請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/98071完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 施世駿 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Shih-Jiunn Shi | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 梁日彰 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | John Jih-Chang Liang | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2025-07-24T16:04:54Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2025-07-25 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2025-07-24 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2025 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2025-07-15 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | 尤智儀、李玉春（2016）。縣市生育津貼政策對夫妻生育意願之影響。人口學刊，（52），43-79。
王宏男、謝創智（2021）。臺灣工會發展之研究。科學與人文研究，8（2），1-20。 王甫昌（2009）。社會運動。載於王振寰、瞿海源（編），社會學與臺灣社會（422-452頁）。巨流。 王業立（1996）。我國政黨提名政策之研究。政治學報，（27），1-36。 立法院預算中心（2022年9月）。112年度中央政府總預算案整體評估報告。 任育騰（2004）。利益團體影響民營化政策制定之研究－以臺灣菸酒公司產業工會聯合會為例。國立臺灣師範大學政治學研究所碩士論文。 行政院（2023年8月）。我國少子女化對策計畫（107-113年）（核定版）。 行政院主計總處（2022）。111年人力運用調查報告：非典型工作者就業狀況分析。行政院主計總處。 行政院研究發展考核委員會（2011年12月）。「保母托育管理與費用補助計畫」效益評估。 行政院國家發展委員會（2013年7月）。人口政策白皮書－少子女化、高齡化及移民。 行政院國家發展委員會（2017年7月）。完善生養環境方案（核定本）。 行政院勞動部（2023年9月）。111年性別勞動統計。 行政院衛生福利部（2016）。長期照顧十年計畫2.0（106-115年）（核訂本）。 行政院衛生福利部（2016年12月）。長期照顧十年計畫2.0（106~115 年）（核定本）。 行政院衛生福利部（2021）。高齡社會白皮書。 何明修，2008，〈體制化及其不滿：二十年來的臺灣勞工運動〉，王宏仁、李廣均、龔宜君編，《跨戒：流動與堅持的臺灣社會》：281-298，台北：群學。 吳濟華、馮永猷（2008）。中位投票者模型與地方公共支出：臺灣之實證研究。公共行政學報，（29），29-60。 李大正、楊靜利、王德睦（2011）。人口老化與全民健保支出：死亡距離取向的分析。人口學刊，（43），1-35。 李衍儒、李天申、劉燕萍、王光旭（2020）。我國中央對地方政府績效考核的制度安排與弔詭：以縣市社會福利服務評鑑為例。臺灣社區工作與社區研究學刊，10（2），53-90。 周立婷（2013）。人口高齡化對每人醫療支出之影響：臺灣之實證研究（1999-2011）。國立成功大學政治經濟研究所碩士論文。 官有垣、杜承嶸（2009）。臺灣民間社會團體的組織特質、自主性、創導與影響力之研究。行政暨政策學報第四十九期，1-38。 林妏蓁、陳國樑、黃勢璋（2013）。生育津貼對我國生育率的影響：以1998-2010年為例。社會政策與社會工作學刊，17（2），259-297。 林萬億（1994）。福利國家－歷史比較的分析。巨流。 林萬億（2000）。社會抗爭、政治權力、社會福利政策的發展：一九八0年代以來的臺灣經驗。載於蕭新煌、林國明（編）。臺灣的社會福利運動。巨流。 林萬億（2006）。臺灣的社會福利：歷史經驗與制度分析。五南圖書出版股份有限公司。 施世駿、孫瑩芯（2023），〈東亞視野的臺灣福利國家：歷史發展與前瞻〉。《臺大社會工作學刊》特刊：頁43-82。 范雲（2010）。〈靜默中耕耘細節的婦運革命〉，載於吳介民、范雲、顧爾德（編）。《秩序繽紛的年代1990-2010》，117-136。台北：左岸。 茆昔文（2010）。臺灣工會參與政策與治理之研究。國立臺灣大學政治學研究所碩士論文。 張紹勳（2016）。Panel-data迴歸模型：Stata在廣義時間序列的應用。五南圖書。 張家卉（2017）。以居家托育服務中心視角評析「托育一條龍」平價托育政策。兒童照顧與教育，(7)，53-70。 郭寶錚、陳玉敏（2007）。生物統計入門，五南圖書。 陳正芬、呂寶靜、王彥雯（2011）。臺灣不同族群老人長期照護需要差異之趨勢分析。臺灣公共衛生雜誌，30(2)，165-179。 陳琇惠（2022）。轉化或重構：國民年金保險制度調整之研究。臺灣社會福利學刊，18（2），1-43。 陳震豪（2016）。社會福利及經濟發展支出對縣市間人口移動之影響分析。國立中央大學產業經濟研究所在職專班博士論文。 葉崇揚、古允文（2017）。從生產性福利體制到社會投資福利國家：臺灣與韓國的比較。社會政策與社會工作學刊，21（1），97-147。 葉崇揚（2018）。轉型中的東亞福利體制。香港城市大學出版社。 廖唯傑、莊仕憲（2020）。檢驗地方政府預算增減之樣態與成因：漸進預算理論或斷續均衡理論？公共行政學報，（59），1-29。 廖唯傑（2016）。影響臺灣地方政府債務的財政與政治因素之探討。國立臺灣大學公共事務研究所碩士論文。 臺北市政府社會局（2023）。臺北市總決算，臺北市政府社會局單位決算。 趙永茂（1998）。地方政治生態與地方行政的關係。政治科學論叢，（9），305-328。 劉一龍、王德睦（2005）。臺灣地區總生育率的分析：完成生育率與生育步調之變化。 蔡妮娜、陳彥仲、許永河（2014）。臺灣各縣市人口結構與社會福利支出集中度之分析。臺灣土地研究，17（2），1-27。 賴定佾、葉崇揚、古允文（2021）。社會投資福利國家的多樣性：社會支出結構的檢證。國家發展研究，21（1），43-91。 駱明慶（2007）。臺灣總生育率下降的表象與實際。研究臺灣（3），37-60。 蘇彥斌、吳親恩（2017）。臺灣地方層級社會抗議之解析（1992～2008）：一個政治機會結構的觀點。臺灣政治學刊，21（2），57-106。 