誰是防洪計畫的利害關係者？一個嘗試性的界定架構

Flood-project Stakeholders: Tentative Framework for Stakeholder Identification

10.6128/CP.39.2.121

李家齊(Chia-Chi Lee)；陳亮全(Liang-Chun Chen)

利害關係者 ； 防洪計畫 ； 洪災管理 ； Stakeholder ； Flood project ； Flood management

都市與計劃

39卷2期（2012 / 06 / 01）

121 - 155

繁體中文

誰來參與？誰有權參與？一直是公共事務營造民眾參與時面臨的一大難題。在現代國家成員眾多的脈絡下，任何公共事務皆由公民行使其直接民權表達意見顯得窒礙難行，然代議制度代表性（representativeness）不足等問題長此以往屢屢為人所詬病。由此等問題應運而生的利害關係者（stakeholder）概念，提供了一個實際可行的觀點，主張由個別公共事務利害相關的民眾來參與。本文以防洪計畫為研究對象，以利害關係者相關論述為基點建構出「防洪計畫利害關係者界定架構」，該架構因應防洪計畫之特性，能以多元方法界定多元利害關係者，非但在一定程度上回答「究竟政府在執行防洪計畫前、規劃初期應該聽取誰的聲音？」此一重要問題，也降低於防洪計畫營造民眾參與時，某重要類別利害關係者被排除在外的機率，並且現實可行，而能為規劃者所使用。時值民意日趨高漲的此刻，期望各種多元價值能據此忠實地傳遞出來，並得到善意的關注，防洪計畫更為大眾感到滿意。

When getting people involved in public affairs, two important questions arise: Who will participate? And who has the right to participate? In the context of a large modern state, having all civilians exercise their civil rights directly is not feasible. Additionally, a lack of representativeness in representative government has been criticized repeatedly. To overcome such difficulties, the concept of stakeholders, defined as those who have a stake in certain public affairs, is applied. A flood project is the focus of this study. Based on stakeholder theory, a framework for stakeholder identification for a flood project is constructed to answer the question: ”Whose voice should be heard before the government implements a flood project?” This framework also reduces the probability that important stakeholders will be excluded from stakeholder groups. The proposed framework identifies multiple stakeholders via different methods and takes feasibility into consideration. We hope that through this framework, diverse opinions will be heard faithfully and considered, and that flood projects will satisfy an increased number of stakeholders.

