Skip navigation

DSpace

機構典藏 DSpace 系統致力於保存各式數位資料(如:文字、圖片、PDF)並使其易於取用。

點此認識 DSpace
DSpace logo
English
中文
  • 瀏覽論文
    • 校院系所
    • 出版年
    • 作者
    • 標題
    • 關鍵字
    • 指導教授
  • 搜尋 TDR
  • 授權 Q&A
    • 我的頁面
    • 接受 E-mail 通知
    • 編輯個人資料
  1. NTU Theses and Dissertations Repository
  2. 社會科學院
  3. 公共事務研究所
請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件: http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/94307
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位值語言
dc.contributor.advisor王宏文zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisorHong-Wung Wangen
dc.contributor.author張絜瑜zh_TW
dc.contributor.authorChieh-Yu Changen
dc.date.accessioned2024-08-15T16:43:56Z-
dc.date.available2024-08-16-
dc.date.copyright2024-08-15-
dc.date.issued2024-
dc.date.submitted2024-08-02-
dc.identifier.citation中文部分
王業立(1996)。我國選舉制度的政治影響。臺北:五南出版社。
王靖興(2009)。立法委員的立法問政與選區服務之分析:2000年政黨輪替前後的持續與變遷。台灣政治學刊,13(2),113-169。
古哲瑋、徐俊明、王宏文(2022)。縣議員總質詢內容之分析:以第十八屆苗栗縣議員為例。東吳政治學報,40(2),127-175。
包正豪(2013)。台灣原住民立法委員代表行為之研究:2002-2012之質詢內容分析。選舉研究,20(2),103-136。
行政院研究發展考核委員會(1991)。各國國會質詢制度之比較(GPN:1008000319),行政院研考會。
江育誠(2022)。官員於地方議會答詢時之避責策略分析:以苗栗縣為例〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺灣大學。
吳宜侃(2005)。立法委員連任預測模型分析-以第四屆立法委員為例。選舉研究,12(1),173-210。
李憲榮(2008)。愛爾蘭“單一選票讓渡”的選舉制度。台灣國際研究季刊,4(4),1-19。
邱正一(2023)。普遍性利益或選區相關利益?影響苗栗縣第18屆縣議員口頭質詢之因素〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺灣大學。
徐仁輝、郭昱瑩(2014)。政策分析。臺北:智勝。
徐俊明(2020)。台灣第五屆立法委員提案策略之研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺灣大學。
徐俊明、古哲瑋、王宏文(2024)。不同黨派議員口頭質詢強度的研究:以苗栗縣第十八屆議會為例。行政暨政策學報,78,1-32。
高雅雯、徐俊明、王宏文(2023)。臺北市議會第十二屆議員提出書面質詢之數量分析[論文發表],政府與公共事務學術論文研討會,3月18日,臺北。
耿榮水(2015)。宜將剩勇追窮寇?解讀柯文哲現象。海峽評論,290,60-63。
盛杏湲(2005)。選區代表與集體代表:立法委員的代表角色,東吳政治學報,21,1-40。
陳淳斌(2007)。地方議會的立法控制與監督:嘉義市第六屆議會的個案分析,空大行政學報,18,63-104。
陳夢琨(2017)。2014年臺北市市長候選人柯文哲競選策略之研究,中國行政評論,23(3),1-36。
莊淑媚、洪永泰(2011)。特定政黨不認同:台灣地區民意調查中關於政黨認同的新測量工具,選舉研究,18(2),1-29。
張麟徵(2015)。柯文哲情結與兩岸關係,海峽評論,297,38-41。
張順全、莊文忠(2017)。超越藍綠?政治版圖在2014年臺北市長選舉的新應用。選舉研究,24(1),97-132。
黃秀端(1994)。選區服務:立法委員心目中的連任基礎。臺北:唐山。
黃德福、廖益興(2009)。我國立法委員為何選擇並立式混合選舉制度?2004年選舉制度改革之觀察。政治學報,47,1-27。
楊日青(2016)。立法部門。載於陳義彥(編),政治學(頁259-283)。五南。
劉坤億(2009)。政府課責性與公共治理之探討。研考雙月刊,33(5),59-72。
劉嘉薇、黃紀(2012)。父母政黨偏好組合對大學生政黨偏好之影響-定群追蹤之研究。臺灣民主季刊,9(3),37-84。
蕭怡靖(2009)。「台灣選舉與民主化調查」之政黨認同測量的探討。選舉研究,16(1),67-93。
羅清俊、謝瑩蒔(2008)。選區規模與立法委員分配政策提案的關聯性研究:第三、四屆立法院的分析,行政暨政策學報,48,1-48。
西文部分
Akirav, Osnat. (2011). The Use of Parliamentary Questions in the Israeli Parliament, 1992–96. Israel Affairs, 17(2), 259-277.