Aidt, T., & Dallal, B. (2008). Female voting power: The contribution of women's suffrage to the growth of social spending in Western Europe (1869–1960). Public Choice, 134, 391–417. Bailey, M. A., & Rom, M. C. (2004). A wider race? Interstate competition across health and welfare programs. The Journal of Politics, 66(2), 326-347. Barrilleaux, C., Holbrook, T., & Langer, L. (2002). Electoral competition, legislative balance, and American state welfare policy. American Journal of Political Science, 46(2), 415-427. Beal Krause, A. L. (2021). The aged population and social spending in Latin America: Comparing the demographic functionalist theories and political pressure arguments. Politics & Policy, 49(5), 1061-1091. Besley, T., & Case, A. (2003). Political institutions and policy choices: Empirical evidence from the United States. Journal of Economic Literature, 41, 7–73. Bloch, C. (2020). Social spending in South Asia-an overview of government expenditure on health, education and social assistance. Bloom, D. E., Chatterji, S., Kowal, P., Lloyd-Sherlock, P., McKee, M., Rechel, B., ... & Smith, J. P. (2015). Macroeconomic implications of population ageing and selected policy responses. The Lancet, 385(9968), 649-657. Bolzendahl, C. (2009). Making the implicit explicit: Gender influences on social spending in twelve industrialized democracies, 1980–99. Social Politics, 16(1), 40-81. Bolzendahl, C., & Brooks, C. (2007). Women’s political representation and welfare state spending in 12 capitalist democracies. Social Forces, 85(4), 1509–1534. Borg, S. G., & Castles, F. G. (1981). The influence of the political right on public income maintenance expenditure and equality. Political Studies, 29(4), 604-621. Burillo, P., Salvati, L., Matthews, S. A., & Benassi, F. (2020). Local-scale fertility variations in a low-fertility country: evidence from Spain (2002–2017). Canadian Studies in Population, 47, 279-295. Chaffin, L. Y., & Corder, J. K. (2018). How do social security expenditures vary by state? The surprising impact of unemployment. Journal of Public Policy, 38(3), 305-328. Chang, Y. F., & Ku, Y. W. (2013). Challenges for the developmental welfare regime in Taiwan: From authoritarianism to democratic governance. In Managing Social Change and Social Policy in Greater China (pp. 70-95). Routledge. Chen, C. F., & Fu, T. H. (2020). Policies and transformation of long-term care system in Taiwan. Annals of geriatric medicine and research, 24(3), 187. Chen, F.-L., & Shi, S.-J. (2012). Social Exclusion Experiences of Atypical Workers A Case Study of Taipei. International Journal of Social Quality, 2(2). Chen, K. M., Shih, Y. C., Hung, H. F., Wang, C. Y., & Cheng, C. H. (2024). Social transfers and poverty alleviation in Taiwan from 2000 to 2020. Poverty & Public Policy, 16(4), 352-373. Chen, L. J. (2013). Do female politicians influence public spending? Evidence from Taiwan. International Journal of Applied Economics, 10(2), 32-51. Cheng, Y. H. A. (2020). Ultra-low fertility in East Asia. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 18, 83-120. Cheng, Y., Fang, Z., Zhang, X., Wen, Y., Lu, J., He, S., & Xu, B. (2023). Association between triglyceride glucose-body mass index and cardiovascular outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a retrospective study. Cardiovascular Diabetology, 22(1), 75. Chiang, M. H. (2018). Post-industrial development in East Asia: Taiwan and South Korea in comparison. Springer. Cigler, A. J., Loomis, B. A., & Nownes, A. J. (Eds.). (2015). Interest group politics. Cq Press. Clark, T. N., & Ferguson, L. C. (1983). City money. Political processes, fiscal strain, and Retrenchment. Columbia University