當公民參與遇上專案管理：以臺北市參與式預算的專案管理為例

Linking Project Management to Citizen Participation Practice: The Case Study of Participatory Budgeting in Taipei City

10.29865/PAP.202012_(71).0002

傅凱若(Kai-Jo Fu)；張婷瑄(Ting-Syuan Jhang)

參與式預算 ； 公部門專案管理 ； 專案生命週期 ； participatory budgeting ； public project management ； project life cycle

行政暨政策學報

71期（2020 / 12 / 01）

43 - 88

繁體中文

近年來參與式預算（Participatory Budgeting，簡稱PB）在臺灣引起了相當大的關注，已在許多都會區和地方社區實踐。然而，目前對於PB的研究大多關注參與的過程，缺乏對後端執行的結果進行探討，當行政機關無法有效實踐公民參與的提案反而容易對政府治理產生不利的效果。與其他城市相比，臺北市以全市為範圍進行PB的試驗，而為了有效管理提案的執行而採用私部門所開發的專案管理（Project Management，簡稱PM）方式。因此，本研究的主要目的是想瞭解臺北市如何面對不同政治力場的挑戰，並探討如何應用PM制度在PB的提案執行過程。本文根據專案管理的生命週期流程，透過次級資料以及深度訪談等研究方法進行分析，研究發現指出政治環境對於PB的執行有不同程度的影響，但並不會阻礙PB在臺北的發展與進程；而公部門和私部門實質上追求不同的目標，當政府將專案管理的概念整合到公部門中，在應用上會與私部門有所差異。囿限於官僚體系的層級節制和依法行政特性，PM承辦人的裁量權和資源使用的整合程度低，且受限於專案管理能力以及課責機制的設計，讓提案完成的自主性受到層層的管控。因此，本研究提出公部門的專案應被視為是一種社會的過程，強調公共價值的創造而非僅是套用一致管理流程的理性工具。透過本文的發現可以提供公部門在專案管理上理論的發展，以及在實務上推進PB制度的建議。

Participatory budgeting (PB) has recently gained considerable attention in Taiwan. This new initiative of democratic governance has been implemented in most municipalities and local communities across Taiwan. However, most of the current research on PB focuses on the process of participation and lacks relevant discussion about the results of PB's projects completion after public participation. As the administrative agency cannot effectively accomplish the projects of citizen participation, it can easily lead to adverse effects on governance. In comparison with other cases, Taipei City takes a different approach to practice PB on a city-wide scale and adopts the idea of project management (PM), which was primarily developed in the private sector, in order to effectively manage PB projects. Therefore, the main purpose of this research is to understand how Taipei City faces the challenges of different political forces and to explore how to apply PM in the PB's project execution process. Based upon the life cycle of PM, this study collects data from document analysis and in-depth interviews. The results found that the political stakeholders have varying degrees of influence on the implementation of PB's projects, but they don't hinder the development and progress of PB. In essence, the public sector and the private sector pursue different goals. When the government integrates the concept of PM into the public sector, the application will be different from the private sector. Limited to the hierarchical control of public institutions and the characteristics of administration by law, the discretion of the PM managers and the capacity to integrate resource use are low. Additionally, constrained by the competencies of project managers and controlled by the design of the accountability mechanisms, the project managers have limited autonomy to complete these PB's projects. Consequently, this study suggests that public projects should be perceived as a social process, emphasizing the creation of public value rather than the application of rational tools to manage the project processes. According to the findings, this study can provide theoretical development of project management in the public sector as well as suggestions on the practical progress of PB implementation.

