請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/92197完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 王宏文 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Hongwung Wang | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 王敏菁 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | Minching Wang | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-03-08T16:15:27Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2024-03-09 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2024-03-08 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2024 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2024-02-19 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | 壹、 中文部分
BBC,2021,〈台灣疫情:「神話破滅」背後的四個看點〉,BBC NEWS 中文,2021/5/25,https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/57187804 ,檢閱日期:2022/06/03 MoneyDJ 新聞,2020,〈華航致員工信:疫情對營運帶來雪崩式影響〉,https://www.moneydj.com/kmdj/news/newsviewer.aspx?a=75a1610c-21d8-48ae-9529-d3d0dbb42f2d ,檢閱日期 2022/10/20 rfi,2020,〈日本將新型肺炎定為“指定感染症”〉,https://www.rfi.fr/tw/%E4%BA%9E%E6%B4%B2/20200128-%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E5%B0%87%E6%96%B0%E5%9E%8B%E8%82%BA%E7%82%8E%E5%AE%9A%E7%82%BA%E6%8C%87%E5%AE%9A%E6%84%9F%E6%9F%93%E7%97%87 , 檢閱日期 2022/01/05 丘昌泰,2022,《公共政策基礎篇》。高雄市: 巨流 台灣研究中心,2022/12/17,「健康與社會經濟論壇-台灣防疫政策的檢討與省思」,直播連結:https://youtu.be/DR1XWETbXdw ,檢閱日期: 2023/6/2 李漢庭譯,2020,《傳染病的世界史 : 人類二十萬年興亡史上最大戰爭! 》(原作者: 石弘之《感染症の世界史》(初版)。新北市:木馬文化 立法院,2021/9/17,《國籍航空機組員隔離「3+11」 決策過程專案報告》,立法院第10屆第4會期 立法院,2021/9/28,《行政院施政報告》,立法院第10屆第4會期 交通部民用航空局新聞稿,2020-2022, https://www.caa.gov.tw/NewsPublish.aspx?a=165&lang=1&p=1&ssd=2021%2f04%2f29&sed=2022%2f04%2f29&title=%e6%a9%9f%e7%b5%84%e5%93%a1, 檢閱日期: 2022/12/03 余致力、毛壽龍、陳敦源、郭昱瑩,2008,《公共政策》。台北市: 智勝文化 吳富堯、王承宗、崔海恩,2004,〈運用組員資源管理精進飛行決策模式以改善飛航危機管理與安全〉,《危機管理學刊》,1(1),25-32 巫宗翰、游凱迪、林侑璇、葉晏婷、林詠青、李婉萍、何麗莉,2022,〈2020 年 7 月-2022 年 6 月臺灣 COVID-19 邊境檢疫策略與發展〉,《疫情報導》,38(19),265-277 李允傑、丘昌泰,1999,《政策執行與評估》(初版)。新北市: 空中大學用書 李崇菱、黃競文,2022,〈疫情中的健康權: 以台灣為例〉,《醫藥、科技與法律》,27(2):47-75 汪淑芬,2020/3/2,〈華航致員工信 稱武漢肺炎雪崩式影響甚於SARS〉,中央社,https://www.cna.com.tw/news/firstnews/202003020338.aspx ,檢閱日期: 2022/06/03 邱炳坤、李俊杰、李欣霓、黃美珍、楊宗文、陳子軒、... & 顏伽如譯,2016,《質性研究: 設計與施作指南》(原作者: Sharan B. Merriam, Elizabeth J. Tisdell)。台北市: 五南 范麗恒譯,2013,《質性研究訪談》(原作者: Brinkmann, S. & Kvale, S.)。北京: 世界圖書出版公司 桃園市機師職業工會新聞稿,2021/3/26,〈「檢疫-執勤」無限輪迴 機師身心健康集體亮紅燈!機師工會憂心呼籲 懇請政府儘速正視改善〉,https://www.facebook.com/pilotunion/posts/2873351499614472/?paipv=0&eav=AfYUcsu2o6yC6ulb8Fi-mDOVOzDXpRqs-8N-Anc15ZcP9YixRW27OVgbivxH-1X7rtk&_rdr ,2021/3/26 桃園市機師職業工會新聞稿,2021/9/27,〈國際機師工會 向全球最嚴格檢疫制度下的台灣機師致敬〉,https://d.facebook.com/pilotunion/photos/a.1692369911045976/3010869182529369/?type=3&source=48 ,檢閱日期: 2022/12/03 莊麗蘭、趙永茂、王宏文, 2019, 〈城鎮風貌型塑整體計畫之可評估性衡量及執行評估〉,《公共行政學報》,(56), 41-82. 陳建仁,2022/10/22,「防疫、法治與公義」,Facebook, https://www.facebook.com/chencj/posts/663568931800154/?paipv=0&eav=AfYDZ-44Qk7z4YRWkqilzOEPK902GQXPZVJT7qomnjzyoKnZaKRtqYDdZfXN0zpi224&_rdr ,檢閱日期: 2023/7/1 陳偉婷、張茗喧,2020/12/22,〈台灣253天零本土病例破功 染疫紐西蘭機師接觸者確診〉,中央通訊社,https://www.cna.com.tw/news/firstnews/202012220042.aspx ,檢閱日期: 2022/6/2 陳嘉宏,2021/05/14,〈范雲幫機組員說話有什麼問題?〉,上報,https://www.upmedia.mg/news_info.php?Type=2&SerialNo=113095 ,檢閱日期: 2022/06/03 陳蓓蓓,2021/07/05,〈女機師載莫德納回台 39天回不了家的豁達告白〉,商業週刊,https://www.businessweekly.com.tw/archive/Article/Index?StrId=7004059 ,檢閱日期: 2022/10/20 陳潔,2023,〈疫情3年了,你好嗎?