Press. Cleland, J., Bernstein, S., Ezeh, A., Faundes, A., Glasier, A., & Innis, J. (2006). Family planning: The unfinished agenda. The Lancet, 368(9549), 1810-1827. Clots-Figueras, I. (2011). Women in politics: Evidence from the Indian States. Journal of Public Economics, 95(7-8), 664-690. Cloward, Richard A., and Frances Fox Piven. (1975). The Politics of Turmoil. New York: Vintage Books. Copper, J. F. (1993). The role of minor political parties in taiwan. World Affairs, 155(3), 95-108. Di Maio Jr, A. J. (1980). The Soviet Union and population: Theory, problems, and population policy. Comparative Political Studies, 13(1), 97-136. Dormann, C. F., Elith, J., Bacher, S., Buchmann, C., Carl, G., Carré, G., ... & Lautenbach, S. (2013). Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a simulation study evaluating their performance. Ecography, 36(1), 27-46. Edlund, L., & Pande, R. (2002). Why have women become left-wing? The political gender gap and the decline in marriage. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(3), 917-961. Edlund, L., Haider, L., & Pande, R. (2005). Unmarried parenthood and redistributive politics. Journal of the European Economic Association, 3(1), 95-119. Ennser-Jedenastik, L. (2017). How women's political representation affects spending on family benefits. Journal of Social Policy, 46(3), 563-581. Fell, D. (2022). Local Elections 2022: The Squeezed Space For Taiwan’s Alternative Parties. Taiwan Insight. Fleckenstein, T., & Lee, S. C. (2017). Democratization, post-industrialization, and East Asian welfare capitalism: the politics of welfare state reform in Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy, 33(1), 36-54. Garritzmann, J. L., Häusermann, S., & Palier, B. (2021). Social investment. The Oxford handbook of the welfare state, 188-206. González, L. (2017). Electoral competition and social spending in the Argentine provinces. Journal of Politics in Latin America, 9(1), 91-124. Ha, E. (2008). Globalization, veto players, and welfare spending. Comparative Political Studies, 41(6), 783-813. Haelg, F., Potrafke, N., & Sturm, J. E. (2022). The determinants of social expenditures in OECD countries. Public Choice, 193(3), 233-261. Hanna, P., Vanclay, F., Langdon, E. J., & Arts, J. (2016). Conceptualizing social protest and the significance of protest actions to large projects. The Extractive Industries and Society, 3(1), 217-239. Häusermann, S., & Palier, B. (2008). The politics of employment-friendly welfare reforms in post-industrial economies. Socio-Economic Review, 6(3), 559-586. Häusermann, S., Picot, G., & Geering, D. (2013). Review article: rethinking party politics and the welfare state. British Journal of Political Science, 43(1), 221-40. Hecock, R. D. (2006). Electoral competition, globalization, and subnational education spending in Mexico, 1999-2004. American Journal of Political Science, 50, 950–961. Hedman, L. (2018). Female political representation and social spending. Hemerijck, A. (2013). Changing Welfare States. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hemerijck, A. (Ed.). (2017). The uses of social investment. Oxford University Press. Herwartz, H., & Theilen, B. (2013). Health care and ideology: A reconsideration of political determinants of public healthcare funding in the OECD. Health Econ. Herwartz, H., & Theilen, B. (2014). Partisan influence on social spending under market integration, fiscal pressure and institutional change. European Journal of Political Economy, 34, 409-424. Hewitt, C. (1977). The effect of political democracy and social democracy on equality in industrial societies: A cross-national comparison. American Sociological Review, 42, 450-464. Hibbs, D. A. (1977). Political parties and macroeconomic policy. American Political Science Review, 71(4), 1467-1487. Holliday, I. (2000). Productivist welfare capitalism: Social policy in East Asia. Political Studies, 48(4), 706-723. Hong, I. (2014). Trends and Determinants of Social Expenditure in K orea, J apan and Taiwan. Social policy & administration, 48(6), 647-665. Hong, I., Yeh, C. Y., Lee, J., & Lue, J. D. (2022). An increasing but diverse support for social investment. The World Politics of Social Investment: Volume II: The Politics of Varying Social Investment Strategies, 2, 259. Hsiao, C. (2007). Panel data analysis—advantages and challenges. Test, 16(1), 1-22. Huang, C. C., & Ku, Y. W. (2011). Effectiveness of social welfare programmes in East Asia: A case study of Taiwan. Social Policy & Administration, 45(7), 733-751. Huang, Fang-Yi. & Lin, Jiun-Da. (2022, Nov). Women’s political empowerment and social protection responses to COVID-19. Asia Pacific Journal of Social Work and Development, 32(3), 213-227. (SSCI) Huber, E., & Stephens, J. D. (2000). Partisan Governance, Women’s Employment, and the Social Democratic Service State. American Sociological Review, 65(3), 323–342. Jang, D. H. (2008). Welfare Geography and the Changing World of Welfare Municipalities: Municipal social spending in Denmark and South Korea analyzed (Doctoral dissertation, Universität Bremen). Jaynes, A. (2002). Insurgency and policy outcomes: The impact of protests/riots on urban spending. Journal of Political & Military Sociology, 90-112. Jennings, E. T. (1980). Urban riots and welfare policy change: a test of the Piven-Cloward theory. Why Policies Succeed or Fail, 59-82. Jensen, P. H., & Lolle, H. (2013). The fragmented welfare state: Explaining local variations in services for older people. Journal of Social Policy, 42(2), 349-370. Pontusson, J., & Rueda, D. (2008). Inequality as a source of political polarization: A comparative analysis of twelve OECD countries. Democracy, inequality, and representation, 312-353. Jones, G. W. (2019). Ultra-low fertility in East Asia: Policy responses and challenges. Asian Population Studies, 15(2), 131-149. Kato, H. (2021). Macro-econometric analysis on determinants of fertility behavior. Springer Nature. Kelly, P., & Lobao, L. (2021). Whose need matters?: the local welfare state, poverty, and variation in US counties’ social service provisioning. Social Currents, 8(6), 566-590. Kim, W. S., & Shi, S. J. (2020). East Asian approaches of activation: the politics of labor market policies in South Korea and Taiwan. Policy and Society, 39(2), 226-246. Korpi, W. (1983). The Democratic Class Struggle. London: Routledge. Li, S. J. (2022). Working poor in Taiwan: Profile and policy response. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 15(1), 43-59. Lin, W. I. (1991). The structural determinants of welfare effort in post-war Taiwan. International Social Work, 34(2), 171-190. Lin, Y. H., & Liu, Y. Y. F. (2019). Turning the tide: Publicisation of early childhood education and care in Taiwan. In Policification of Early Childhood Education and Care (pp. 231-242). Routledge. Lin, Y. Y., & Huang, C. S. (2016). Aging in Taiwan: building a society for active aging and aging in place. The Gerontologist, 56(2), 176-183. Lu, W. Bing-Yan. (2015). "Seven: The power of influencing policies, or getting their share and more: interest groups in Taiwan". In Policy Analysis in Taiwan. Bristol, UK: Policy Press. Lynch, J. (2006). Age in the Welfare State: The Origins of Social Spending on Pensioners, Workers, and Children. Cambridge University Press. Magazzino, C. (2016). The Political Determinants of Social Expenditure in the European Countries. International Journal of Economic Perspectives, 10(2). Malthus, T. R. (1798). An Essay on the Principle of Population. Marlow, M. L., & Orzechowski, W. (1996). Public sector unions and public spending. Public Choice, 89(2), 1–16. Mayoral, F. M., & Nabernegg, M. (2014). Determinants of social spending in Latin America. A dynamic panel data error-correction model analysis. In XXI Encuentro Economía Pública (p. 92). Universidad de Gerona= Universitat de Girona. Moffett, D. (2021). Social or Special Interests: How Unions Influence Spending. Kentucky Journal of Undergraduate Scholarship, 5(1), 7. Mok, K. H., & Qian, J. (2019). A new welfare regime in the making? Paternalistic welfare pragmatism in China. Journal of European Social Policy, 29(1), 100-114. Motoki, A., Shinohara, R., & Yamagata, Z. (2016). International investigation into the relationship between social expenditure for family and total fertility rate. [Nihon Koshu Eisei Zasshi] Japanese Journal of Public Health, 63(7), 345–354. Newburn, T. (2021). The causes and consequences of urban riot and unrest. Annual Review of Criminology, 4, 53-73. Ogura, S., & Kadoda, T. (2010). Effects of public policies and labor market on the fertility of Japanese women: analyses of municipal data. Özdemir, E. (2012). Political determinants of sub-national social spending: a statistical analysis of metropolitan municipality budgets in Turkey (Doctoral dissertation). Pampel, F. C., & Williamson, J. B. (1988). Welfare spending in advanced industrial democracies, 1950–1980. American Journal of Sociology, 93(6), 1424–1456. Parkin, F. (1979). Marxism and class theory: A bourgeois critique. New York. Piven, Frances Fox, and Richard A. Cloward. (1971). Regulating the Poor. New York: Pantheon Porto, A., Porto, N., & Garbero, N. (2016). The impact of globalization on subnational expenditures: Efficiency and compensation effects. Journal of Finance and Economics, 4(2), 1–22. Potrafke, N. (2010). The growth of public health expenditure in OECD countries: Do government ideology and electoral motives matter? Journal of Health Economics, 29, 797–810. Prihatini, E. S. (2021, April). Women’s representation and government welfare spending in Indonesia 1970—2020. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 729, No. 1, p. 012139). IOP Publishing. Pritchard, D. (2019). Protest events, welfare generosity, and welfare state regimes: a comparative analysis of welfare states and social unrest. Contention, 7(2), 31-50. Ratigan, K. (2017). Disaggregating the Developing Welfare State: Provincial Social Policy Regimes in China. World Development, 98, 467–484. Russ-Sellers, R. (2012). State Implementation of the Children's Health Insurance Program: Analyses of Variation in Policy Adoption (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Carolina). Schlesinger, J. A. (1991). Political parties and the winning of office. University of Michigan Press. Sharp, E. B., & Maynard-Moody, S. (1991). Theories of the local welfare role. American Journal of Political Science, 934-950. Shim, J. (2022). Overpromising social welfare benefits? Electoral competition and welfare politics in Taiwan. Journal of East Asian Studies, 22(1), 99-123. Sirén, S. (2021). Is there anything Left? The politics of social spending in new democracies. Governance, 34(1), 67–86. Sullivan, J., & Sapir, E. (2012). Nasty or nice Explaining positive and negative campaign behavior in Taiwan. The China Journal, 67(1), 149-170. Svaleryd, H. (2009). Women's representation and public spending. European Journal of Political Economy, 25(2), 186-198. Tashevska, B., & Trenovski, B. (2019). Socio-economic determinants of social spending in the EU. CEA Journal of Economics. Trydegård, G. B., & Thorslund, M. (2001). Inequality in the welfare state? Local variation in care of the elderly–the case of Sweden. International Journal of Social Welfare, 10(3), 174-184. Tsai, H. F. (2018). Municipal financial strategy responses to fiscal austerity: The case of Taiwan. in Value for Money: Budget and financial management reform in the People's Republic of China, Taiwan and Australia. ANU Press. Tufte, E. R. (1978). Political control of the economy. Princeton University Press. Turner, V. (1998). From ritual to theatre: The human seriousness of play. Performing arts journal publ.. Wängnerud, L. (2000). Testing the politics of presence: Women’s representation in the Swedish Riksdag. Scandinavian political studies, 23(1), 67-91. Wong, J. (2019). Healthy democracies and welfare politics in Taiwan: The arguments, refinements and limitations. In Taiwan Studies Revisited (pp. 141-159). Routledge. Wong, J. (2022). From Developmentalism to Postindustrialism: The Evolution of the Welfare State in Taiwan. In Democratic Governance in Taiwan (pp. 78-93). Routledge. Yeh, C. Y., & Lue, J. D. (2018). In-work poverty in three East Asian welfare states. In Handbook on in-work poverty (pp. 449-472). Edward Elgar Publishing. Yeh, C. Y., Cheng, H., & Shi, S. J. (2020). Public–private pension mixes in East Asia: Institutional diversity and policy implications for old-age security. Ageing & Society, 40(3), 604-625. Yeh, M. J. (2020). Long-term care system in Taiwan: the 2017 major reform and its challenges. Ageing & Society, 40(6), 1334-1351. Yeh, M. J., & Liu, F. Y. (2023). “Others' children are expendable.” Comparing childcare sector with health and long‐term sectors in Taiwan. Zarate Tenorio, B. (2014). Social spending responses to organized labor and mass protests in Latin America, 1970-2007. Comparative Political Studies, 47(14), 1945-1972. Zeng, Y., & Hesketh, T. (2016). The effects of China's universal two-child policy. The Lancet, 388(10054), 1930-1938. Zrinščak, S., & Lawrence, S. (2014). Active ageing and demographic change: challenges for social work and social policy. European Journal of Social Work, 17(3), 313-321. | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/98071 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本研究探究臺灣地方政府社會支出之決定因子為何？過去研究多從臺灣民主化的視角切入此問題，強調選舉及政黨競爭影響社會支出。近期文獻則指出，後工業化進程導致人口結構及社會需求的改變，進而影響政府支出。然而，現有研究對於民主化與後工業化兩種理論視角的綜合實證十分有限。本研究聚焦於影響地方政府社會支出的決定因子，使用2002年至2022年臺灣縣市政府社會支出為依變項，透過縱橫資料迴歸模型，分析影響臺灣地方政府社會支出的主要因素。
