台灣公害糾紛機制未來發展方向

Abstract

依據歐美日等國家的經驗，「糾紛處理替代途徑（ Alternative Dispute Resolution, ADR ）」已成為解決環境糾紛的重要管道， 我國政府亦於 81 年 2 月頒定「 公害糾紛處理法」，依法省縣市各級政府「公害糾紛調處、仲裁委員會」陸續成立。然由過 去的環境調處（ mediation ）與仲裁（ arbitration ）案件觀察得知，現階段該組織有時 無法免除泛政治化的陰影，加上調處委員會的效率、公信力仍遭部分民眾與廠商質疑等問題 ，以致成效有限。 參照歐美國家民間調處（仲裁）機制健全與運作靈活的情形，同時考量我國相關研究顯示「 當正常管道無法有效解決的環境事件時，民眾首將向環境紛爭調處團體（例如中華民國消費 者文教基金會）提出申請」之事實，繼續推廣環境調處相關觀念與鼓勵民間非營利調處組織 之成立應有其價值。 由於重工業多在臺灣南部，加上近年來環境糾紛多發生在大高雄地區，本文即針對此地區， 透過問卷調查，了解南臺灣社會大眾對於「政府與民間環境糾紛調處組織」的態度，同時經 由檢討政府公害糾紛委員會工作成效，進而提出健全多元化公害糾紛處理機制政策性的建議 。

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) provides an important and effective alternative for environmental conflict resolution and for coordination in collaborative problem-solving situations. The desire to reduce cases of "self-help" environmental dispute has made ADR a popular approach in U.S.a. Despite the fact that there have been governmental mediation-arbitration systems assisting in the settlement of public pollution disputes since 1992, ADR remains uncommon in our society due to problems such as inefficiency, political complexity, etc. In this paper, we explore fundamental problems in current official ADR systems and describe our aims in managing these problems via case studies. Our primary discussion focuses on the concept of private, non-profit organizations for resolving environmental dispoutes. We describe how we are assessing the applicability of this alternative with a public opinion survey in Kaohsiung area and then suggest future directions based on the survey results.