Albrecht, F., C. Karlsson, & T. Persson. (2021). Patterns of Parliamentary Opposition: Empirical Evidence from the Deliberations in the German Bundestag’s Committee on European Union Affairs. Parliamentary Affairs, 74(1), 230-251.
Ames, B. (1995). Electoral rules, constituency pressures, and pork barrel: bases of voting in the Brazilian Congress. The Journal of politics, 57(2), 324-343.
André, A., Depauw, S., & Martin, S. (2015). Electoral Systems and Legislators’ Constituency Effort: The Mediating Effect of Electoral Vulnerability. Comparative Political Studies, 48(4), 464-496.
Anzia, S. F., & Berry, C. R. (2011). The Jackie (and Jill) Robinson effect: why do congresswomen outperform congressmen?. American Journal of Political Science, 55(3), 478-493.
Bailer, Stefanie. (2011). People's Voice or Information Pool? The Role of, and Reasons for, Parliamentary Questions in the Swiss Parliament. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 17(3), 302-314.
Berry, W. D., Berkman, M. B., & Schneiderman, S. (2000). Legislative professionalism and incumbent reelection: The development of institutional boundaries. American Political Science Review, 94(4), 859-874.
Bickers, K. N., & Stein, R. M. (1996). The electoral dynamics of the federal pork barrel. American Journal of Political Science, 1300-1326.
Bird, Karen. (2005). Gendering Parliamentary Questions. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 7(3), 353-370.
Blidook, K., & Kerby, M. (2011). Constituency influence on constituency members: The adaptability of roles to electoral realities in the Canadian case. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 17(3), 327-339.
Bowler, s. (2010). Private Members' Bills in the UK Parliament: Is There an ‘Electoral Connection’? The Journal of Legislative Studies, 16(4), 476-494.
Born, Richard. (1982). Perquisite Employment in the U.S. House of
Representatives, 1960-1976. American Politics Quarterly, 10(3), 347-62.
Brack, N., & Costa, O. (2019). Parliamentary questions and representation of territorial interests in the EP. The European Parliament in times of EU crisis: Dynamics and transformations, 225-254.
Brouard, S., Costa, O., Kerrouche, E., & Schnatterer. (2013). Why do French MPs Focus More on Constituency Work than on Parliamentary Work?. Journal of Legislative Studies, 19(2), 141-159.
Cain, B., Ferejohn, J. & Fiorina, M. (1984). The Constituency Service Basis of the Personal Vote for U.S. Representatives and British Members of Parliament. American Political Science Review, 78(1):110-125
Cain, B., Ferejohn, J. & Fiorina, M. (1987). The Personal Vote: Constituency Service and Electoral Independence. Cambridge, MA and London, England: Harvard University Press.
Carey, J. M., & Shugart, M. S. (1995). Incentives to cultivate a personal vote: A rank ordering of electoral formulas. Electoral studies, 14(4), 417-439.
Chiru, M. (2018). The electoral value of constituency-oriented parliamentary questions in Hungary and Romania. Parliamentary Affairs, 71(4), 950-969.
Fenno, R. F. (1973). Congressmen in committees. Little Brown.
Fenno, R. F. (1977). US House members in their constituencies: An exploration. American Political Science Review, 71(3), 883-917.
Fenno, R. F. (1978). Home style: House members in their districts. Little Brown.