──7大關鍵數據,解析全台逾900萬人感染、1萬5千人死亡下該被看見的事〉,報導者,https://www.twreporter.org/a/covid-19-third-anniversary-coverage-data ,檢閱日期: 2023/7/18 曾嬿芬、吳嘉苓,2004,〈「看見」病毒:流動、隔離與邊界〉,《傳播研究簡訊》,(37),8-10 黃揚明,2021,〈范雲聲稱沒施壓 協調會「強烈建議回到3+11」錄音曝光〉,鏡週刊,https://www.mirrormedia.mg/story/20210513inv001/ ,檢閱日期: 2023/2/1 監察委員新聞稿,2022/8/22,〈疫情指揮中心防疫檢疫措施自「5+9」調整為「3+11」決策考量雖有所本,但未對外詳加說明,應檢討改進。另該決策是指揮官聽取任務組報告後直接定案再於記者會公布及發布新聞稿,雖無會議紀錄,惟相關法令未明確規範是否應製作及公開,鑒於事涉國人健康權益及知的權利之重要事項,衛福部應修法加以明定〉,https://www.cy.gov.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=125&s=24212, 檢閱日期:2022/12/3 衛生福利部,2020-2022,https://covid19.mohw.gov.tw,檢閱日期:2022/12/3 衛生福利部疾病管制署,2021,《新興傳染病暨流感大流行應變整備及邊境檢疫計畫》 衛生福利部疾病管署,2020,《因應嚴重特殊傳染性肺炎疫情整備應變計畫》,https://www.cdc.gov.tw/File/Get/sR8H-GsvYkVS0nOVFXJ-4w ,檢閱日期: 2022/6/3 蕭全政,1994,《政治與經濟的整合—政治經濟的基礎理論》台北市:桂冠。 蘇益仁,2008,〈台灣SARS的經驗對H5N1流感可能大流行挑戰的啟示〉,《疫情報導》,24(4):235-242 貳、 英文部分 Adekunle, A., Meehan, M., Rojas‐Alvarez, D., Trauer, J., & McBryde, E. 2020. Delaying the COVID‐19 epidemic in Australia: evaluating the effectiveness of international travel bans. Australian and New Zealand journal of public health, 44(4), 257-259. Barrett, S., & Fudge, C. 1981. Examining the policy-action relationship. Policy and action: Essays on the implementation of public policy, 3-34. Bernar Hickey. 2020. We must go hard and we must go early. https://www.newsroom.co.nz/we-must-go-hard-and-we-must-go-early. Newsroom, 檢閱日期 2022/01/05 Blair, A., de Pasquale, M., Gabeff, V., Rufi, M., & Flahault, A. 2022. The end of the elimination strategy: decisive factors towards sustainable management of COVID-19 in New Zealand. Epidemiologia,3(1), 135-147. Bloomberg. 2020. Lives, Livelihoods and Policy — Ranking Emerging Markets. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-19/lives-livelihoods-and-policy-ranking-emerging-markets-map?leadSource=uverify%20wall . 檢閱日期 2023/01/05 Bloomberg. 2022. The Best and Worst Places to Be as World Enters Next Covid Phase, https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-resilience-ranking/#xj4y7vzkg . 檢閱日期 2023/01/05 Chen, H., Shi, L., Zhang, Y., Wang, X., & Sun, G. 2021. A cross-country core strategy comparison in China, Japan, Singapore and South Korea during the early COVID-19 pandemic. Globalization and health, 17, 1-10. De Bruijn, H. A., & Hufen, H. A. 1998. The traditional approach to policy instruments. Public policy instruments: Evaluating the tools of public administration, 11-32. Dewan, A., Pettersson, H., & Croker, N. 2020. As governments fumbled their coronavirus response, these four got it right. Here''s how. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/16/world/coronavirus-response-lessons-learned-intl/index.html ,檢閱日期: 2022/12/05 Ferguson, N., Laydon, D., Nedjati Gilani, G., Imai, N., Ainslie, K., Baguelin, M., & Ghani, A. 2020. Report 9: Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID19 mortality and healthcare demand. Fukuuyama Francis. 