| dc.contributor | 第三部門 | |
| dc.creator (作者) | 劉小蘭 | |
| dc.date (日期) | 2011-09 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 5-Feb-2020 14:40:34 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 5-Feb-2020 14:40:34 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 5-Feb-2020 14:40:34 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/128529 | - |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 吾人對食品安全管理的想像，經常與官方的檢驗和管制相連結，但此典型的管控模式面臨諸多執行困難，例如：成本高，而且效能亦不理想，本文以德國農藥殘留管制為例進行說明。一般而言，農藥管制具多元管理途徑，可分為三大類，包括傳統官方例行性檢查、民間團體參與，以及業者自律等，分別各自進行抽查工作，各方基於不同立場、責任和旨趣，同時關注農藥殘留對消費者健康的影響。藉由公私夥伴關係的連結，若能在相關主管單位的帶領指導下形成工作團隊，以民間團體名義進行農藥殘留檢測與相關結果訊息發布，以逐漸凝聚起消費者力量參與市場運作，漸次導正魚目混珠或劣幣驅逐良幣情形，亦得以合理保障農作者之付出。長期而言，應能降低對於土壤水源和生物多樣性的危害。 | |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | The typical pattern of supervision that my imagination of food safety management frequently connects with the inspections and instructions from the government has been facing many difficulties of implementation. For example, the workforce, facility, and fund under the government agencies are limited. In practice, the administrative organizations may cause councilor lobbying issues or timeconsuming administrative proceedings, even influence situations of election if they extensively investigate on and punish the violators. It is still a big problem if it is worthy to cause the consequent disturbances for the anticipated efficiency with good intentions. Therefore, there are many problems with the implementation of conventional administrative measures (investigation/ punishment) which spend high costs and obtain low efficiency. However, are there any methods of getting rid of the above mentioned difficulties at the moment that emphasizes the cooperation between the public and the private sectors? For example, in addition to administrative supervisions, are there any possibilities for carrying out the measures of agricultural pesticide control? Is it possible to affect market operations by providing consumers with sufficient information? Is self-management of enterprise one of policy methods? Or shall we take them all? The study takes the management of agricultural pesticide residue in German as an example to explain the diversified channels to take random self-investigations respectively; the channels consist of 1) traditional routine investigation by the government, 2) participation of private sector, and 3) selfmanagement of enterprises. The influences of agricultural pesticide residue on consumers have simultaneously obtained a lot of attention for different responsibilities and interests. We hope that private sectors may publish the information on investigations and relevant results of agricultural pesticide residue under the leadership of relevant competent authorities to gradually establish an agglomeration of consumers and market operations, and reform the situation of masquerade or “Bad money drives out good” to help farmers to obtain reasonable rewards by connecting public organizations with private sectors, and forming work teams. Taking a long-term view, it is helpful for reducing the hazards to soils, water resources, and the variety of creature. | |
| dc.format.extent | 110 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | text/html | - |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 第三部門, 16, 073-094 | |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 公私夥伴關係 ; 食品安全 ; 農藥殘留 ; 歐盟食品政策 ; private public partnership ; food safety ; pesticides residue ; food policy in the EU | |
| dc.title (題名) | 食品安全治理：政府、市場與第三部門之協力－－以德國經驗為例 | |
| dc.title (題名) | Governance in Food Safety: Government, Market and the Third Sector—An Experience from Germany | |
| dc.type (資料類型) | article | |
