English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 91913/122132 (75%)
Visitors : 25811053      Online Users : 207
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/71933


    Title: 風險溝通與民主參與:以竹科宜蘭基地之設置為例
    Authors: 杜文苓;施麗雯;黃廷宜
    Tu, Wen-Ling;Li, Han-Lin
    Contributors: 公行系
    Keywords: 公民參與;審議民主;風險;風險溝通;竹科宜蘭基地
    public participation;deliberative democracy;risk;risk communication;Hsinchu Science-based Industrial Park in I-lan
    Date: 2007
    Issue Date: 2014-12-09 16:24:30 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 當今高科技發展牽涉複雜的專業知識,公部門在執行高科技發展政策常常需要與地方民眾進行風險溝通。正因為牽涉的知識層面相當複雜,不同行動者對於高科技的風險認知也有相當差異,爭議因而產生。本文即在這樣的脈絡下,分析竹科宜蘭園區設置案例。首先透過中央與地方行政部門、地方居民與在地團體的深度訪談、地方的環評說明會與竹科宜蘭基地公民會議的參與觀察,分析不同行動者的風險認知及其所反映之價值,以了解不同行動者風險認知的差異;其次分析比較自救會的社會抗爭、環評說明會與公民會議三個場域在風險溝通上的差異,呈顯出制度內的公民參與機制尚未能妥善處理風險認知歧異所產生之社會抗爭,以及政府處理環境科技風險議題的盲點。雖然民眾參與管道增多,但並無促進實質溝通。最後,本文指出目前政策機制缺乏風險處理的敏感度,而審議式民主著重提供充分資訊以及理性審議,促成不同行動者間風險認知的對話,增加公共政策民主參與的實質內涵,指出了制度改善的一條途徑。
    Public participation and risk communication have become important components in environmental decision-making processes. However, public opposition and mistrust during risk communication often cripple policy-making processes. This case study examines risk communications on high-tech environmental controversies in three public forums (an Environmental Impact Assessment public hearing, a social protest, and a citizens' conference). This paper argues that policy-makers' technocratic tendency prevents them from communicating effectively with the public about environmental risk. Although avenues of public participation have increased, risk communication has not really improved, and the current policy-making mechanism addresses the issue of risk management insufficiently and lacks a design for better communication. This paper concludes that deliberative democracy may provide a better way to facilitate public communication of risk and thus improve the quality of public discussions and policy decision-making processes.
    Relation: 科技醫療與社會, 5, 71-107.
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[公共行政學系] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    71110.pdf3828KbAdobe PDF874View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback