跨域合作模式與案例分析—台灣與德國之比較〉,《公共行政學報》,41:37-72。 劉坤億,2005,〈臺灣地方政府間發展夥伴關係之制度障礙與機會〉,《臺灣民主季刊》,3 (3 ):1~34。 劉曜華,2014,〈剖析中央權力下放地方都市及區域規劃篇〉,《台灣思想坦克》,9:18-26。 顏聰玲,2014,〈雲嘉南區域合作平台發展歷程與落實區域合作關鍵因素分析〉,《政策與人力管理》,5(2):1-32。 龔意琇,2002,《臺灣垃圾跨區域處理之個案研究》,國立臺灣大學政治學研究所碩士論文。 貳、西文部分 Agbodzakey, James. 2012. Collaborative Governance of HIV Health Services Planning Councils in Broward and Palm Beach Counties of South Florida. Public Organization Review, 12(2): 107–126. Ansell, Chris & Gash, Alison. 2007. Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4): 543-571.Bardach, Eugene. 1977. The Implementation Game. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. Asaduzzaman, Mohammed & Kaivo-oja, Jari & Stenvall, Jari & Jusi, Sari. 2016. Strengthening Local Governance in Developing Countries: Partnership as an Alternative Approach. Public Organization Review, 16(3): 335–356. B.Guy, Peter. 1998. Managing Horizontal Government: The Politics of Coordination. Public Administration, 76(Summer): 295-311. Brown, Mary & O'Toole, Laurence & Brudney, Jeffrey. 1998. Implementing Information Technology in Government: An Empirical Assessment of theRole of Local Partnerships. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8(4):499-525. Bryson, John & Crosby, Barbara & Middleton, Stone Melissa. 2006. The Design and Implementation of Cross-Sector Collaborations: Propositions from the Literature. Public Administration Review, 66(s1):44-55. Claro, Edmundo. 2007. Exchange Relationships and the Environment: The Acceptability of Compensation in theSiting of Waste Disposal Facilities. Environmental Values, 16(2): 187-208. Daley, Dorothy. 2009. Interdisciplinary Problems and Agency Boundaries: Exploring Effective Cross-AgencyCollaboration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(3) :477-493. Dawes, Sharon. 1996. Interagency Information Sharing: Expected Benefits, Manageable Risks. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 15(3): 337-394. Dear, Michael. 1992. Understanding and Overcoming the NIMBY Syndrome. Journal of the American Planning Association, 58(3): 288-300. Devine-Wright, Patrick. 2012. Explaining “NIMBY”Objections to a Power Line: The Role of Personal, Place Attachment and Project-Related Factors. Environment and Behavior, 45(6):761-781. Esteve, Marc & Boyne, George & Sierra, Vicenta & Ysa, Tamyko. 2012. Organizational Collaboration in the Public Sector: Do Chief Executives Make a Difference? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(4): 936, doi:10.1093/jopart/mus035. Frey, Bruno & Oberholzer- Gee, Felix. 1996. Fair Siting Procedures: An Empirical Analysis of Their Importance and Characteristics. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 15(3): 353-376. Greasley, Kay & Watson, Paul & Patel, Shilpa. 2008. The formation of public-public Partnerships A case study examination of collaboration on a“back to work” initiative. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 21(3): 305-313. Horst, Dan van der. 2007. NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies. Energy Policy, 35:2705–2714. Ibitayo, Olurominiyi & Pijawka, David. 1999. Reversing NIMBY: an assessment of state strategies for siting hazardous-waste facilities. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 17:379-389. Johson, Renee J. & Scichitano, Michael J.. 2012. Don’t Call Me NIMBY: Public Attitudes Toward Solid Waste Facilities. Environment and Behavior, 44(3):410-426. Lo¨ fstro¨m, Mikael. 2010. Inter-organizational collaboration projects in the public sector: a balance between integration and demarcation. Int J Health Plann Manage, 25(2):136-55. McClintock, J. E., Petro, L. D., Remillard, R. A., & Ricker, G. R. 1983. Astrophysical Journal, V266, L27. Mullin, Megan & Daley, Dorothy. 2010. Working with the State: Exploring Interagency Collaboration within a Federalist System. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(4):757-778. Romzek, Barbara & LeRoux, Kelly & Johnston, Jocelyn & Kempf, Robin & Schede, Piatak Jaclyn. 2014. Informal Accountability in Multisector Service Delivery Collaborations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mut027. Sedgwick, Donna. 2016. Building Collaboration: Examining the Relationship between Collaborative Processes and Activities. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. doi: 10.1093/jopart/muw057. Spekkink, Wouter A. H. & Boons, Frank A. A.. 2016. The Emergence of Collaborations, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26 (4): 613-630. Van der Horst, Dan. 2007. NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies. Energy Policy, 35(5):2705-2714. Vangen, Siv & Huxham, Chris. 