在本研究的兩個統計模型中，「民主化模型」的結果顯示，社會抗爭、利益團體數量、工會參與率與地方政府社會支出呈現正相關，反映出民主化促進公民參與成為推動縣市福利政策的重要力量。相對而言，縣市首長的黨籍、選舉競爭激烈程度及選舉年，則與地方政府社會支出無顯著關係。「後工業化模型」的結果顯示，女性擔任縣市首長、65歲以上人口比例與社會支出呈現正相關，生育率、貧窮率與社會支出呈現負相關，女性勞動參與率、失業率對社會支出則無顯著相關性。該結果顯示女性政治參與、高齡少子女化是推動地方社會支出成長的重要因子，更反映出地方政府積極回應政治危機，而未積極回應職業婦女、失業及貧窮人口的需求。 本研究結果深化了對小型新興民主國家在地方社會支出政策運作模式的理解。相較於西方國家受主要由政黨與工會主導福利政策，以臺灣為例的小型新興民主國家亦受到公民參與影響，如社會抗爭及利益團體影響政府決策。在後工業化趨勢下，臺灣與西方國家的社會支出擴張現象皆受到人口高齡化及女性政治領袖的驅動。值得注意的是，女性勞動參與率、失業率、貧窮率與社會支出的結果，突顯出臺灣整體社會福利發展仍著重於保障性社會政策，而非朝向更廣泛的社會投資策略。本研究突顯小型民主國家的後工業化模式有別於其他國家，民主化與後工業化兩股力量在臺灣的共同作用，形塑出獨特的地方政府社會政策模式。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | Previous research on determinants of government social spending has primarily focused on democratization, emphasizing elections and party competition, while recent literature highlights post-industrialization’s impact on social spending. However, few studies integrate both perspectives to rigorously investigate underlying factors behind local social spending. This study examines the determinants of social expenditure in Taiwanese local government from 2002 to 2022. We collected social expenditure information and various democratization and post-industrialization characteristics at the county/city levels across two decades and analyze the data using panel data regression.
The Democratization factors show that social protests, interest groups and union density positively correlate with local government’s social expenditure, indicating that democratization enhances civic participation, driving increase welfare expenditure. However, mayoral political affiliation, electoral competition and electoral year show no significant effect on social spending. The Post-Industrialization factors indicate that the presence of female mayors and a higher proportion of residents aged 65+ are positively correlated with local social spending. Fertility rates and poverty rates are negatively correlated with social spending. Female labor force participation and unemployment rates do not significantly impact social expenditure. These findings suggest that female political leadership and aging society are key drivers of increased social expenditure at local level. Furthermore, these results also reflect that local governments prioritize responding to political crises while insufficiently addressing the demand of female employees, low-income households, and unemployed populations. This study offers insights into local social spending dynamics in a small emerging democracy. Unlike Western democracies, where political parties and unions shape welfare policies, smaller democracies rely more on civic engagement to influence government decisions. Under post-industrialization trends, both Taiwan and Western countries have increased social spending, primarily driven by aging society and female political leadership. Notably, the results regarding female labor participation rate, unemployment rate poverty and rate suggest that the country’s welfare development remains focused on protective social policies rather than broader social investment. These findings distinguish the post-industrialization model in small democracies from that of other countries and underscore the unique interactions between democratization and post-industrialization in shaping Taiwan’s social policy landscape. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2025-07-24T16:04:54Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2025-07-24T16:04:54Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員審定書 i
