Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
Google ScholarTM
NCCU Library
Citation Infomation
Related Publications in TAIR
題名 地方創生走向民主創新：苗栗苑裡公民參與的治理變革與實踐
The Regional Revitalization towards Democratic Innovations: Governance Transformation from a Citizen Participation Perspective in Yuanli, Miaoli作者 蔡子弘
Tsai, Tzu-Hung貢獻者 傅凱若
Fu, Kai-Jo
蔡子弘
Tsai, Tzu-Hung關鍵詞 地方創生
民主創新
參與式預算
鑲嵌式個案研究
苗栗苑裡
Regional Revitalization
Democratic Innovations
Participatory Budgeting
Embedded Case Study
Yuanli Township日期 2026 上傳時間 2-Mar-2026 12:30:33 (UTC+8) 摘要 近年來，面對人口高齡化、少子化與城鄉發展失衡等結構性挑戰，我國政府自2019年起推動地方創生政策，期望透過活化地方資源與培力青年，促進人口回流與地方永續發展。然而，既有地方創生研究多聚焦於產業振興與經濟價值共創，較少從民主治理與公民參與角度，探討地方創生作為民主實踐場域的可能性；既有民主創新研究亦多著重制度工具，對其如何在地方脈絡中經由長期實作生成的過程，仍缺乏細緻分析。 本研究以苗栗縣苑裡鎮為個案，探討掀海風團隊如何自社會運動出發，經由地方創生實踐與市場災後治理衝突等關鍵事件，轉化為體制內的民主創新治理模式。研究採質性研究取徑，以della Porta 與 Felicetti（2019）的觀點，結合 Elstub 與 Escobar（2019）之民主創新綜合分析架構，剖析苑裡模式的生成脈絡、制度特徵、關鍵成功因素，以及其在落地生根時所面臨的結構性限制與實務挑戰。 研究發現，苑裡民主創新治理並非單純制度移植，而是奠基於長期社會運動與地方創生所累積的社會資本與治理能力。在制度運作上，苑裡模式展現審議與聚合並行的決策設計，並透過行政轉譯與公私協力網絡，使公民意見得以實質影響政策形成。更重要的是，透過兒童參與式預算與敬老計畫等制度化實踐，於政策過程中重新構想並深化兒童與長者等群體的公民角色。 最後，苑裡案例顯示，不僅地方創生實踐能形成鄉鎮層級民主創新治理的重要基礎。同時，透過在地情感敘事與週期性的審議實踐，苑裡正以「民主價值」重塑地方品牌，亦吸引青年返鄉與外部資源流入，證實了地方創生與民主創新形成可相互強化的循環關係。此外，透過精細的制度設計與賦權過程，即便在資源有限的基層，亦能深化公民與政府間的信任，實現具包容性的在地民主治理。對臺灣地方治理實務與民主創新研究提供關鍵經驗與理論啟發。
Since 2019, Taiwan has promoted regional revitalization policies to address demographic challenges such as population aging and rural depopulation. While these policies aim to revitalize local communities and encourage young people to return to their hometowns, existing research has largely focused on economic impacts, paying limited attention to regional revitalization as a site of democratic governance and civic participation. Meanwhile, studies on democratic innovations have tended to emphasize institutional designs, with relatively little examination of how such arrangements emerge through long-term, practice-based processes embedded in local contexts. This study bridges these gaps by examining Yuanli Township in Miaoli County. It traces how the grassroots “Sayhihome” team evolved from social movement activism into an institutionalized model of democratic governance through regional revitalization practices, particularly in response to conflicts over post-disaster market management. Adopting a qualitative approach based on interviews and document analysis, and drawing on the analytical frameworks of della Porta and Felicetti (2019) as well as Elstub and Escobar (2019), this research analyzes the origins, key