Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

Title: 透過委託 - 代理關係的社會資本發展及交換
Researching Research in Action: Social Capital Development and Exchange Through Principal-Agent Relationships
Authors: 湯姆
Robertson, Thomas
Contributors: 魏玫娟
Wei, Mei-Chuan
Robertson, Thomas
Keywords: 代理理論
Agency theory
Action research
Social capital
Date: 2018
Issue Date: 2018-10-01 12:20:03 (UTC+8)
Abstract: 世界各地的原住民因殖民歷史而面臨經濟、社會和文化的種種困境。現代社會與團結經濟理論帶來了發展倡議,在現代市場系統中透過文化知識、價值觀和傳統的運用,為邊緣化的民族提供更公平的條件。行動研究計畫的創建亦使當地民族得以融入並參與自身的發展。將當地民族與外界資源(如科技、科學和政治等專門知識)連結,預期會在經濟、社會和政治等層面帶來長期效益。
Indigenous peoples around the world are faced with many economic, social, and cultural difficulties as a result of colonial histories. Modern social and solidarity economic theory has led to developmental initiatives that seek to create more equitable conditions for marginalized peoples by leveraging cultural knowledge, values, and traditions in a modern market system, and action research programs have been created to allow inclusion and participation of local peoples in their own development. By linking local peoples to outside resources, such as technological, scientific, and political expertise, long term economic, social, and political benefits are expected.
One such program developed by scholars at National Chengchi University in Taiwan, was the Lokah Initiative; an SSE based action research project that focused on increasing community capacity of the indigenous Atayal people of Wulai. By mobilizing resources, academics behind the Lokah Initiative were able to activate the local community and reach some developmental successes. The process, however, required no small effort to build relationships with an initially skeptical community that had experienced many stalled projects in the past.
Principal-agent theory may provide some insight into the difficulty in aligning interests between outside experts who create programs and community members who participate in them. However, agency relationships do not occur in a social vacuum. In particular, literature on social capital implicates trust, reciprocity, and a sense of fairness as relational factors that indicate bridging links between principals and agents that can be used to build relationships and reduce agency costs.
This thesis seeks to examine the Lokah Initiative’s agency relationships through the lens of social capital. By doing this it is hoped to provide generalizable insights into practices that can help increase the likelihood of success for future projects under the Lokah umbrella and beyond.
Reference: Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S.-W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. The Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17–40.

Aldrich, D. P., & Meyer, M. A. (2014). Social capital and community resilience. American Behavioral Scientist, 59(2), 1–16.

Ansari, S., Munir, K., & Gregg, T. (2012). Impact at the “Bottom of the Pyramid”: The role of social capital in capability development and community empowerment. Journal of Management Studies, 49(4), 813–842.

Belair C., Ichikawa K., Wong B.Y.L., M. K. . (2010). Sustainable use of biological diversity in socio-ecological production landscapes: Background to the ’Satoyama Initiative for the benefit of biodiversity and human well-being. CBD Technical Series No. 52. Series no. 52

Bennett, N., Lemelin, R. H., Koster, R., & Budke, I. (2012). A capital assets framework for appraising and building capacity for tourism development in aboriginal protected area gateway communities. Tourism Management, 33(4), 752–766.

Blackstock, K. L., Kelly, G. J., & Horsey, B. L. (2007). Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability. Ecological Economics, 60(4), 726–742.

Blackstock, K. L., Waylen, K. A., Dunglinson, J., & Marshall, K. M. (2012). Linking process to outcomes - Internal and external criteria for a stakeholder involvement in river basin management planning. Ecological Economics, 77, 113–122.

Bosse, D. A., Phillips, R. A., & Phillips, R. A. (2016). Agency theory and bounded self-interest. Academy of Management Review, 41(2), 276–297.

Braun, D., & Guston, D. H. (2003). Principal–agent theory and research policy: an introduction. Science and Public Policy, 30(5), 302–308.

Brosnan, S. F. (2006). Nonhuman species’ reactions to inequity and their implications for fairness. Social Justice Research, 19(2), 153–185.