Fernandes, J. M., Leston-Bandeira, C., & Schwemmer, C. (2018). Election proximity and representation focus in party-constrained environments. Party Politics, 24(6), 674-685.
Fernandes, J. M., Geese, L., & Schwemmer, C. (2019). The impact of candidate selection rules and electoral vulnerability on legislative behaviour in comparative perspective. European Journal of Political Research, 58(1), 270-291.
Fletcher, F. J., & Goddard, A. M. (1978). Government and Opposition: Structural Influences on Provincial Legislators. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 647-669.
Heitshusen, V., Young, G., & Wood, D. M. (2005). Electoral context and mp constituency focus in Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. American Journal of Political Science, 49(1), 32-45.
Ingall, R. E., & Crisp, B. F. (2001). Determinants of home style: The many incentives for going home in Colombia. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 487-512.
Jacobson, G. C. (1987). The marginals never vanished: Incumbency and competition in elections to the US House of Representatives, 1952-82. American Journal of Political Science, 126-141.
Judge, D. (1974). Backbench Specialisation: A Study of Parliamentary Questions. Parliamentary Affairs, 27 (2), 171–86.
Johnson, J. W., & Hoyo, V. (2012). Beyond personal vote incentives: Dividing the vote in preferential electoral systems. Electoral Studies, 31(1), 131-142.
Kellermann, Michael. (2016). Electoral Vulnerability, Constituency Focus, and Parliamentary Questions in the House of Commons. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 18 (1), 90-106.
Killermann, K., & Proksch, S. O. (2013). Dynamic political rhetoric: Electoral, economic, and partisan determinants of speech-making in the UK Parliament [Conference presentation]. Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 29 -September 1, Chicago, IL.
King, G., Keohane, R., & Verba, S. (1996). Designing Social Inquiry. Princeton University Press.
Mair, Peter. (2009). Representative versus Responsible Government. MPIfG Working Paper, No. 09/8.
Maricut-Akbik, A. (2021). Q and A in Legislative Oversight: A Framework for Analysis. European Journal of Political Research, 60(3), 539-559.
Martin, Shane. (2011a). Using Parliamentary Questions to Measure Constituency Focus: An. Application to the Irish Case. Political Studies, 59(2), 472-488.
Martin, Shane. (2011b). Parliamentary Questions, the Behavior of Legislators, and the. Function of Legislatures: An Introduction. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 17(3), 259-270.
Martin, Shane. (2016). Parliamentary Questions and Open Government. In Irène. Bouhadana et al. (Eds.), Parliaments in the Open Government Era (pp. 43-67). IMODEV.
Mayhew, D. R. (1974). Congress: The electoral connection. Yale university press.
Munyao, F. M., & Kasyula, P.(2021). The Effect of Legislators‟ Education Levels on Constituency Service: A Case Study of CDF Utilization (2008-2013). International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), 5(11), 518-528.
Otjes, S., Nagtzaam, M., & Van Well, R. (2022). Scrutiny and policymaking in local councils: how parties use council tools. Local Government Studies, 49(5), 1110-1134.
Rasch, Bjørn E. (2009). Opposition Parties, Electoral Incentives and the Control of. Government Ministers: Parliamentary Questioning in Norway. In Ganghof Steffen et al. (Eds.), Parlamente, Agendasetzung und Vetospieler(pp. 199-214). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Rozenberg, Olivier & Shane Martin. (2011). Questioning Parliamentary Questions. Journal of Legislative Studies, 17(3), 394–404.
Russo, Federico & Matti Wiberg. (2010). Parliamentary Questioning in 17 European Parliaments: Some Steps towards Comparison. Journal of Legislative Studies, 16(2), 215–232.
Russo, Federico. (2011). The Constituency as a Focus of Representation: Studying the. Italian Case Through the Analysis of Parliamentary Questions. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 17(3), 290-301.
Sánchez de Dios, M. & Wiberg, M. (2011). Questioning in European parliaments. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 17(3), 354-367.
Searing D. (1994). Westminster’s World: Understanding political roles. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Strøm K. (1997). Rules, reasons and routines: Legislative roles in parliamentary democracies. Journal of Legislative Studies, 3, 155-174.