success factors, and challenges of the so-called “Yuanli Model.” The findings show that the success of the Yuanli Model was not the result of a simple top-down implementation, but was instead grounded in social capital accumulated through years of social movement engagement. Institutionally, the model combines deliberation with decision-making, employing processes of “administrative translation” to ensure that citizens’ voices meaningfully shape policy outcomes. Notably, initiatives such as children’s participatory budgeting have contributed to redefining the civic roles of underrepresented groups. Overall, this study demonstrates that regional revitalization and democratic innovations can mutually reinforce one another. By branding the township through democratic values and affective local narratives, Yuanli has successfully attracted returning youth and external resources. The case further shows that even in resource-constrained local settings, carefully designed institutional arrangements can rebuild trust between citizens and government, offering valuable insights for local governance practices and democratic innovations research in Taiwan.參考文獻 中文部分 內政部統計處（2024）。內政統計113年第44週。11月2日。 https://ws.moi.gov.tw/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvNDAwL3JlbGZpbGUvOTAwOS8zMjI1NjAvZDRiZjdhM2MtY2I2Yy00MDIxLWI2MzAtMWMyMTNiMmI3YmYzLnBkZg%3d%3d&n=MTEz5bm056ysNDTpgLHlhafmlL%2fntbHoqIjpgJrloLFf6LaF6auY6b2h56S%2b5pyDLnBkZg%3d%3d 王郁雯（2023）。基隆委託行地方創生的協力網絡：探討政策企業家的角色與功能。國立政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 王翠薇（2022）。地方創生關鍵影響因素之探討──以參與地方創生之中小企業為例。國立雲林科技大學企業管理學系碩士論文，未出版，雲林縣。 王輝煌（2017）。政策創新與官僚角色：臺灣解嚴後治理失能的分析。文官制度季刊，9（3），27-64。 丘昌泰（2013）。公共政策：基礎篇（第五版）。臺北：巨流圖書。 田開瑄（2023）。我國「地方創生青年培力工作站」計畫之協力治理分析。國立臺灣大學公共事務研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 吳博祐（2022）。價值共創導入地方創生之研究：以供需視角探討宜蘭冬山地方創生。國立臺灣科技大學企業管理學系碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 吳澤玫（2024）。從審議系統觀論微型公眾的定位與功能。載於林國明，葉欣怡（編），台灣審議民主的進化時代（頁43-87）。臺北：臺灣大學出版中心。 呂冠瑩（2018）。參與式預算的幕後：臺北市基層公務人員情緒勞務與信任之研究。國立政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 李志銘（2022）。從苑裡「掀海風」到「掀冊店」（下）：書店作為地方創生的文化基地。鳴人堂－聯合新聞網，11月22日。 https://opinion.udn.com/opinion/story/12369/6783488 李宛真（2021）。從公私協力探討我國地方創生之執行──以甘樂文創為例。國立臺北大學公共行政暨政策學系碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，新北市。 杜文苓（2007）。審議民主與社會運動：民間團體籌辦新竹科學園區宜蘭基地公民會議的啟發。公共行政學報，23，67–93。 阮慈琳（2021）。文化創意產業價值鏈與生態系統研究──以陽明山產業聚落為例。中國文化大學企業實務管理數位碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 周桂田（2013）。全球化風險挑戰下發展型國家之治理創新—以台灣公民知識監督決策為分析。政治與社會哲學評論，（44），65-148。 