Cargo, M., & Mercer, S. L. (2008). The value and challenges of participatory research: Strengthening its practice. Annual Review of Public Health, 29(1), 325–350.

Chao, C.-L. C.-L., & Hsu, P.-H. (2011). Learning about the development of ecotourism in the context of the Smangus tribe’s traditional ecological knowledge. GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites, 7(1), 7–21.

Colton, J. W., & Whitney-Squire, K. (2010). Exploring the relationship between aboriginal tourism and community development. Leisure/ Loisir, 34(3), 261–278.

Dash, A. (2016). An epistemological reflection on social and solidarity economy. Forum for Social Economics, 45(1), 61–87.

Döhler, M. (2018). Discovering the dark side of power: The principal’s moral hazard in political-bureaucratic relations. International Journal of Public Administration, 41(3), 190–202.

Dyer, J., Stringer, L.C., Dougill, A. . (2014). Assessing participatory practices in community-based natural resource management: experiences in community engagement from southern Africa. Journal of Environmental Management, 137, 137–145.

Gordon, M. E. G., Kayseas, B., & Moroz, P. W. (2017). New venture creation and opportunity structure constraints: Indigenous-controlled development through joint ventures in the Canadian potash industry. Small Enterprise Research, 24(1), 1–22.

Graci, S. R., & Ph, D. (2012). Putting community based tourism into practice: The case of the Cree village ecolodge in Moose Factory, Ontario. Téoros: Revue de Recherche En Tourisme, TÉOROS, Sp, 65–70.

Grano, S. A. (2015). Environmental Governance on Taiwan. London and New York: Routledge.

Grootaert, C., & Bastelaer, T. Van. (2001). Understanding and measuring social capital: A synthesis of findings and recommendations from the social capital initiative. Social Capital Initiative Working Paper (Vol. 24).

Grootaert, C., & Van Bastelaer, T. (2002). Understanding and measuring social capital.

Harrison, L., & Callan, T. (2013). Action research. Key Research Concepts in Politics and International Relations, 2–4.

Jagosh, J., Bush, P. L., Salsberg, J., Macaulay, A. C., Greenhalgh, T., Wong, G., … Pluye, P. (2015). A realist evaluation of community-based participatory research: Partnership synergy, trust building and related ripple effects. BMC Public Health, 15(1), 1–11.

Johnson, N. B., & Droege, S. (2004). Reflections on the generalization of agency theory: Cross-cultural considerations. Human Resource Management Review, 14(3), 325–335.

Judge, T. A., & Zapata, C. P. (2015). The person-situation debate revisited: Effect of situation strength and trait activation on the validity of the big five personality traits in predicting job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 58(4), 1149–1179.

Kagan, C., Burton, M., & Siddiquee, A. (2006). The Handbook of Action Research - Introduction. Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods in Psychology, 468.

Kapashesit, R., & Klippenstein, M. (1991). Aboriginal group rights and environmental protection. McGill Law Journal, 36, 925–961.

Kivisto, J. (2008). An assessment of agency theory as a framework for the government-university relationship. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 30(4), 339–350.

Klain, S. C., Beveridge, R., & Bennett, N. J. (2014). Ecologically sustainable but unjust? Negotiating equity and authority in common-pool marine resource management. Ecology and Society, 19(4).

Kuan, D.-W., Yen, & Ai-Ching. (2003). Traditional institution and the institutional choice: Two CPR self-governing cases of Atayal tribe in Taiwan indigenes. In Joining the northern commons: Lessons for the world, lessons from the world. IASCP Northern polar regional conference. Retrieved from,DaWei.pdf?sequence=1

Kurzban, R. (2003). Biological foundations of reciprocity. In E. Ostrom & J. Walker (Eds.), Trust and Reciprocity (pp. 105–127). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Laville, J.-L. (2013). The social and solidarity economy: A theoretical and plural framework. In Potential and Limits of Social and Solidarity Economy (pp. 1–15). Retrieved from$file/Jean-Louis Laville.pdf

Lemelin, R. H., Koster, R., & Youroukos, N. (2015). Tangible and intangible indicators of successful aboriginal tourism initiatives: A case study of two successful aboriginal tourism lodges in Northern Canada. Tourism Management, 47, 318–328.

