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
|Issue Date:||2018-10-01 12:20:03 (UTC+8)|
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. https://doi.org/10.2307/4134367|
Aldrich, D. P., & Meyer, M. A. (2014). Social capital and community resilience. American Behavioral Scientist, 59(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214550299
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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2012.01042.x
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. https://doi.org/Technical 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2011.08.009
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.05.014
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.02.015
Bosse, D. A., Phillips, R. A., & Phillips, R. A. (2016). Agency theory and bounded self-interest. Academy of Management Review, 41(2), 276–297. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2013.0420
Braun, D., & Guston, D. H. (2003). Principal–agent theory and research policy: an introduction. Science and Public Policy, 30(5), 302–308. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154303781780290
Brosnan, S. F. (2006). Nonhuman species’ reactions to inequity and their implications for fairness. Social Justice Research, 19(2), 153–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-006-0002-z
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. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.29.091307.083824
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/14927713.2010.521321
Dash, A. (2016). An epistemological reflection on social and solidarity economy. Forum for Social Economics, 45(1), 61–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/07360932.2014.995194
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2016.1256893
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/13215906.2017.1291361
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. https://doi.org/10.7202/1036565ar
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). https://doi.org/10.1227/00006123-197907010-00058
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. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-1949-1
Johnson, N. B., & Droege, S. (2004). Reflections on the generalization of agency theory: Cross-cultural considerations. Human Resource Management Review, 14(3), 325–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2004.06.003
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. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0837
Kagan, C., Burton, M., & Siddiquee, A. (2006). The Handbook of Action Research - Introduction. Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods in Psychology, 468. https://doi.org/0432
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600800802383018
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). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07123-190452
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 https://dlc.dlib.indiana.edu/dlc/bitstream/handle/10535/1616/Kuan,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 http://www.unrisd.org/80256B42004CCC77/(httpInfoFiles)/2A922D7DFB4821EEC1257B720032E1F4/$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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2014.10.011
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. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750307083720
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. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-40523-4_2
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). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.02.016
Moss, Q. Z., Alho, J., & Alexander, K. (2007). Performance measurement action research. Journal of Facilities Management, 5(4), 290–300. https://doi.org/10.1108/14725960710822277
Nadasdy, P. (2003). Reevaluating the comangement success story. Arctic, 56(4), 367–380. https://doi.org/10.14430/arctic634
Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (2003). Delegation to international organizations: Agency theory and World Bank environmental reform. International Organization, 57(02), 241–276. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818303572010
Noffke, S. (1997). Professional, personal, and political dimensions of action research. Review of Research in Education, 22(1997), 305–343. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X022001305
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. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/7281405
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 http://www.ciriec.ulg.ac.be/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/WP2017-06.pdf
Pierotti, R., & Wildcat, D. (2000). Traditional ecological knowledge: the third alternative. Ecological Applications, 10(5), 1333–1340. Retrieved from http://www.esajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[1333:TEKTTA]2.0.CO;2
Popova, U. (2014). Conservation, traditional knowledge, and indigenous peoples. American Behavioral Scientist, 58(1), 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213495043
Portes, A. (2014). Downsides of social capital. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(52), 18407–18408. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1421888112
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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-011-9448-1
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. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-40523-4_38
Robertson, J. (2000). The three Rs of action research methodology: reciprocity, reflexivity and reflection-on-reality. Educational Action Research, 8(2), 307–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650790000200124
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. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-40523-4_1
Shapiro, S. P. (2005). Agency theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 31(1), 263–284. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.31.041304.122159
Shih, C. (2010). Academic colonialism and the struggle for indigenous knowledge systems in Taiwan. Social Alternatives, 29(1), 44–48. Retrieved from http://faculty.ndhu.edu.tw/~cfshih/politics observation/newspaper/2010V29I12.pdf
Simon, S. (2013). Of Boars and men: Indigenous knowledge and co-management in Taiwan. Human Organization, 72(3), 220–229. https://doi.org/10.17730/humo.72.3.xq24071269xl21j6
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650790802667402
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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X10382877
Steets, J. (2010). Accountability in public policy partnerships. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230290617
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 http://www.niscair.res.in/sciencecommunication/ResearchJournals/rejour/ijtk/ijtk0.asp
Tai, H. S. (2007). Development through conservation: An institutional analysis of indigenous community-based conservation in Taiwan. World Development, 35(7), 1186–1203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2006.09.015
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. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-40523-4_33
Utting, P. (2012). Social and solidarity economy: A pathway to socially sustainable development? Retrieved from http://www.unrisd.org/unrisd/website/newsview.nsf/0/ab920b156339500ac1257b5c002c1e96?opendocument&utm_campaign=ebulletin_23_5_2013&utm_medium=email_html&utm_source=en&utm_content=content_link
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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764011409757
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2016.07.006
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2013.09.001
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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2011.01016.x
Woolcock, M., & Narayan, D. (2000). Social capital: Implications for development theory, research, and policy. World Bank Research Observer, 15(2), 225–249. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/15.2.225
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 http://www.pmranet.org/conferences/georgetownpapers/Worsham.pdf
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.
|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:
All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.