English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 11 |  Items with full text/Total items : 88531/118073 (75%)
Visitors : 23458847      Online Users : 186
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
    政大機構典藏 > 學術期刊 > 中國行政 > 期刊論文 >  Item 140.119/90363
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/90363


    Title: 從政策論證的技術理性到政策對話的溝通理性──民宿管理政策個案分析
    Other Titles: From Policy Argument to Policy Discourse: A Case Study of Taiwan’s Bed and Breakfast Policy
    Authors: 魯炳炎;林玥秀;吳碩文
    Lu, Bing-Yan;Lin, Yuen-Hsiu;Wu, Shuo-Wen
    Keywords: 可信度;民宿管理辦法;政策對話;政策論證;政策選擇
    qualifier;bed and breakfast management regulation;policy discourse;policy argument;policy adoption
    Date: 2010-08
    Issue Date: 2016-05-03 16:31:38 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 本文基於公共政策學者W. Dunn所提出之政策論證理論概念,探討以下的問題。首先,比較2004年和1994年不同版本理論概念的演進和差異。其次,針對我國《民宿管理辦法》規範下的政策系絡環境,有關「家庭副業」與「五間客房」的政策爭議進行分析,驗證理論概念差異對於案例論證分析的影響。研究結果發現,經過反證後,可信度的被強化或是被削弱,仍然難以擺脫正向論證過程、以實現己方政策主張為目的之質疑;政策問題的爭議主要來自於政策價值的堅持和順應民意與從善如流的考量,而只有從政策論證正反並陳的技術理性到政策對話互動的溝通理性,所形成的政策建議才能夠化解衝突意見,提出更多元、更有可信度的政策方案,裨益決策者的政策選擇。
    Policy argumentation is central to policy analysis and policymaking process. Based on William Dunn’s theoretical foundations, this paper explores three following research questions. To compare the theoretical concept differences of Dunn (1994,2004) in modes and elements of policy arguments is the first research question,whereas the authors testify substantial influences of different concepts upon rebuttal, backing, qualifier, and claims in the bed and breakfast policy contexts of practice, such as regulations of Family Side Job and Five-Room Maximum Limit. In the end, after rebuttals being strengthened or weakened, policy recommendations of consensus mode and adversarial mode may need continuing mutual learning through policy discourse to resolve conflicts. Since persuasion involves the marshaling of facts, data, and information, and the skillful construction of arguments, it is significant to convince policy stakeholders and provide more diverse and valuable policy alternatives based on policy values and the use of reason and logic.
    Relation: 中國行政, 82,1-22
    Chinese journal of administration
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[中國行政] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    82( p1-22 ).pdf528KbAdobe PDF1222View/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