1. 杜文苓,陳致中(2007)。民眾參與公共決策的反思：以竹科宜蘭基地設置為例。臺灣民主季刊，4(3)，33-62。
   連結：
2. 傅凱若(2020)。民主創新與公共價值創造的實踐─以台灣都會區參與式預算為例。臺灣民主季刊，16(4)，1-33。
   連結：
3. 黃東益(2008)。審議過後：從行政部門觀點探討公民會議的政策連結。東吳政治學報，26(4)，59-96。
   連結：
4. 蘇彩足(2017)。公部門推動參與式預算之經驗與省思。文官制度季刊，9(2)，1-22。
   連結：
5. Alkadry, M.(2003).Deliberative Discourse between Citizens and Administrators: If Citizens Talk, will Administrators Listen?.Administration and Society,35(2),184-209.
6. Allison, G. T.(1971).Essence of Decision Explaining the Cuban Missile.Boston:Little, Brown.
7. Baiocchi, G.,Ganuza, E.(2014).Participatory Budgeting as if Emancipation mattered.Politics and Society,42(1),29-50.
8. Baiocchi, G.,Heller, P.,Silva, M. K.(2008).Making Space for Civil Society: Institutional Reforms and Local Democracy in Brazil.Social Forces,86(3),911-936.
9. Bjorvatn, T.,Wald, A.(2018).Project Complexity and Team-level Absorptive Capacity as Drivers of Project Management Performance.International Journal of Project Management,36(6),876-888.
10. Blixt, C.,Kirytopoulos, K.(2017).Challenges and Competencies for Project Management in the Australian Public Service.International Journal of Public Sector Management,30(3),286-300.
11. Boviard, T.,Loffler, E.(2009).Public Management and Governance.London:Routledge.
12. Boyne, G. A.(2002).Public and Private Management: What’s the Difference?.Journal of Management Studies,39(1),97-122.
13. Brill, J. M.,Bishop, M. J,Walker, A. E.(2006).The Competencies and Characteristics Required of an Effective Project Manager: A Web-based Delphi Study.Educational Technology Research and Development,54(2),115-140.
14. Brower, R. S.,Abolafia, M. Y.(1997).Bureaucratic Politics: The View from Below.Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,7(2),305-331.
15. Cabannes, Y.(2004).Participatory Budgeting: A Significant Contribution to Participatory Democracy.Environment and Urbanization,16(1),27-46.
16. Cleary, R. E.(ed.),Henry, N.(ed.)(1989).Managing Public Programs: Balancing Politics, Administration, and Public Needs.San Francisco:Jossey-Bass Publishers.
17. de Oliveira, O. P.(2017).International Policy Diffusion and Participatory Budgeting: Ambassadors of Participation, International Institutions and Transnational Networks.Cham:Palgrave Macmillan Press.
18. Frant, H.(1996).High-powered and Low-powered Incentives in the Public Sector.Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,6(3),365-381.
19. Fung, Archon,Wright, Eric O.(2003).Deepening Democracy: Institutional Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance.London:Verso.
20. Ganuza, E.,Baiocchi, G.(2012).The Power of Ambiguity: How Participatory Budgeting Travels the Globe.Journal of Public Deliberation,8(2),1-12.
21. Goldfrank, B.(2007).Lessons from Latin American Experience in Participatory Budgeting.Participatory Budgeting,143,91-126.
22. Horn, M. J.(1997).The Political Economy of Public Administration: Institutional Choice in the Public Sector.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
23. Kassel, D. S.(2010).Managing Public Sector Projects: A Strategic Framework for Success in an Era of Downsized Government.Boca Raton, FL:CRC Press.
24. Kerzner, H.(2003).Project Management: A System Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling.New Jersey:John Wiley & Sons.
25. King, C. S.,Feltey, K. M.,Susel, B. O.(1998).The Question of Participation: Toward Authentic Public Participation in Public Administration.Public Administration Review,58(4),317-326.