2003. Enacting Leadership for Collaborative Advantage: Dilemmas of Ideology and Pragmatism in the Activities of Partnership Managers. British Journal of Management, 14:61-76. Vittes, M. Elliot & Pollock, III, P. H. & Stuart, A. Lilie. 1993. Factors Contributing to NIMBY Attitudes. Waste Management, 13: 125-129. Weber, Edward. 1998. Pluralism by the Rules: Conflict and Cooperation in Environmental Regulation, V113, L4. Wimmer, R. D. and Dominick, J. R. 1994. Mass Media Research: An Introduction, California:Wadsworth. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/68104 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 民國104年我國屢次發生中部縣市垃圾無處燒的窘境,其中以雲林縣垃圾累積的公噸量最為驚人,然而,在「鄰避情結」的催化之下,雲林縣垃圾無處傾倒,可以說是臺灣「第二次垃圾大戰」。與其同時,台北市三座及高雄市兩座公有公營廠運轉率卻低於80%,透露出「垃圾不夠燒」之現象,換言之,「跨域治理」很有可能是垃圾危機處理的最佳解套方式,於是引發本文的研究動機。希冀透過質化調查方法,企圖去了解是怎樣的態度和交錯互動,使得這些行動者最終成為鄰避情結人,並且更進一步理解導致跨域合作破局的關鍵。
研究結果發現,首先,造成雲林垃圾無處燒之根本原因乃是市場之供需失衡與諸多外部因素而導致的,尤其「鄰避效應」是本次雲林縣垃圾大戰失敗的關鍵所在。其次,中央政府在垃圾跨域合作上有著不可或缺的角色。尤其目前台灣縣市的合作經驗不足,需要中央主管介入,扮演公正的協調者與監督者。最後,本研究為政府垃圾處理提供幾點建議,包含:在全台推動垃圾減量政策、授予中央實權、在垃圾調度上建立誘因機制建立、產生合作之誘因以及更有效管控事業廢棄物。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Several “trash crises” occurred in 2015 in counties and cities in the central Taiwan. Yunlin County, in particular, has been overloaded with tons of trash. It was observed that the amount of trash waiting to be proceeded was the highest among the problematic areas. The overloading of trash was exacerbated under the “not in my back yard (NIMBY)” phenomenon, causing “the second trash crisis” in Yunlin County. At the same time, there were five – three in Taipei City and two in Kaohsiung City – public incinerators found to be underused, indicating that “across boundary governance” was the possible solution to the crisis. Through the qualitative research method, the inclination of related actors, the interaction among them, and the cause of actors who fell into the trap of NIMBY are examined in this paper. Furthermore, this paper aims at identifying and analyzing the key factor of the failed practices of the across boundary governance in this case.
There are two findings in the research: first, the Yunlin trash crisis was fundamentally caused by market disequilibrium and other external factors. NIMBY phenomenon particularly played a critical role bringing out the crisis. Moreover, as impartial coordinator and supervisor, the central government was an indispensable actor leading the across boundary cooperation of trash allocation among local governments, which lacked of experiences of coordinating with the counterparts at the same level. Finally, several suggestions of trash management for the government are brought up by the research, including: promotion of garbage reduction at the scale of the whole country, a central government granted with real power on the matter, setting up incentives for trash allocation and cooperation, and more effective management on the business waste. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-17T02:12:42Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-106-R03322006-1.pdf: 2963258 bytes, checksum: b93b13950f9bf0fdb11f3eb4df0d0301 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝辭 i
中文摘要 ii 英文摘要 iii 目錄 v 圖目次 vii 表目次 viii 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機與研究目的 1 第二節 研究途徑與研究方法 3 第三節 訪談研究與問卷設計 9 第四節 文獻探討 13 第二章 雲林垃圾大戰之經過 27 第一節 雲林縣垃圾處理之背景說明 27 第二節 雲林縣垃圾大戰之導火線 31 第三節 雲林垃圾大戰之府際互動 34 第三章 跨域治理失靈之根源 49 第一節 雲林縣本身垃圾焚燒之供需市場失衡 49 第二節 外部因素 61 第三節 小結 71 第四章 垃圾究竟該何去何從? 73 第一節 林內焚化爐的政策探討 73 第二節 現有垃圾跨域處理模式檢討 85 第五章 結論與建議 103 第一節 研究發現與政策建議 103 第二節 研究限制與後續研究建議 110 參考文獻 113 附錄 問卷 121 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 2015-2017年雲林垃圾大戰:跨域治理途徑之分析 | zh_TW |
dc.title | A Case Study of the Garbage War in Yunlin, 2015-2017 — A Cross-Boundary Perspective | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 106-1 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 林子倫(Tze-Luen Lin),李翠萍(Tsuey-Ping Lee) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 跨域治理,鄰避效應,垃圾處理, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Cross-Boundary Governace,NIMBY,Trash Disposal, | en |
dc.relation.page | 124 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201704478 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2017-12-20 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 社會科學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 政治學研究所 | zh_TW |
Appears in Collections: | 政治學系 |
Files in This Item:
File | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-106-1.pdf Restricted Access | 2.89 MB | Adobe PDF |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.