「離島建設條例」及「花東地區發展條例」土地開發條文合法化過程之比較-新多元主義觀點

Abstract

「離島建設條例」與「花東地區發展條例」土地開發條文與現行土地管理機制差異甚大，又欲將海岸等環境敏感地區納入得開發範圍，也因此招致有關圖利財團、賤賣國土、破壞自然生態等質疑。這些質疑的聲音透過各種方式不斷地向社會大眾傳遞並向國會遊說或施壓，再加上關心此議題之立法委員的支持，使得最後僅有離島建設條例第7條於民國99年11月順利完成三讀修法，至於離島建設條例第8條及花東地區發展條例土地開發條文都在最後階段由提案人主動撤案或於立法院黨團協商時遭到撤除。 本研究以新多元主義觀點作為主要分析架構，並透過文獻分析法蒐集與研究主題有關之資料，再搭配深度訪談法訪問參與合法化過程之重要人士，並據以比較及分析離島建設條例及花東地區發展條例土地開發條文之合法化過程以及各參與者間之互動模式。 整體合法化過程可歸納出以下4項研究發現： （一） 行政部門角色方面：在合法化過程當中，行政部門其實是具有特定立場及偏好的，不論是偏向開發主義的思維，或是對於土地開發條文可能對整體土地管理法規範及自然環境造成的衝擊持保留態度等，都顯露出行政部門是有其既定想法。但在本研究案例中，行政部門並無太多可表現之處，或者說在臺灣特殊的政治環境之下，行政部門在本研究案例中所能運用的支持策略與手段是極其有限的。 （二） 不同利益團體的代表性方面：不同的參與群體其所擁有的權力是不對等的。立法委員因為具有體制內關鍵的影響力，得以在立法院中藉由議事程序的運作以取得推動法案通過的有利地位；而行政部門雖有其自主意願，惟在政治現實考量下，其所能運作之處極其有限，且相當大程度受到立法委員的壓力影響；至於民間團體，因為其靈活運用各種策略，且能夠順利尋求立法委員的支持與協助，因此反而較行政部門產生更大的影響力。 （三） 利益團體對公共政策結果的影響方面：支持土地開發條文的立法委員(包含其所可能代表的利益團體)雖然力促法案通過，但最後仍然在選情考量、社會壓力及其他立法委員的反對下宣告失敗；相對地，反對土地開發條文的民間團體不斷地運用各種策略來宣傳理念，並透過與友好立法委員的合作，再加上剛好發生一連串與土地徵收有關的爭議事件所形塑的社會氛圍，最後成功阻擋條文通過，證明利益團體有時確實能夠影響公共政策，但有時則未必。 （四） 國會的角色方面：在新多元主義架構下，所有的參與者，包括行政部門、利益團體、媒體、一般民眾等皆須在國會中進行討論與協商，使得國會成為政策制定過程中最重要的場域，而立法委員也自然成為最具權力的參與者。 離島及花東條例土地開發條文合法化結果能夠將大部分土地開發條文刪除，影響的因素包括當時的政治及社會背景、行政部門與不同立法委員間的態度、民間團體與立法委員的合作等，可說是一種不同條件交集而成的偶然結果。因此，雖然民間團體的努力奔走發揮了相當重要之影響力，但唯有建立起制度化的公民參與機制以及各方澈底落實執行才是真正能夠讓公共政策過程更趨成熟與透明的正本清源之道，而非任由黨團協商或是檯面下的利益交換等不透明方式來決定政策結果，否則將使整體社會付出更高的成本，亦傷害民主價值。

The land development clauses of 「Offshore Islands Development Act」and 「Hualien-Taitung Area Development Act」are quite different with existing land management mechanism,moreover,which allow coast and other environmentally sensitive areas could be developed. This arouse questions about give benefits to private corporation and destruction of natural ecosystems.These voices had been sent to the public and put pressure on legislators continuously.finally ,only part of land development clauses being passed,others were withdrawn at Party caucas negotiation stage . This thesis use Neo-Pluralism as the main analytical framework,reaearch metods are documentary analysis and In-depth Interview.Main research purposes are compare and analyze the legalization process of land development clauses of 「Offshore Islands Development Act」and 「Hualien-Taitung Area Development Act」as well as the mode of interaction between participants. The legalization process can be summarized in the following four findings： 1. The role of the administrative department：the administrative department with specific positions and preferences during the legalization process,but under such a specific political background in Taiwan,there are few supporting strategies could be used by the administrative department. 2. The representation of different interest groups：Different group has differentl right in legalization process,the legislators got the key power due to Institutional mechanisms;the administration department though has autonomous will,but under pressure put by legislators,it cannot be a main participant;As for non-governmental organizations,by means of its various strategies and gain legislators’ support successfully.Thus, non-governmental organizations is more influential than the administration department in the legalization process. 3. The influences of interest groups on public policy：Legislators to support the land development clauses although urged passage of the bill,but still failed by election considerations, social pressures, and other legislators’ opposition.Relatively, Against the land development clauses, non-governmental organizations continue to use a variety of strategies to promote the concept, and through cooperation with friendly legislators, coupled with the occurred just a series of controversial land expropriation related events shaping the social atmosphere, and finally successfully blocked clauses through. 4. The role of the legislative yuan：Under the structure of Neo-Pluralism,all participants need to negotiate in the legislative yuan,let it become the most important field of policy making process,and legialators become the most powerful participant. The influencingt sectors of legalization process including political and social background,the attitude of the administration departmentand the legislators,and above all,the cooporation between non-governmental organizations and the legislators,But all of these occurred occasionally. Although the efforts of non-governmental organizations played a very important influence, but only to establish institutionalized citizen participation mechanisms as well as the parties to thoroughly implement truly be able to let the public policy process becomes more mature and transparent, rather than exchange of interests under the table or the Party caucus negotiation to decide the policy results, otherwise the society will pay a higher cost, but also hurt the democratic values.