1995. Trust: the social virtues and the creation of prosperity, New York: Free Press, 25-28. Guba, E & Y. S. Lincoln. 1989. Fourth Generation Evaluation. Newbury Park: Sage. Hale, T., Angrist, N., Goldszmidt, R.et al. 2021, A global panel database of pandemic policies (Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker), Nat Hum Behav5, 529–538, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01079-8 . 檢閱日期 2023/01/05 Hood, Christopher C., 1983, The Tools of Government, London: Macmillian. Howlett, M. 2009. Governance modes, policy regimes and operational plans: A multi-level nested model of policy instrument choice and policy design. Policy Sciences, 42, 73-89. IATA. 2020-2022. https://www.iata.org/en/publications/store/world-air-transport-statistics/ ,檢閱日期 2023/01/05 Ingraham, P. W. 1987. Toward more systematic consideration of policy design. Policy Studies Journal, 15(4), 611-628 Jamieson, T. 2020. “Go hard, go early”: preliminary lessons from New Zealand’s response to COVID-19. The American Review of Public Administration, 50(6-7), 598-605. Lasswell, H. D. 1970. The emerging conception of the policy sciences. Policy sciences, 1(1), 3-14. Lipsey, M. W. 1993. Theory as method: Small theories of treatments. In L. Sechrest &A. Scott (Eds.), Understanding causes and generalizing about them (pp. 5-28). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Liu, J. Y., Chen, T. J., & Hwang, S. J. 2020. Analysis of imported cases of COVID-19 in Taiwan: a nationwide study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(9), 3311. Manning, J. M. 2021. Feats, flops, and free lessons from NZ’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Medical Law Review, 29(3), 468-496. Mazey, S., & Richardson, J. 2020. Lesson‐drawing from New Zealand and covid‐19: The need for anticipatory policy making. The Political Quarterly, 91(3), 561-570. Ministry of Health,2020-2022,https://www.health.govt.nz/ ,檢閱日期 2023/01/05 Nachmias, D. 1979. Public policy evaluation: approaches and methods. St. Martin’s Press. New Zealand Gazette,2020-2022,https://gazette.govt.nz ,檢閱日期: 2023/01/18 O’Hare, M. 1989. A typology of governmental action. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 8(4), 670-672. Policy Responses to the Coronavirus Pandemic. 2022. Our world in Data. https://ourworldindata.org/policy-responses-covid ,檢閱日期 2023/01/05 Pressman, J. L., & Wildavsky, A. B. 1973. How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland. University of California: Berkeley, LA, USA. Ripley, R. B., & Franklin, G. A. 1986. Policy implementation and bureaucracy. Brooks/Cole. Rossi, P. H., Freeman, H. E., & Rosenbaum, Sonia. 1982. Evaluation: a systematic approach(2nd Ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: sage Publications. Rossi, P. H., H. E. Freeman & M. W. Lipsey. 1999. Evaluation: A systematic approach(6th Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Schneider, A., & Ingram, H. 1990. Behavioral assumptions of policy tools. The journal of politics, 52(2), 510-529. Shimizu, K., & Negita, M. 2020. Lessons learned from Japan’s response to the first wave of COVID-19: a content analysis. In Healthcare, 8(4) 426. MDPI. Skocpol, T., Evans, P., Rueschemeyer, D., & Skocpol, T. 1985. Bringing the state back in. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 253-256. Summers, J., Cheng, H. Y., Lin, H. H., Barnard, L. T., Kvalsvig, A., Wilson, N., & Baker, M. G. 2020. Potential lessons from the Taiwan and New Zealand health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Lancet Regional Health-Western Pacific, 4, 100044. Swanson, J. A. 2011. Michael J. Sandel’s justice: What’s the right thing to do: A response of moral reasoning in kind, with analysis of Aristotle and examples. BUL Rev., 91, 1375. Weimer, D. L., & Vining, A. R. 2017. Policy analysis: Concepts and Practice(6th Ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. Wilson, M. E., & Chen, L. H. 2020. Travellers give wings to novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). Journal of travel medicine, 27(2), taaa015. 參、 日文部分 National Governors'' Association, 2020-2022, https://www.nga.gr.jp/committee_pt/honbu/shingatakoronauirusukinkyutaisakukaigi/r02/ ,檢閱日期 2022/12/05 NHK, 2020,〈新型コロナウイルス対策の特措法 成立 「緊急事態宣言」可能に〉,https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20200313/k10012330031000.html ,檢閱日期 2022/12/05 NHK,2020,中国 武漢の肺炎 国内で初確認 武漢に渡航した男性から 厚労省, https://www.nhk.or.jp/politics/articles/statement/28849.html ,檢閱日期 2022/07/05 Prime Minister’s Office of Japan, https://japan.kantei.go.jp/index.html ,檢閱日期 2022/12/05 山口二郎,2022,日本官僚制とコロナ危機: 日本モデルと無責任体制をめぐって. 年報 公共政策学, 16, 63-78. 兒玉龍彥,2021,デモクラシータイムズ,https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVtn7Br-PWw ,2021/1/7,檢閱日期 2022/12/05 厚生労働省新型コロナウイルス感染症について,2020-2022,https://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/seisakunitsuite/bunya/0000164708_00001.html ,檢閱日期 2022/12/05 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/92197 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 我國在疫情期間的防疫管理讓國人引以為傲,邊境管控是防疫的重要項目之一。本研究的動機源自於新冠疫情期間,我國、紐西蘭與日本作為海島型國家,如何依瞬息萬變的防疫資訊作出決策來確保公共衛生安全。研究聚焦在我國防疫期間嚴格的邊境管制與機組員防疫政策隨疫情變化、調整的過程,透過不同的觀察分析,期有助日後制定更為周全與有效的防疫政策。
從執行評估的角度,本研究爬梳了三國對於防疫政策的相關資訊,對比我國嚴密的邊境防疫與強化對航空機組員的防疫管理;紐西蘭從防堵到與病毒共存的防疫態度;日本自始至終以緩解為防疫主軸的策略,透過次級資料蒐集與質化訪談的研究方法,了解各國的邊境政策的差異、三國對機組員防疫政策及管理的方式與我國機組員防疫政策的演化。此外,藉由適用機組員防疫政策對象訪談的第一手資料揭露,更可理解機組員面臨的挑戰與他們的需求和期望,可為政策制定者提供寶貴的洞見。 本研究同時參閱牛津新冠病毒政府應對追蹤器的數據,以疫情期間三國的嚴格指數作分析,對比各國在疫情期間的防疫嚴格度與機師的防疫政策,是否與有效控制疫情達到平衡。 疫情期間機組員身負跨國運輸重任,機組員防疫政策制定的目的在保障社區與機組員的健康。但機組員防疫政策的施行未隨疫情變化滾動調整,社會輿論的放大關切與機組員投訴無門,當強調有效控制疫情的同時,更應考慮建立一個多部門協調機制,涵蓋航空、公衛、勞動等相關領域專家,同步保障機組員的權益和心理健康,確保政策制定既符合公共衛生目標,又兼顧機組員的職業需求和權益。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | The motivation for this study stems from the management of the COVID-19 pandemic by Taiwan, New Zealand, and Japan as island nations, and how they made decisions based on rapidly changing pandemic information to ensure public health safety. The study focuses on Taiwan's strict border control and the evolution and adjustment of policies for airline crew during the pandemic. Through different analytical observations, this research aims to contribute to the development of more comprehensive and effective pandemic policies in the future.