Lancaster, T. D. (1986). Electoral Structures and Pork Barrel Politics. International Political Science Review, 7(1), 67–81.
Vliegenthart, R. & S. Walgrave. (2011). Content Matters: the Dynamics of Parliamentary. Questioning in Belgium and Denmark. Comparative Political Studies, 44(8), 1031-1059.
Wiberg, M & Koura, A. (1994). The Logic of Parliamentary Questioning. In: M. Wiberg, (Ed.), Parliamentary Control in the Nordic Countries(pp. 19–43). Helsinki: Finnish Political Science Association,.
Zittel, T., D. Nyhuis & M. Baumann. (2019). Geographic Representation in Party-Dominated Legislatures: A Quantitative Text Analysis of Parliamentary Questions in the German Bundestag. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 44(4), 681-711.
-
dc.identifier.urihttp://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/94307-
dc.description.abstract在追求連任的過程中,議員會透過反映選區議題與利益來獲得選民的支持,從而最大化其選票,以實現勝選的目的,此行為稱為選舉聯繫(Electoral Connection)(Bowler, 2010;Fernandes, 2018;盛杏湲,2005)。
而選舉聯繫又受議員所面臨的選舉壓力影響,在上次選舉中險勝的議員為爭取個人選票(personal vote),有更強烈的動機關心選區問題(André et al., 2015)。本研究以勝選幅度(Reelection Magnitude)反映議員的選舉壓力,其計算方式結合議員的得票數與該選區的族普基數(Droop Quota),當議員的勝選幅度愈高,說明其所面臨的選舉壓力愈低,反之勝選幅度愈低,則表示選舉壓力愈高(王業立,1996;吳宜侃,2005;羅清俊、謝瑩蒔,2008)。
為探討勝選幅度對於議員提出有關選區的問題數量與其質詢強度的影響,本研究以第十二屆臺北市議員的書面質詢為研究對象,利用敘述性統計及群聚穩健標準誤的負二項迴歸模型進行量化分析。發現在第十二屆臺北市議員所提的書面質詢中有778筆與議員所屬的選區事務有關,占25.98%,同時除了第五會期之外,各會期的選區問題比例隨著市議員改選日期的臨近而增加的趨勢。
此外亦觀察到當議員的勝選幅度愈低時,會更常於有關選區的書面質詢中向行政機關要求政策解釋或說明。且由於非線性關係,於特定勝選幅度數值區間中,當議員的勝選幅度愈低時,會更常於有關選區的書面質詢中要求相關決策資訊的提供、要求行政機關修改政策決策或改變行為以及進行制裁或譴責威脅。
zh_TW
dc.description.abstractDuring the process of seeking re-election, legislators garner voter support by addressing the interests pertinent to their constituencies. This strategy maximizes their votes and enhances their chances of winning. This behavior is referred to as the Electoral Connection (Bowler, 2010; Fernandes, 2018; Sheng, 2005).
Electoral Connection is also influenced by the electoral pressure faced by legislators. Those who narrowly won in the previous election are more motivated to address district issues to secure personal votes (André et al., 2015). This study uses Reelection Magnitude to measure a legislator's electoral pressure, calculated by combining the number of votes received by the legislator with the district's Droop Quota. A higher Reelection Magnitude indicates lower electoral pressure, while a lower Reelection Magnitude indicates higher electoral pressure (Wang, 1996; Wu, 2005; Lo & Hsieh, 2008).
To explore the effects of Reelection Magnitude on the quantity and strength of written question in relation to their constituencies, this study examines the written questions of the 12th Taipei City Councilors. Quantitative analysis is conducted using descriptive statistics and a cluster-robust standard errors for negative binomial regression model. The findings reveal that 778 out of the Written Questions submitted by the 12th Taipei City Council members are related to district affairs, accounting for 25.98%. Additionally, except for the fifth session, the proportion of district-related questions shows an increasing trend as the reelection date approached.
