循證政策制定之運用：以南勢溪流域管理策略爲例

An Analysis of Evidence-based Policy-making: The Governance Strategy for Nan-shih Creek Basin

10.30409/JPA.200906_(31).0003

陳恒鈞(Hen-Chin Chen)；黃渾峰(Hun-Feng Huang)

循證規劃 ； 南勢溪流域 ； 開放－封閉途徑 ； 分析網絡程序法 ； 政策德菲法 ； evidence-based policy-making ； nan-shih creek basin ； open-up and close-down approach ； analytic network process ； policy delphi

公共行政學報

31期（2009 / 06 / 01）

101 - 148

繁體中文

南勢溪為大臺北地區之重要水源區域，近年來，因該流域蘊藏豐富之碳酸氫鈉溫泉，且佔有地利之便，促使該區域觀光產業快速發展。如何兼顧南勢溪流域之水資源管理與經濟發展，以及透過何種方式進行規劃，方能提出具有可行性方案，便是本文所欲探討的問題。 本文運用以證據為基礎的政策制定理論，採取開放－封閉型途徑，分析南勢溪流域欲達永續發展，應思考如何兼顧客觀事實與主觀判斷，俾利獲得政策利害關係人之支持。據此，本文首先採取開放型途徑，運用深度訪談法，彙整南勢溪流域現有之核心問題，繼而根據封閉型途徑，運用文獻分析法與分析網絡程序法，求得重要影響因子之處置優先順序以及最適方案。最後，再以開放型途徑，運用政策德菲法，針對實際參與規劃人員進行兩回合問卷調查，提出漸進可行的方案。 綜整研究調查結果，發現影響流域管理最重要的因子為「水土資源保育」，顯示無論是以「管制」或「獎勵」水土資源保育方式，其重要性高於促進當地開發。由於南勢溪流域治理問題牽涉眾多管理權責單位，無法由單一部門來解決，現階段南勢溪流域管理方式應以「維持現狀增加橫向聯繫機制」方案為主，長期則是朝「成立跨部門專責管理單位」進行規劃。

Nan-Shih Creek basin is the main part of Taipei water source domain. Recently, since it possesses rich hot-spring resources and with its proximity to Taipei Metropolitan area, local hot-spring tourism is flourishing. Because of its special geographical location and historical background, Nan-Shih Creek Basin management faces several challenges, from land conservation to nonunitary authority, from hot-spring sewage treatment to complex legal problems. Therefore, the main purpose of this paper is to analyze the key factors influencing Nan-Shih Creek Basin management strategies by applying the theory of evidence-based policy-making which stressing the importance of evidence on policy-making. Utilizing open-up and close-down approach to discuss how to maintain the basin's sustainable development, this paper suggests keeping balance between objective facts and subjective judgment is very important for future strategic planning to get the support from policy stakeholders. Based on that, this paper starts with an open-up approach, by taking indepth interview with stakeholders, to construct the key issues of Nan-Shih Creek Basin. Secondly, this paper applies literature review associated with the method of Analytic Network Process to find out the priority of key factors and the optimum alternatives. Finally, this paper applies the method of Policy Delphi to investigate each alternative's merits and demerits. After analysis, this paper finds that because of its complex issues which are extremely difficult to resolve by one department. Consequently, this paper recommends that increasing horizontal communication in existing mechanism is a prior option so far, and organizing cross-sectional government authority is a long-term plan for an effort toward better river basin management.

1. Anderson, J. E.(2000).Public policy-making: An introduction.New York:Houghton Mifflin.
2. Bochel, H. (Eds.),S. Duncan (Eds.)(2007).Making policy in theory and practice.UK:The Policy Press.
3. Bulmer, M.,E. Coates,L. Dominian,H. Bochel (Eds.),S. Duncan (Eds.)(2007).Making policy in theory and practice.UK:The Policy Press.
4. Cobb, R. W.,C. D. Elder(1982).Participation in American politics: The dynamics of agenda building.Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins University Press.
5. Cooper, P. J.,L. P. Brady,O. Hidalgo-Hardeman,A. Hyde,K. C. Naffetc(1998).Public administration for the twenty-first century.Orlando, FL.:Harcourt Brace & Company.
6. Davies, P.(1999).What is evidence based education?.British Journal of Educational Studies,47(2),108-121.
7. Dobuzinskis, L.(1992).Modernist and postmodernist metaphors of the policy process: Control and stability vs. chaos and reflexive understanding.Policy Science,25(4),355-380.
8. Dror, Y.,A. Faludi (Ed.)(1973).A reader in planning theory.New York:Pergamon Press.
9. Duncan, S.(2005).Towards evidence inspired policy.Social Sciences,61,10-1.
10. Dunn, W. N.(2005).Public policy analysis: An introduction.NJ.:Prentice Hall.
11. Guba, E. G.,Y. S. Lincoln(1985).Naturalistic inquiry.CA:Sage.
12. Henry, N.(1995).Public administration and public affairs.NJ.:Prentice-Hall Press.
13. Kingdon, J. W.(1995).Agendas, alternatives, and public policy.New York:Harper Collins.
14. Lasswell, H.(1958).Who gets what, when, and how.OH.:Meridian Books.
15. Mayer, R. R.(1985).Policy and program planning: A developmental perspective.NJ.:Prentice-Hall Press.
16. Merton, R. K. (Eds.),R. Nisbet (Eds.)(1976).Contemporary social problems.New York:Harcourt Brace Jovano-vich.
17. Mulgan, G.(2005).Government, knowledge and the business of policy making: The potential and limits of evidence-based policy.Evidence and Policy,1(2),215-226.
18. Parsons, W.(2002).From muddling through to muddling up: Evidence based policy making and the modernization of British government.Public Policy and Administration,17(3),43-60.
19. Performance and Innovation Unit(2000).Adding it up.London:Performance and Innovation Unit.
20. Pressman, J. L.,A. B. Wildavsky(1973).Implementation: How great exceptions in Washington are dashed in Oakland.CA:University of California.
21. Ray, P.(2006).Evidence-based policy: A realist perspective.London:Sage.
22. Rip, A.,J. P. Voß (Eds.),D. Bauknecht (Eds.),R. Kemp (Eds.)(2006).Reflexive governance for sustainable development.UK:Edward Elgar.
23. Saaty, R. W.(2003).Decision making in complex environments.Pittsburgh:University of Pittsburgh.
24. Saaty, T. L.(2001).Decision making with dependence and feedback: The analytic network process.New York:RWS.
25. Saaty, T. L.(1996).The analytic network process.New York:RWS.
26. Seldtani, K.,I. Takahashi(2001).A unified model and analysis for AHP and ANP.Journal of Operations Research Society of Japan,44(1),67-89.
27. Spector, M.,J. I. Kitsuse(1977).Constructing social problems.CA:Cummings.