從委託代理觀點探討地方創生制度之運作—青年培力工作站計畫之分析

Abstract

本研究以「地方創生青年培力工作站」計畫為研究核心，採用委託代理理論與制度邏輯作為研究框架，探討政府相關計畫執行團隊與地方團隊在政策執行中的互動關係與潛在問題。地方創生政策起源於日本，隨後成為臺灣應對人口減少、城鄉發展不均等挑戰的重要策略，於2018年種下第一顆地方創生種子，也促使行政院正式核定2019年為臺灣地方創生元年。然而，相較於日本強調地方創生之自立性與永續性，臺灣地方創生政策仍高度依賴中央補助，如本研究的核心青年培力工作站計畫。據此，本文欲了解政府相關計畫執行團隊與地方團隊共同投入該計畫時，能否保有相同的目標與初衷？雙方的互動關係在計畫資源有限下，會發生哪些問題？並且實務執行至今有哪些改善建議。故本研究從三項研究問題切入，將採用質性研究方法，包括：政策分析與訪談設計，從理論與實務中探究計畫執行中的目標利益衝突、資訊不對稱與契約等問題。 研究結果顯示，國發會與地方團隊在參與計畫前的制度邏輯會有所不同。國發會多以績效導向與量化治理為核心，對應官僚邏輯，而地方團隊則根植於社會關係、文化脈絡與在地實踐，展現出社會邏輯與地方創生商業邏輯交織的多元性。惟當需要提案計畫時，雙方的願景與價值觀會隨著參與的時間逐漸共融。直到開始執行計畫後，會因團隊之經驗與成熟度的不同浮現出目標衝突、資訊不對稱與契約僵化等委託代理問題，進而影響計畫推動的效率與彈性。本研究的最後也總整學界、政府單位與地方團隊之回饋，提出相應之政策建議，包含：強化中介機構輔導功能與監督機制、提升團隊能力與自立性、優化計畫評估機制與彈性空間等，為未來地方創生政策提供學術參考。

This study centers on the "Regional Revitalization Youth Empowerment Workstation" project, employing Principal-Agent Theory and Institutional Logics as its analytical framework. It aims to explore the interaction and potential issues between government implementation teams and local actors during policy execution. Originating in Japan, the concept of regional revitalization has since become a critical strategy in Taiwan to address challenges such as population decline and regional disparities. Taiwan sowed its first seed of regional revitalization in 2018, with the Executive Yuan officially designating 2019 as the inaugural year of regional revitalization in the country. However, compared to Japan’s emphasis on autonomy and sustainability, Taiwan’s approach to regional revitalization remains heavily reliant on central government subsidies—such as the Youth Empowerment Workstation project at the core of this study. This research seeks to understand whether government implementation teams and local teams can maintain aligned goals and shared intentions while jointly participating in the project. What kinds of problems arise under limited resources? What improvements can be made based on practical execution thus far? Accordingly, the study addresses three main research questions through qualitative research methods, including policy analysis and in-depth interviews, to examine conflicts of interest, information asymmetry, and contract-related issues in the implementation process from both theoretical and practical perspectives. The research findings indicate that the National Development Council (NDC) and local teams operate under different institutional logics prior to engaging in the project. The NDC is primarily driven by performance-based metrics and quantitative governance, reflecting bureaucratic and state logics. In contrast, local teams are rooted in social relations, cultural contexts, and local practices, demonstrating a hybrid of social and localized business logics. However, as both parties become more engaged over time—particularly during the project proposal phase—their visions and values begin to converge. Once implementation begins, principal-agent problems such as goal conflicts, information asymmetry, and rigid contracts often surface due to differences in team experience and maturity, ultimately affecting the project's efficiency and flexibility. The study concludes by synthesizing feedback from academia, government agencies, and local teams to propose several policy recommendations. These include strengthening the role of intermediary organizations in guidance and oversight, enhancing team capacity and autonomy, and optimizing project evaluation mechanisms and flexibility. These insights aim to contribute academically to the future development of regional revitalization policy.