非營利組織的議程設定與政策倡議的形成：質化研究的檢證

Formulation of Policy Advocacy and Agenda Setting in Nonprofit Organizations: Examinations of Qualitative

10.30409/JPA.200912_(33).0004

莊文忠(Wen-Jong Juang)；徐明莉(Ming-Li Hsu)；張鐙文(Teng-Wen Chang)

政策倡議 ； 議程設定 ； 問題建構 ； 非營利組織 ； 公共政策 ； policy advocacy ； agenda setting ； problem construction ； nonprofit organizations ； public policy

公共行政學報

33期（2009 / 12 / 01）

121 - 163

繁體中文

有關非營利組織政策倡議的研究大多是理論層次的討論居多，較少針對非營利組織本身的議程設定過程及其倡議策略進行實務層面的檢視。因之，本研究乃採取深度訪談的方法，訪問非營利組織的執行長或資深幹部，將分析焦點置於非營利組織的議題形成過程及其對外的倡議策略。透過本研究的分析結果發現，非營利組織的議題來源、議題形成、及倡議策略等相當地多元，不同的策略在各個政策領域中各有其效果，不過，不少受訪者認為在政策制定過程中，以民選政治人物和民意代表為遊說對象的倡議策略，是相當有效的作法。 從問題界定的觀點，政策議題的形成有二大觀點，「自然演化說」(evolution)與「社會建構說」(social construction)。自然演化論者認為，當社會進化到某一個階段，隨著環境條件的演變，會引發某些集體需求和公共問題，政策問題就會自然浮現，成為政府採取行動解決的標的；社會建構論者指出，政策問題不是自然發生的，而是人為建構的產物，不同的行動者依據其價值理念與利益需求而創造問題，遊說政府採取必要的行動。後者的主張在議程設定研究中較受到支持，因為多數的行動者相信他們在議程設定過程中可以採取行動，進而創造問題的「意象」(images)和倡議解決方案，以影響政府的決策。無論如何，由於非營利組織在近年來在政治過程已經成為重要的參與者，分析他們在公共政策上的作為是十分具有價值的。

Based on problem definition perspectives, there have two kinds of arguments about the framing of policy issues: evolution and social construction. The evolutionists argue that, social problems are the product of social development and environment change. Therefore, the problem will be dealt with by government while it was natural matured. On the other hand, social constructionists think social problems are rarely self-evidencely problems as such. Most policy actors have to define the reality of problems according their ideas and interests and convince the government to adopt action for it. The latter are more popular in agenda setting because of most actors believe that they can create image of problem and advocacy solutions in the process of agenda setting. However, due to nonprofit organizations becoming an important player and participant in the public policy and political processes, it is valuable to analyze what they do and how they do it. There has been much theoretical discussion about nonprofit organization advocacy. But only a few empirical studies explored the process of agenda setting and the different strategies of advocacy they taken in practice. In this article, we have tried to provide a more precise portrait of the formulation of issues within nonprofit organizations and advocacy activities in which they participate. We conducted in-depth interviews with chief of executive or senior directors in organizations to obtain more detailed information on their activities regarding the processes of agenda setting and the strategies of organization's policy advocacy. Analysis of the findings indicates that there have various types of agenda setting and a lot of strategies of policy advocacy in nonprofit organizations. Although the effectiveness of strategies used to influence government and public also depended on different field. But on formulating public policy, many respondents believe that it was seemed to be the most effective to exert pressure on elected political leaders or congressmen in most cases.