From an implementation evaluation perspective, this study reviews the pandemic policies of the three countries, contrasting Taiwan's stringent border and airline crew pandemic management, New Zealand's transition from containment to coexistence with the virus, and Japan's consistent mitigation strategy. Through secondary data analysis and qualitative evaluation, this research explores the differences in border policies, the approaches to airline crew pandemic policies and management among the countries, and the evolution of airline crew pandemic policies in Taiwan. Additionally, firsthand data from interviews with subjects of airline crew pandemic policies reveal the challenges they face, their needs, and expectations, offering valuable insights for policymakers. This study also refers to data from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker, analyzing the stringency index of the three countries during the pandemic, comparing the severity of pandemic policies, including those for pilots, and whether they balance effective pandemic control. During the pandemic, airline crew played a crucial role in cross-border transportation. The purpose of formulating airline crew pandemic policies was to protect the health of the community and the airline crew. However, the implementation of airline crew pandemic policies did not adjust dynamically with the changing pandemic, leading to amplified public concerns and complaints from the airline crew. While emphasizing effective pandemic control, it is also essential to consider establishing a multidisciplinary coordination mechanism that includes experts from aviation, public health, labour, and other related fields. This approach aims to protect the rights and mental health of airline crew while ensuring that policy formulation meets public health goals and considers the professional needs and rights of airline crew. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2024-03-08T16:15:27Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2024-03-08T16:15:27Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 論文口試委員會審定書 I
謝誌 II 中文摘要 IV ABSTRACT V 目次 VII 圖次 X 表次 XI 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機 3 第二節 研究目的 7 第三節 研究問題 9 第二章 文獻探討 13 第一節 防疫政策 14 第二節 執行評估 29 第三章 研究方法 31 第一節 研究設計 31 第二節 研究方法 32 第四章 次級資料分析結果 37 第一節 入境防疫政策 38 第二節 「組員防疫作業原則」內容演變 42 第三節 台紐日防疫關鍵決策與嚴格指數 48 第五章 深度訪談結果分析 53 第一節 跨國機組員防疫政策比較 53 第二節 防疫政策制訂與執行的盲點 55 第三節 防疫政策的效果與評估的反思 60 第四節 防疫政策未遵循國際指導原則 62 第六章 結論 65 第一節 研究結論 65 第二節 研究建議 68 第三節 研究貢獻與限制 69 參考文獻 71 附錄一 我國COVID-19「重大事件」防疫關鍵決策時間軸 81 附錄二 我國「邊境政策」防疫關鍵決策時間軸 83 附錄三 紐西蘭防疫關鍵決策時間軸 86 附錄四 日本防疫關鍵決策時間軸 89 附錄五 機組員防疫作業原則規範內容 91 附錄六 訪談內容 96 | - |
| dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
| dc.subject | 新冠疫情 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 機組員 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 防疫政策 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 嚴格指數 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 執行評估 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Airline Crew | en |
| dc.subject | COVID-19 | en |
| dc.subject | implementation evaluation | en |
| dc.subject | Stringency Index | en |
| dc.subject | Epidemic Prevention Policy | en |
| dc.title | 航空機組員防疫政策之跨國比較 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Cross-Country Comparison on Crew Epidemic Prevention Policy | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 112-1 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 李仲彬;李天申 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Chungpin Lee;Tienshen Lee | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | 新冠疫情,機組員,防疫政策,嚴格指數,執行評估, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | COVID-19,Airline Crew,Epidemic Prevention Policy,Stringency Index,implementation evaluation, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 131 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202400724 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2024-02-19 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 社會科學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 政治學系 | - |
| 顯示於系所單位: | 政治學系 | |
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-112-1.pdf | 2.82 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。