26. King, C. S.,Stivers, C.(1998).Citizens and Administrators: Roles and Relationships.Government is Us: Public Administration in an Anti-government Era,CA:
27. PMI(2017).A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide).Newtown Square, PA.:Project Management Institute, Inc.
28. Shah, A.(ed.)(2007).Public Sector Governance and Accountability Series: Participatory Budgeting.Washington, DC:World Bank.
29. Sintomer, Yves(2017).Experience in Implementing Participatory Budgeting: Comparison with the Existing Budgeting System.International Symposium on Participatory Budgeting,Taipei:
30. Sintomer, Yves,Herzberg, Carsten,Röcke, Anja,Allegretti, Giovanni(2012).Transnational Models of Citizen Participation: The Case of Participatory Budgeting.Journal of Public Deliberation,8(2),1-32.
31. Sjoberg, F. M.,Mellon, J.,Peixoto, T.(2017).The Effect of Bureaucratic Responsiveness on Citizen Participation.Public Administration Review,77(3),340-351.
32. Smith, G.(2009).Democratic Innovations: Designing Institutions for Citizen Participation.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
33. Tinnirello, P. C.(2000).Best Practices Series: Project Management.USA:Auer bach.
34. Wampler, B.(2012).Participatory Budgeting: Core Principles and Key Impacts.Journal of Public Deliberation,8(12),1-13.
35. Wan, Poe Yu-ze(2018).Outsourcing Participatory Democracy: Critical Reflections on the Participatory Budgeting Experiences in Taiwan.Journal of Public Deliberation,14(1),1-20.
36. Waterman, R.,Rouse, A.,Wright, R.,Meier, K.(2004).Bureaucrats, Politics and the Environment.Pittsburgh, PA:University of Pittsburgh Press.
37. Willson-Murray, R.(1997).Managing Projects: A New Approach.Brisbane:John Wiley & Sons.
38. Wirick, D. W.(2009).Public-sector Project Management: Meeting the Challenges and Achieving Results.Hoboken, NJ.:John Wiley & Sons, Inc..
39. Yang, K.,Pandey, S.(2011).Further Dissecting the Black Box of Citizen Participation: When does Citizen Involvement Lead to Good Outcomes?.Public Administration Review,71(6),880-892.
40. Young, T. L.(1996).The Handbook of Project Management: A Practical Guide to Effective Policies and Procedures.London:Kogan Page.
41. 朱柔若（譯）,Neuman, W. Lawrence(2000).社會研究方法－質化與量化取向.臺北:揚智.
42. 朱鎮明(2011)。政策協調機制及其評估制度。研考雙月刊，35(3)，23-39。
43. 徐淑敏,高光義,蔡馨芳,李俊達(2018).臺北市政府研究發展考核委員會委託市政專題研究報告第 407 輯.台北:台北市政府研考會.
44. 張婷瑄(2018)。國立政治大學公共行政學系研究所。
45. 許光華(2006).專案管理：知識體系觀點.台北市:華泰.
46. 許秀影(2015)。政府專案管理新思維。國土及公共治理季刊，3(3)，20-32。
47. 陳向明(2002).社會科學質的研究.台北:五南.
48. 陳志瑋（譯）,Starling, Grover(2015).行政學：公部門之管理.台北:五南.
49. 陳智勤,崔芳瑜,葉懿倫(2017).台灣參與式預算關鍵報告.台北市:青平台基金會.
50. 萬毓澤，2016a，〈台灣當前的參與式預算概況：反省與前瞻〉，網址：https://twstreetcorner.org/2016/03/01/wanyuze-2/，檢索日期：2018 年 10 月 28 日。
51. 萬毓澤，2016b，〈「參與式預算」的興衰浮沈：巴西愉港的故事〉，網址：https://twstreetcorner.org/2013/06/17/wanyuze/，檢索日期：2020 年 6 月 1 日。
52. 廖宇雯,傅凱若(2019)。從市政型參與式預算探討行政官僚對公民參與的態度。2019 年台灣公共行政與公共事務系所聯合會年會暨國際學術研討會，台中:
53. 臺北市政府民政局(2017).台北市政府 105 年度參與式預算成果報告專書：重新參與你的生活.台北:台北市政府民政局.
54. 蘇彩足,孫煒,蔡馨芳(2015)。國家發展委員會委託研究報告國家發展委員會委託研究報告,未出版

1. 陳揚中,李慈瑄,方凱弘(2021)。有參與就有審議嗎？臺北市參與式預算審議討論過程之評估。公共行政學報，61，41-78。
2. 黃東益,林煥笙(2022)。公民參與及公共價值創造：以臺北市公民參與委員會爲例。政治科學論叢，93，45-95。
3. 林家伃,林凌仲,王妤萍(2022)。無人商店服務品質發展之改善策略模式。管理資訊計算，11(1)，312-321。
4. (2023)。共創治理的實踐探索－以雲林縣兩個村落的參與式預算為例。臺灣民主季刊，20(4)，117-167。
5. (2024)。那些「不成功的參與式預算提案」告訴我們的事。公共行政學報，67，43-75。