1. Anderson, J. E.(2000).Public policymaking.New York:Houghton-Mifflin.
2. Bowen, W. G.(1994).Inside the boardroom: Governance by directors and trustees.New York:John Wiley & Sons.
3. Bryce, H. J.(2005).Players in the public policy process: Nonprofits as social capital and agents.New York:Palgrave Macmillan Press.
4. Burd, G.,D. L. Protess(Eds.),M. McCombs(Eds.)(1991).Agenda setting: Readings on media, public opinion, and policymaking.New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
5. Child, C. D.,K. A. Grønbjerg(2007).Nonprofit advocacy organizations: Their characteristics and activities.Social Science Quarterly,88(1),259-281.
6. Dearing, J. W.(1989).Setting the polling agenda for the issue of ADS.Public Opinion Quarterly,53,309-329.
7. Gandy, O.,D. L. Protess(Eds.),M. McCombs(Eds.)(1991).Agenda setting: Readings on media, public opinion, and policymaking.New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
8. Handy, F.(2001).Advocacy by environmental nonprofit organizations: An optional strategy for addressing environmental problems?.International Journal of Social Economics,28(8),648-666.
9. Hilgartner, S.,C. L. Bosk(1988).The rise and fall of social problems: A public arenas model.The American Journal of Sociology,9(1),53-78.
10. Jones, B. D.,F. R. Baumgartner,J. L. True(1998).Policy punctuations: U.S. Budget Authority, 1947-1995.The Journal of Politics,60(1),1-33.
11. Kingdon, J. W.(1995).Agendas, alternatives, and public policies.New York:HarperCollins.
12. Kotler, P.(1982).Marketing for nonprofit organizations.Englewood Cliffs:Prentice-Hall.
13. Lang, G. E.,K. Lang,D. L. Protess(Eds.),M. McCombs(Eds.)(1991).Agenda setting: Readings on media, public opinion, and policymaking.New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14. McCombs, M. E.,D. L. Shaw(1972).The agenda-setting function of mass media.Public Opinion Quarterly,36,176-187.
15. Sabatier, P. A.,P. A. Sabatier(Eds.),H. Jenkins-Smith(Eds.)(1993).Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach.Boulder:Westview.
16. Soroka, S. N.(2002).Issue attributes and agenda-setting by media, the public, and policymakers in Canada.International Journal of Public Opinion Research,14(3),264-285.
17. Vaughan, S. K.,S. Arsneault(2008).Not-for-profit advocacy: Challenging policy images and pursuing policy Change.Review of Policy Research,25(5),411-428.
18. Wood, B. D.,A. Doan(2003).The politics of problem definition: Applying and testing threshold models.American Journal of Political Science,47(4),640-653.
19. 王順民(2006)。當代台灣地區非營利組織的社會行銷及其相關議題論述。社區發展季刊，115，53-64。
20. 司徒達賢(1999)。非營利組織的經營管理。台北市:天下遠見。
21. 江明修(2001)。第三部門經營策略與社會參與。台北市:智勝。
22. 江明修(1995)。非營利組織領導行爲之研究。問題與研究，34(10)，77-98。
23. 吳得源(2006)。全球治理在公共政策理論發展之擴充。行政暨政策學報，42，1-36。
24. 李宗勳(1999)。政策問題建構與議程設定－動態過程的觀點（上）。人力發展，67，22-32。
25. 李宗勳(1999)。政策問題建構與議程設定－動態過程的觀點（下）。人力發展，68，17-27。
26. 林水波、莊文忠(1998)。政策論述與議程設定。立法院院聞，26(4)，9-29。
27. 林吉郎、行政院青年輔導委員會第三處編(2002)。2002非營利組織培力指南。台北市:行政院青年輔導委員會。
28. 林淑馨(2008)。非營利組織管理。台北市:三民。
29. 翁興利(2004)。政策規劃與行銷。台北市:華泰。
30. 張重昭(1985)。探討社會行銷的意義、內涵及未來發展。社會科學論叢，33，296-297。
31. 莊文忠(2007)。倡議型非營利組織倡議的創新策略與途徑。第三部門學刊，7，115-138。
32. 莊文忠(2004)。台北市，政治大學公共行政學系。
33. 陳敦源、韓智先(2000)。是誰告訴人民他們要什麼？媒體、民意與公共議程設定。研考雙月刊，24(1)，19-31。
34. 黃東益、鍾道明(2005)。高鐵財務融資爭議與議程設定之研究。逢甲人文社會學報，11，281-309。
35. 羅金棟(2007)。國家治理中非政府組織的角色與政策倡議策略：以菸害防制法爲例。非政府組織學刊，2，69-90。

1. 畢兆偉、石振國(2012)。非營利組織社會行銷個案探討：以促進兒童用藥安全為例。中華行政學報，10，137-172。
2. 林宛萱,王禕梵,王宏文(2020)。影響臺灣電子提案通過成案門檻之因素。行政暨政策學報，71，1-42。
3. 趙永茂、李衍儒(2016)。公共政策棘手問題界定理論之研究：以我國觀光博弈產業政策與個案為例。行政暨政策學報，62，1-58。
4. 莊昆穎(2016)。利益團體與我國性產業政策－日日春關懷互助協會個案研究。中國行政評論，22(2)，101-130。