謝誌 ii 中文摘要 iii Abstract iv 目次 vi 圖次 x 表次 x 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機與問題 1 壹、 研究動機 1 貳、 研究問題 1 第二節 研究架構與流程 4 壹、 研究架構 4 貳、 研究流程 5 第二章 文獻探討 7 第一節 臺灣民主化與社會福利 7 第二節 民主化影響社會支出因子 10 壹、 社會抗爭 10 貳、 工會與利益團體 13 參、 政黨意識形態 16 肆、 選舉競爭 18 第三節 後工業化與社會福利 20 壹、後工業化經濟及社會結構 21 貳、臺灣後工業化的經濟及社會結構 22 參、臺灣後工業化的社會福利轉變 23 第四節 後工業化影響社會支出因子 26 壹、 女性政治參與 26 貳、 女性勞動參與率 27 參、 生育率 29 肆、 高齡化 30 伍、 失業與貧窮 32 第五節 研究貢獻 34 壹、 實證檢視民主化及後工業化對東亞福利國家影響 35 貳、 擴展決定因子 35 參、 擴展時間範疇 35 肆、 以小國案例擴展社會支出決定因子之理論討論 36 伍、 政策實務意義 36 第三章 研究設計 37 第一節 研究架構及假設 37 第二節 資料來源 38 第三節 變項測量 40 壹、 依變項 40 貳、 自變項 41 一、 民主化模型 41 二、 後工業化模型 42 參、 控制變項 44 肆、 已排除之自變項 46 第四節 分析策略 47 壹、 描述性統計分析 47 貳、 雙變項分析 47 參、 縱橫資料迴歸模型 48 第四章 實證結果 50 第一節 描述性統計 50 第二節 雙變項分析 54 第三節 迴歸模型結果 57 壹、共線性檢測 57 貳、 Hausman檢測 58 參、 民主化模型結果 58 肆、 後工業化模型結果 59 伍、 控制變項結果 59 陸、 敏感性測試 59 柒、 受限依變數模型（Tobit Model） 60 第五章 討論 64 第一節 民主化模型討論 64 第二節 後工業化模型討論 67 第三節 民主化模型結果與其他國家實證對話 71 第四節 後工業化模型結果與其他國家實證對話 74 第六章 結論 77 第一節 主要發現 77 第二節 理論意涵 81 壹、 綜合性分析框架與拓展討論範疇 81 貳、 檢驗民主化模型相關理論 81 參、 檢視後工業化相關理論 83 第三節 政策意涵與建議 85 第四節 研究限制 87 第五節 未來研究建議 88 參考文獻 89 附錄 104 | - |
| dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
| dc.subject | 地方政府 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 民主化 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 後工業化 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 社會投資 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 社會福利支出 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Social Welfare Spending | en |
| dc.subject | Local Government | en |
| dc.subject | Social Investment | en |
| dc.subject | Democratization | en |
| dc.subject | Post-Industrialization | en |
| dc.title | 臺灣地方政府社會支出差異之決定因素 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Determinants of Local Variations in Government Social Expenditure in Taiwan | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 113-2 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
| dc.contributor.coadvisor | 汪書華 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.coadvisor | Julia Shu-Huah Wang | en |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 黃建實;黃芳誼 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Chien-shih Huang;Fang-Yi Huang | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | 民主化,後工業化,社會福利支出,地方政府,社會投資, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Democratization,Post-Industrialization,Social Welfare Spending,Local Government,Social Investment, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 110 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202501104 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2025-07-17 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 社會科學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 國家發展研究所 | - |
| dc.date.embargo-lift | 2027-06-13 | - |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 國家發展研究所 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-113-2.pdf 此日期後於網路公開 2027-06-13 | 1.36 MB | Adobe PDF |
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。