1. 經濟部水利署(2008b)。「『易淹水地區水患治理計畫』嘉義縣朴子溪支流排水系統環境營造規劃」，台北:經濟部水利署。
2. 經濟部水利署(2008a)。「『易淹水地區水患治理計畫』臺南縣龜子港排水系統環境營造規劃」，台北:經濟部水利署。
3. 經濟部水利署(2009)。「『易淹水地區水患治理計畫』桃園縣管河川南崁溪水系治理規劃報告（總報告）」，台北:經濟部水利署。
4. 經濟部水利署(2009)。「『易淹水地區水患治理計畫』屏東縣管區域排水土庫地區排水系統規劃報告」，台北:經濟部水利署。
5. IUCN/WCPA(1998). Economic Values of Protected Areas: Guideline for Protected Area Managers, Cambridge: IUCN..
6. 經濟部水利署(2008c)。「『易淹水地區水患治理計畫』臺中縣旱溝排水系統環境營造規劃」，台北:經濟部水利署。
7. 經濟部水利署(2009)。「『易淹水地區水患治理計畫』嘉義縣管事業海堤東石海埔地海堤規劃報告」，台北:經濟部水利署。
8. 經濟部水利署(2008)。「『易淹水地區水患治理計畫』嘉義縣管事業海堤好美里海堤規劃報告」，台北:經濟部水利署。
9. 經濟部水利署(2007)。「『易淹水地區水患治理計畫』第1階段實施計畫執行情形及績效報告（備查本）」，台北:經濟部水利署。
10. Agle, B. R.,Mitchell, R. K.,Sonnenfeld, A. J.(1999).Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values.Academy of Management Journal,42(5),507-525.
11. Arnstein, S.(1969).A ladder of citizen participation.Journal of the American Institute of Planners,35(4),216-224.
12. Bankoff, G.(ed.),Frerks, G.(ed.),Hilhorst, D.(ed.)(2004).Mapping Vulnerability: Disasters, Development and People.London:Earthscan.
13. Berry, J. M.(1997).The Interest Group Society.New York:Longman.
14. Box, R. C.(1998).Citizen Governance: Leading American Communities into the 21st Century.London:Sage.
15. Calton, J. M.,Lad, L. J.(1995).Social contracting as a trust-building process of network governance.Business Ethics Quarterly,5(2),271-295.
16. Clarke, T.,Clegg, S.(1998).Changing Paradigms: The Transformation of Management Knowledge for the 21st Century.London:Harper Collins.
17. Clarkson, M. B. E.(1995).A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance.Academy of Management Review,20(1),92-117.
18. Commonwealth of Australia(2001).Bureau of Transport Economics ReportBureau of Transport Economics Report,未出版
19. Day, P.,Klein, R.(1989).Interpreting the unexpected: The case of AIDS policy making in Britain.Journal of Public Policy,9(3),337-353.
20. De Marchi, B.,Ravetz, J. R.(1999).Risk management and governance: A post-normal science approach.Futures,31,743-757.
21. Dunn, W. N.(2004).Public Policy Analysis: An Introduction.New Jersey:Prentice Hall.
22. Eesley, C.,Lenox, M. J.(2006).Firm responses to secondary stakeholder action.Strategic Management Journal,27(8),765-781.
23. Ekenberg, L.,Brouwers, L.,Danielson, M.,Hansson, K.,Johannson, J.,Riabacke, A.,Vári, A.(2003).IIASA Interim ReportIIASA Interim Report,未出版
24. Ermolieva, T.,Ermoliev, Y.,Fischer, G.,Galambos, I.(2003).The role of financial instruments in integrated catastrophic flood management.Multinational Finance Journal,7(3-4),207-230.
25. Ermolieva, T.,Ermoliev, Y.,Linnerooth-Bayer, J.,Vari, A.,Amendola, A.(2002).Design of flood-loss sharing programs in the upper Tisza region, hungary: A dynamic multi-agent adaptive monte carlo approach.IIASA-DPRI 2002 Proceedings
26. Freeman, R. E.(1984).Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach.Boston:Pitman.
27. Friedman, A. L.,Miles, S.(2006).Stakeholders: Theory and Practice.New York:Oxford University Press.
28. Friedman, A. L.,Miles, S.(2002).Developing stakeholder theory.Journal of Management Studies,39(1),1-21.
29. Frooman, J.(1999).Stakeholder influence strategies.Academy of Management Journal,24(2),191-205.
30. Golet, G. H.,Roberts, M. D.,Larsen, E. W.,Luster, R. A.,Unger, R.,Werner, G.,White, G.G.(2006).Assessing societal impacts when planning restoration of large alluvial rivers: A case study of the Sacramento River project, California.Environmental Management,37(6),862-879.
31. Grimble, R.,Chan, M. K.(1995).Stakeholder analysis for natural resource management in developing countries.Natural Resources Forum,19(2),113-124.
32. Hanley, N.,Colombo, S.,Kriström, B.,Watson, F.(2009).Accounting for negative, zero and positive willingness to pay for landscape change in a national park.Journal of Agricultural Economics,60(1),1-16.
33. Hemmati, M.(2002).Multi-Stakeholder Process for Governance and Sustainability: Beyond Deadlock and Conflict.London:Earthscan.
34. Junker, B.,Buchecker, M.,Müller-Böker, U.(2006).Objectives of public participation: Which actors should be involved in the decision making for river restorations?.Water Resources Research,43,W10438.
35. Knox, S.,Gruar, C.(2007).The application of stakeholder theory to relationship marketing strategy development in a non-profit organization.Journal of Business Ethics,75(2),115-135.
36. Kutrilla, J. V.(1967).Conservation reconsidered.American Economic Review,57(4),777-786.
37. Kutrilla, J. V.,Fisher, A. C.(1985).The Economics of Natural Environments: Studies in the Valuation of Commodity and Amenity Resources.Washington, DC:Resources for the Future.
38. Leach, R.,Smith, P.(2001).Local Governance in Britain.New York:Palgrace.
