查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 為公共選擇辯護:論公共選擇理論與「公共性」議題在行政學中的相容性=A Case for Public Choice Theory: the Compatibility of Public Choice Theory and "Publicness" in the Field of Public Administration |
---|---|
作 者 | 陳敦源; | 書刊名 | 行政暨政策學報 |
卷 期 | 40 2005.06[民94.06] |
頁 次 | 頁1-35 |
分類號 | 572.9 |
關鍵詞 | 公共性; 公共選擇理論; 公共行政; 方法論上的個體主義; 公民意識; Publicness; Public choice theory; Public administration; Methodological individualism; Citizenship; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 公共行政理論發展中,最常被提及的就是「公共性」(publicness )的議題,學者除了對公私部門的組織性差異充滿興趣之外,也從「新公共行政」(new public administration )與「黑堡宣言」(Blacksburg Manifesto )的角度,提出對於公共行政過於「經濟學化」而失去公共性的憂心,這些看法近十年又隨著新公共管理(new public management )的興起,而更加熱絡。在這新一波的對話當中,公共行政學者常將「公共選擇」理論(public choice theory )當成學界中「公共性流失」的罪魁之一,然而,本文認為,這些批判最大的問題,就是無法明辨公共選擇理論與新古典經濟學之間的重要差異所在;再者,這些批判當中反經濟學思維的論點,反而讓學界失去了利用公共選擇理論探索公共性議題的能力,值得深思。 本文以上述的困境為起點,從公共選擇理論的角度,提出下列三階段的論述:其一,從新公共管理的風潮當中,尋找批判公共選擇理論的觀點;其二,藉著回應前述的批判,討論「公共性」議題與公共選擇理論的相容性;其三,藉由學界中對「公民意識」的討論,從公共選擇理論角度提出學界討論「公共性」議題的幾個盲點,並從公共選擇理論的引介當中,強化行政學討論公共性議題的內涵。本文認為,一向以理論與實務並重自居的公共行政學界,公共選擇理論應是學界追求公共性不可或缺的取向之一,而不是殘害公共性的元兇。 |
英文摘要 | Scholars in public administration have long been concerned with the issue of “publicness”. After the “new public management” surged in the late 1990 and revolutionized the academic landscape, various comments have been launched to criticize this development from the traditions such as “new public administration” and “Blacksburg Manifesto”. Some scholars have pointed the finger on the economic flavor behind the new public management revolution, especially point out that the theory of public choice is the problem. In this article, author follows three steps to establish a counter-argument that the theory of public choice can contribute greatly on the issue of “publicness” in the field of public administration. First, by reviewing related literatures, author lists three most commonly raised arguments against public choice theory from scholars in public administration. They are (1)adopting the wrong behavioral postulate on individuals, (2)promoting social Darwinism to protect the Right wing ideology, and (3)raising cynicism on bureaucracy. Then, author establishes various counter-arguments to state that none of these criticisms can prevent public choice theory from contributing on the issue of “publicness” both methodologically and substantively in the field of public administration. Lastly, author uses a recent focus on discussing “citizenship” in the field to demonstrate that public choice theory can indeed contribute on this subject in specific and on the issue of “publicness” in general. In conclusion, the theory of public choice should be an intllectual “property” rather than “debt” for scholars in the field of public adminstration whose main goal is to promote “publicness” in the public sector as well as in the greater society. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。