Additionally, it is observed that as legislators' Reelection Magnitudes decrease, they tend to make more requests for justification from administrative agencies in their written questions related to the constituencies. Due to the nonlinear relationship, within certain Reelection Magnitude ranges, lower Reelection Magnitudes lead to more requests for information, changes, and sanctions in their constituency-related written questions.
en
dc.description.provenanceSubmitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2024-08-15T16:43:56Z
No. of bitstreams: 0
en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2024-08-15T16:43:56Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0en
dc.description.tableofcontents論文口試委員會審定書 i
謝辭 ii
中文摘要 iii
英文摘要 iv
圖次 viii
表次 ix
第一章 前言 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的與問題 2
第二章 文獻回顧 5
第一節 議員的行為動機與選區關注 5
第二節 勝選幅度對於議員展現選區關注行為的影響 7
第三節 質詢作為表達選區的工具 10
第四節 勝選幅度對於書面質詢內容涉及選區利益的影響 15
第三章 個案說明:2014年至2018年臺北市地方與議會概況 18
第一節 臺北市土地與人口概述 18
第二節 2014年臺北市直轄市長選舉 19
第三節 第十二屆臺北市議會概況 20
第四節 臺北市議會的質詢規範 27
第四章 研究方法 30
第一節 研究流程與架構 30
第二節 資料來源 31
第三節 統計模型 32
第四節 變數說明與編碼規則 34
第五章 書面質詢中有關選區議題之程度分析 47
第一節 敘述性統計 47
第二節 迴歸統計 56
第六章 有關選區的書面質詢其質詢強度分析 61
第一節 敘述性統計 61
第二節 迴歸統計 74
第七章 結論 83
參考書目 86
附錄一 議員勝選幅度與選區有關的書面質詢問題數統計總表 94
附錄二 將勝選幅度以四分位數分組進行迴歸模型敏感度分析 97
附錄三 以縱橫資料型態(Panel Data)進行迴歸模型敏感度分析 101
-
dc.language.isozh_TW-
dc.subject市議員zh_TW
dc.subject質詢zh_TW
dc.subject書面質詢zh_TW
dc.subject勝選幅度zh_TW
dc.subject選舉壓力zh_TW
dc.subject選區zh_TW
dc.subjectconstituencyen
dc.subjectcouncilorsen
dc.subjectquestionen
dc.subjectwritten questionen
dc.subjectReelection Magnitudeen
dc.subjectelectoral pressureen
dc.title勝選幅度對於議員提出與選區相關書面質詢數量與質詢強度的影響:以第十二屆臺北市議會為例zh_TW
dc.titleEffects of Reelection Magnitude on the Quantity and Strength of Written Question by 12th Taipei City Councilors in Relation to Their Constituenciesen
dc.typeThesis-
dc.date.schoolyear112-2-
dc.description.degree碩士-
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee陳立剛;李仲彬zh_TW
dc.contributor.oralexamcommitteeLi-Khan Chen;Chung-Pin Leeen
dc.subject.keyword市議員,質詢,書面質詢,勝選幅度,選舉壓力,選區,zh_TW
dc.subject.keywordcouncilors,question,written question,Reelection Magnitude,electoral pressure,constituency,en
dc.relation.page106-
dc.identifier.doi10.6342/NTU202401422-
dc.rights.note同意授權(限校園內公開)-
dc.date.accepted2024-08-06-
dc.contributor.author-college社會科學院-
dc.contributor.author-dept公共事務研究所-
顯示於系所單位:公共事務研究所

文件中的檔案:
檔案 大小格式 
ntu-112-2.pdf
授權僅限NTU校內IP使用(校園外請利用VPN校外連線服務)
2.77 MBAdobe PDF
顯示文件簡單紀錄


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。

社群連結
聯絡資訊
10617臺北市大安區羅斯福路四段1號
No.1 Sec.4, Roosevelt Rd., Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 106
Tel: (02)33662353
Email: ntuetds@ntu.edu.tw
意見箱
相關連結
館藏目錄
國內圖書館整合查詢 MetaCat
臺大學術典藏 NTU Scholars
臺大圖書館數位典藏館
本站聲明
© NTU Library All Rights Reserved