39. Lee, C. C.,Chen, L. C.(2011).Who are the resident stakeholders in a flood project? A spatial analysis of resident stakeholders.Natural Hazards,59(1),107-128.
40. Linerooth-Bayer, J.,Vári, A.,Brouwers, L.(2003).Flood Risk Management in the Upper Tisza Region: A Model-Based Stakeholder Approach.Laxenburg:IIASA RMS.
41. Lonsdale, K. G.,Downing, T. E.,Nicholls, R. J.,Parker, D.,Vafeidis, A. T.,Dawson, R.,Hall, J.(2008).Plausible responses to the threat of rapid sea-level rise in the Thames Estuary.Climatic Change,91(1-2),145-169.
42. McDaniels, T. L.,Gregory, R. S.,Fields, D.(1999).Democratizing risk management: Successful public involvement in local water management decisions.Risk Analysis,19(3),497-510.
43. Mitchell, R. K.,Agle, B. R.,Wood, D. J.(1997).Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts.Academy of Management Review,22(4),853-886.
44. Mitroff, I.(1983).Stakeholders of the Organizational Mind.San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
45. Nchito, W.(2007).Flood risk in unplanned settlements in Lusaka.Environment and Urbanization,19(2),539-551.
46. O''Doherty, R.(1996).Using contingent valuation to enhance public participation in local planning.Regional Studies,30(7),667-678.
47. Parent, M. M.,Deephouse, D. L.(2007).A case study of stakeholder identification and prioritization by managers.Journal of Business Ethics,75(1),1-23.
48. Pearce, D.,Atkinson, G.,Mourato, S.(2006).Cost-benefit Analysis and the Environment: Recent Developments.Paris:OECD.
49. Pelling, M.,Dill, K.(2010).Disater politics: Tipping points for change in the adaptation of sociopolitical regimes.Progress in Human Geography,34(1),21-37.
50. Post, J. E.,Preston, L. E.,Sachs, S.(2002).Redefining the Corporation: Stakeholder Management and Organizational Wealth.Stanford:Stanford University Press.
51. Reed, M. S.,Graves, A.,Dandy, N.,Posthumus, H.,Hubacek, K.,Morris, J.,Prell, C.,Quinn, C. H.,Stringer, L. C.(2009).Who's in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management.Journal of Environmental Management,90(5),1933-1949.
52. Rhenman, E.(1964).Foeretagsdemokrati och Foeretagsorganisation.Stockholm:Thule.
53. Shiferaw, B.(ed.),Freeman, H. A.(ed.),Swinton, S. M.(ed.)(2005).Natural Resource Management in Agriculture: Methods for Assessing Economic and Environmental Impacts.Cambridge:CABI.
54. Steins, N.,Edwards, V. M.(1998).Platforms for collective action in multiple-use CPRs.The Seventh Annual Conference of the International Association for the Study of Common Property,Vancouver:
55. Stoll-Kleemann, S.(ed.),Welp, M.(ed.)(2006).Stakeholder Dialogues in Natural Resources Management.New York:Springer-Verlag.
56. United Nations Environment Programme(1999).Conceptual Framework and Planning for Integrated Coastal Area and River Basin Management.Split:Priority Actions Programme.
57. Vari, A.,Linnerooth-Bayer, J.,Ferencz, Z.(2003).Stakeholder views on flood risk management in Hungary's Upper Tisza Basin.Risk Analysis,23(3),585-600.
58. Warner, J.,Oré, M. T.(2006).El Niño platforms: Participatory disaster response in Peru.Disasters,30(1),102-117.
59. Warner, J.,Waalewijn, P.,Hilhorst, D.(2002).Public participation in disaster-prone watersheds, Time for multi-stakeholder platforms?.Disaster Studies,6
60. Winn, M. I.(2001).Building stakeholder theory with a decision modeling methodology.Business and Society,40(2),133-166.
61. Witter, J. V.,van Stokkom, H. T. C.,Hendriksen, G.(2006).From river management to river basin management: A water manager's perspective.Hydrobiologia,565,317-325.
62. World Meteorological Organization(2006).Social aspects and stakeholder involvement in integrated flood management, associated programme on flood management.World Meteorological Organization=WMO.
63. 王皓平(2006)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立臺灣大學政治學系。
64. 丘昌泰(1994)。探索石化工業環境糾紛的迷思：政策利害關係者角度的觀察。法商學報，29，105-175。
65. 余致力(2002)。民意與公共政策：理論探討與實證研究。臺北:五南。
66. 李永展、何紀芳(1996)。臺北地方生活圈都市服務設施之鄰避效果。都市與計劃，23(1)，95-116。
67. 長坂俊成、池田三郎(2008)。災害リスクガバナン研究略の方法。第20回研究發表會『災害リスクのガバナンス』：研究論文
68. 郭昱瑩(2005)。菁英規劃vs.參與規劃。人事月刊，41(1)，6-15。
69. 陳萬紘(2007)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。育達商業技術學院企業管理研究所。
70. 經濟部水利署水利規劃試驗所(2006)。河川治理及環境營造規劃參考手冊。台北:經濟部水利署。
71. 經濟部水利署水利規劃試驗所(2006)。區域排水整治及環境營造規劃參考手冊。台北:經濟部水利署。
72. 翟慎宏(2006)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。育達商業技術學院企業管理研究所。
73. 鄭思蘋(2003)。博士論文(博士論文)。國立臺灣大學生物環境系統工程學系。
74. 蕭代基、鄭蕙燕、吳珮瑛、錢玉蘭、溫麗琪(2002)。環境保護之成本效益分析：理論、方法與應用。臺北:俊傑。
75. 蕭景楷(2003)。防洪措施之間接效益初步評估（2/2）。台中:中興大學應用經濟學系。
76. 羅以倫(2004)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立臺北大學資源管理研究所。

1. 林大鈞(2017)。十二年國教政策實施後之研究--以高雄市國民中學為例。義守大學管理碩博士班學位論文。2017。1-68。