Lin, Y., & Hsiao, H. (2002). Contesting Aboriginal Community Mapping : a Critical View From Local Aboriginal Participation. In Proceedings of IUCN/WCPA-EA-4 Taipei Conference.

Lin, Y., & Icyeh, L. (2000). Indigenous Language-Informed Participatory Policy in Taiwan: A Socio-Political Perspective. In Documenting and Revitalizing Austronesian Languages (p. 134).

Maiter, S., Simich, L., Jacobson, N., & Wise, J. (2008). Reciprocity. Action Research, 6(3), 305–325.

Marques, J. S. (2013). Social and Solidarity Economy, Between Emancipation and Reproduction. In Potential and Limits of Social and Solidarity Economy (pp. 1–13).

Matanle, P. (2011). The great east Japan earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear meltdown: Towards the (re)construction of a safe, sustainable, and compassionate society in Japan’ s shrinking regions. Local Environment, 16(January 2012), 37–41.

McTaggart, R., Nixon, R., & Kemmis, S. (2017). Critical Participatory Action Research. In L. L. Rowell, C. D. Bruce, J. M. Shosh, & M. M. Riel (Eds.), The Palgrave International Handbook of Action Research (pp. 21–35). New York: Palgrave Macmillan US.

Moller, H., Berkes, F., Lyver, P. O. B., & Kislalioglu, M. (2004). Combining science and traditional ecological knowledge: Monitoring populations for co-management. Ecology And Society, 9(3).

Moss, Q. Z., Alho, J., & Alexander, K. (2007). Performance measurement action research. Journal of Facilities Management, 5(4), 290–300.

Nadasdy, P. (2003). Reevaluating the comangement success story. Arctic, 56(4), 367–380.

Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (2003). Delegation to international organizations: Agency theory and World Bank environmental reform. International Organization, 57(02), 241–276.

Noffke, S. (1997). Professional, personal, and political dimensions of action research. Review of Research in Education, 22(1997), 305–343.

Oetzel, J. G., Wallerstein, N., Duran, B., Sanchez-Youngman, S., Nguyen, T., Woo, K., … Alegria, M. (2018). Impact of participatory health research: A test of the community-based participatory research conceptual model. BioMed Research International, 2018, 1–13.

Ostrom, E. (2003). Toward a Behavioral Theory Linking Trust, Reciprocity, and Reputation. In Trust and Reciprocity (pp. 19–79). Russell Sage Foundation.

Pargal, S., Huq, M., & Gilligan, D. (1999). Social capital in solid waste management: Evidence from Dhaka, Bangladesh. Sustainable Development.

Pereira Morais, L., & Juan Bacic, M. (2017). Social and solidarity economy as a tool for territorial development and socio-occupational inclusion (No. 2017/06). Retrieved from

Pierotti, R., & Wildcat, D. (2000). Traditional ecological knowledge: the third alternative. Ecological Applications, 10(5), 1333–1340. Retrieved from[1333:TEKTTA]2.0.CO;2

Popova, U. (2014). Conservation, traditional knowledge, and indigenous peoples. American Behavioral Scientist, 58(1), 197–214.

Portes, A. (2014). Downsides of social capital. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(52), 18407–18408.

Reid, D. (2011). Nation versus tradition: Indigenous rights and Smangus. In D. Blundell (Ed.), Taiwan Since Martial Law: Society, Culture, Politics, Economy (pp. 453–484). National Taiwan University Press.

Reo, N. J., & Whyte, K. P. (2012). Hunting and morality as elements of traditional ecological knowledge. Human Ecology, 40(1), 15–27.

Riel, M. M. (2017). Digital technology in service of action research. In L. L. Rowell, C. D. Bruce, J. M. Shosh, & M. M. Riel (Eds.), The Palgrave International Handbook of Action Research (pp. 627–646). New York: Palgrave Macmillan US.

Robertson, J. (2000). The three Rs of action research methodology: reciprocity, reflexivity and reflection-on-reality. Educational Action Research, 8(2), 307–326.

Rowell, L. L., Bruce, C. D., Shosh, J. M., & Riel, M. M. (2017). Introduction. In L. L. Rowell, C. D. Bruce, J. M. Shosh, & M. M. Riel (Eds.), The Palgrave International Handbook of Action Research (pp. 1–13). New York: Palgrave Macmillan US.

Shapiro, S. P. (2005). Agency theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 31(1), 263–284.

Shih, C. (2010). Academic colonialism and the struggle for indigenous knowledge systems in Taiwan. Social Alternatives, 29(1), 44–48. Retrieved from observation/newspaper/2010V29I12.pdf

Simon, S. (2013). Of Boars and men: Indigenous knowledge and co-management in Taiwan. Human Organization, 72(3), 220–229.

Somekh, B., & Zeichner, K. (2009). Action research for educational reform: Remodelling action research theories and practices in local contexts. Educational Action Research, 17(1), 5–21.

Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2011). A social capital framework for the study of institutional agents and their role in the empowerment of low-status students & youth. Youth & Society, 43(3), 1–58.

Steets, J. (2010). Accountability in public policy partnerships. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US.

Stephenson, J., Berkes, F., Turner, N. J., & Dick, J. (2014). Biocultural conservation of marine ecosystems: Examples from New Zealand and Canada. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 13(2), 257–265. Retrieved from

Tai, H. S. (2007). Development through conservation: An institutional analysis of indigenous community-based conservation in Taiwan. World Development, 35(7), 1186–1203.

Urquhart, R., & Wearing, M. (2017). Organisational change in non-profit human services: Reflections on a collaborative action research approach to working with child, youth, and family organisations. In L. L. Rowell, C. D. Bruce, J. M. Shosh, & M. M. Riel (Eds.), The Palgrave International Handbook of Action Research (pp. 545–561). New York: Palgrave Macmillan US.

Utting, P. (2012). Social and solidarity economy: A pathway to socially sustainable development? Retrieved from

Utting, P. (2015). Introduction: The challenge of scaling up social and solidarity economy. Social and Solidarity Economy: Beyond the Fringe.

Van Puyvelde, S., Caers, R., du Bois, C., & Jegers, M. (2012). The governance of nonprofit organizations: Integrating agency theory with stakeholder and stewardship theories. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41(3), 431–451.

Vining, A. R., & Richards, J. (2016). Indigenous economic development in Canada: Confronting principal-agent and principal–principal problems to reduce resource rent dissipation. Resources Policy, 49, 358–367.

Von der Porten, S., & De Loë, R. C. (2013). Collaborative approaches to governance for water and Indigenous peoples: A case study from British Columbia, Canada. Geoforum, 50, 149–160.

Wiseman, R. M., Cuevas-Rodríguez, G., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2012). Towards a social theory of agency. Journal of Management Studies, 49(1), 202–222.

Woolcock, M., & Narayan, D. (2000). Social capital: Implications for development theory, research, and policy. World Bank Research Observer, 15(2), 225–249.

Worsham, J., & Gatrell, J. (2005). Multiple principals, multiple signals: A signaling model of principal-agent relations. The Policy Studies Journal, 33(3), 363–377. Retrieved from

Yoshimura, M., & Wall, G. (2010). The reconstruction of Atayal identity in Wulai, Taiwan. In M. Hitchcock, V. T. King, & M. Parnwell (Eds.), Heritage Tourism in Southeast Asia (pp. 49–71). NIAS Press.
Description: 碩士
Source URI:
Data Type: thesis
Appears in Collections:[亞太研究英語博/碩士學位學程(IDAS/IMAS) ] 學位論文

Files in This Item:

File SizeFormat
023101.pdf926KbAdobe PDF145View/Open

All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

社群 sharing