林千佑（2023）。以創意城市戰略實現地方創生的可能性—比較嘉義市和日本金澤市之創意城市戰略。國立臺中科技大學應用日語系日本市場暨商務策略碩士班碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。 林水波（2007）。釐定公民政策參與。國會月刊，35（8），26–38。 林立鈞（2023）。探討地方創生的實踐因素－以俗女村公司為例。國立嘉義大學管理學院碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，嘉義。 林怡君（2025）。從生態系統視角探討地方創生中的利害關係人價值共創機制──以臺中市東區東英社區為例。逢甲大學合作經濟暨社會事業經營學系碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。 林建地（2005）。直接民權與代議政體整合之研究：以各國公民投票制度分析為基礎。國立臺灣師範大學政治學研究所博士論文，未出版，臺北市。 林祐聖、葉欣怡（2018）。弱勢者在公民參與中的美麗與哀愁：以三峽身心障礙者就業促進參與式預算試辦計畫為例。社區發展季刊，161，187–197。 林國明（2009）。國家、公民社會與審議民主：公民會議在臺灣的實踐經驗。臺灣社會學，17，161–217。 林國明、陳東升（2003）。公民會議與審議民主：全民健保的公民參與經驗。台灣社會學，6，61-118。 林煥笙（2021）。公民參與的制度設計與公共價值創造：臺北市的個案研究。國立政治大學公共行政學系博士論文，未出版，臺北市。 施建廷（2020）。造就積極公民：臺中參與式預算的民主實踐。國立中山大學社會學系碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。 施聖文（2021）。船過水無痕? 臺中市參與式預算推動的實踐與反思。新實踐集刊，2，129-175。 范玫芳、張簡妙琳（2021）。從審議系統觀點探討臺灣邵族傳統領域治理與公民行動。臺灣民主季刊，18（2），37-77。 孫煒（2020）。臺灣地方基層官僚推動參與式預算的治理模式：桃園市案例研究。政治科學論叢，85，139–178。 容邵武（2013）。文化親密性與社區營造：在地公共性的民族誌研究。台灣社會學刊。53，55-102。 徐妘禎（2023）。基層官僚執行參與式預算之困境與因應對策：臺北市經驗檢視。國立臺北大學公共行政暨政策學系碩士論文，未出版，新北市。 馬嘉延（2025）。串起地方觀光的珍珠！以創新生態系觀點探究學校與地方創生發展模式。國立臺灣師範大學運動休閒與餐旅管理研究所博士論文，未出版，臺北市。 高婉玲（2025）。公私協力下的觀光地方創生與品牌建立──以「淡蘭古道」為例。國立政治大學行政管理碩士學程碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 國發會（2017）。「設計翻轉、地方創生」計畫規劃作業指引，4月。 https://www.ndc.gov.tw/cp.aspx?n=F5BC16A2AE8C8AB9&s=6D5CD422604E8E53 國發會（2018a）。地方創生國家戰略計畫【核定本】，12月。 https://ws.ndc.gov.tw/Download.ashx?icon=..pdf&n=MTA4MDEwM%2BmZouaguOWumi3lnLDmlrnlibXnlJ%2FlnIvlrrbmiLDnlaXoqIjnlaso5qC45a6a5pysKS5wZGY%3D&u=LzAwMS9hZG1pbmlzdHJhdG9yLzEwL3JlbGZpbGUvMC8xMTUwMC9lOTkzMjYyOC1mNzY4LTQ5N2EtODE3OS1iMDA1MjU3MGEwNGYucGRm 國發會（2018b）。我國地方創生國家戰略初步構想，5月21日。 https://ws.ndc.gov.tw/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9hZG1pbmlzdHJhdG9yLzEwL3JlbGZpbGUvMC8xMTUwMC83NTE2M2QxOS1iOWQ0LTQ1NTQtYTRjYS05MTgwODRjMWU2OTAucGRm&n=MTA3MDUyMSDooYzmlL%2FpmaLlnLDmlrnlibXnlJ%2FmnIPloLHnrKwx5qyh5pyD6K2w57Ch5aCxLnBkZg%3D%3D&icon=..pdf 國發會（2020）。加速推動地方創生計畫（110年至114年）【核定本】，9月。https://ws.ndc.gov.tw/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9hZG1pbmlzdHJhdG9yLzEwL3JlbGZpbGUvMC8xMTUwMC84NjIxMmE4NS04YjZiLTQ1MzEtOThjMi1kN2FhMmY1YTA4NTcucGRm&n=5Yqg6YCf5o6o5YuV5Zyw5pa55Ym155Sf6KiI55Wr6Zmi5qC45a6a5pysLnBkZg%3d%3d&icon=..pdf 國發會（2022）。中華民國人口推估報告（2022年至2070年），8月。 https://www.gender.ey.gov.tw/gecdb/Stat_Statistics_DetailData.aspx?sn=S76QK4jz899u7Khj0vJqDA%40%40&d=m9ww9odNZAz2Rc5Ooj%24wIQ%40%40 國發會（2024a）。打造永續共好地方創生計畫（114年至117年）【核定本】，6月。https://www.twrr.ndc.gov.tw/message/InAuxiliary-points/5084345b-76bb-452c-a65b-67cb9a72c36d 國發會（2024b）。前瞻基礎建設計畫介紹。重大公共建設計畫網，檢索日期：2024年5月10日，取自： https://www.ndc.gov.tw/Content_List.aspx?n=608FE9340FE6990D&upn=60F66A08939511F4 國發會地方創生南區輔導中心（2024）。「加速推動地方創生」計畫說明。檢索日期：2025年3月2日，取自： https://engage.nsysu.edu.tw/societies/%E5%9C%B0%E6%96%B9%E5%89%B5%E7%94%9F/ 國發會國土處（2021）。地方創生推動新方向，啟動多元徵案新途徑，國發會新聞稿，2月1日。https://www.ndc.gov.tw/nc_8456_34737 國發會國土處（2023）。地方創生2.0推動情形。4月27日 https://www.ey.gov.tw/File/E5CD72E173683129?A=C 崔芳瑜（2018）。「標案模式」的參與式預算：以中介者的日常行動為核心。國立中山大學社會學系碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。 張婷瑄（2018）。公部門專案管理的協調之初探─以臺北市參與式預算提案為例。國立政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 張皓鈞（2020）。地方創生浪潮的發展、政權重構與共利性演繹──以桃園大溪為例。國立臺灣大學建築與城鄉研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 掀海風（2025）。海風行動－苑裡教芋部簡介。掀海風官方網站。檢閱日期：2025年12月23日， https://www.hihomeway.com/pages/taro-education?utm_source=chatgpt.com 教育部（2023）。我國少子女化對策計畫 （107年－113年）【核定本】，8月。https://www.edu.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=D33B55D537402BAA&s=1F066099DDDA393B 梁弘毅（2021）。地方創生之流程與挑戰：GS公司如何在南庄發展地方創生。國立清華大學高階經營管理碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。 梅佳蓁（2021）。地方創生的評估—以台灣南部地方創生案為例。逢甲大學財務金融學系碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。 陳介英（2015）。社區營造與文化資源的創造。庶民文化研究，12，144-174。 陳坤毅、黃心怡（2020）。民眾電子連署內容與政府回應方式：以提點子平臺為例。民主與治理，7（2），1-40。 陳怡縈（2021）。社區非營利組織推動公民參與及地方創生之研究──以高雄蚵仔寮社區為例。大仁科技大學文化創意產業研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東縣。 陳奕淳（2022）。臺中市大安區長照事業與地方創生之研究：公私協力觀點。東海大學公共事務碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。 陳美伶（2021）。美伶姐的台灣地方創生故事。臺北：天下文化。 陳靖瑜（2024）。以服務主導邏輯觀點探究地方創生之價值共創。國立成功大學企業管理學系碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，臺南市。 傅凱若（2019）。民主創新與公共價值創造的實踐－以臺灣都會區參與式預算為例。臺灣民主季刊，16（4），93-141。 彭莞婷（2018）。從基層官僚的觀點探討參與式預算的政策執行──以臺北市區公所為例。國立政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 曾泰豪（2023）。探討地方創生政見對候選人得票率影響──以2022鄉長選舉為例。東海大學企業管理學系碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。 曾莉婷（2018）。地方政府推動參與式預算方案執行之研究：官僚回應性的觀點。國立中央大學法律與政府研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園市。 程航、吳明儒（2019）。文化資本透過社會資本中介影響地方發展的研究—以新港鄉為例。台灣社區工作與社區研究學刊，9（2），161-212。 黃美枝（2023）。以跨組織合作觀點探究地方創生之多元提案－以地方創生S 工作站為例。輔仁大學企業管理學系管理學碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，新北市。 楊弘任（2014）。社區如何動起來？黑珍珠之鄉的派系、在地師傅與社區總體營造（增訂版）。新北：群學出版社。 萬毓澤（2016）。臺灣當前的參與式預算概況：反省與前瞻。巷仔口社會學。檢索日期：2026年 1月1 8日，取自： https://twstreetcorner.org/2016/03/01/wanyuze-2/ 葉文豪（2023）。地方依附、公共參與對地方創生態度與行為影響之研究──以中興新村光明里居民為例。國立中興大學國家政策與公共事務研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。 葉欣怡（2022）。審議、記憶與地方感的關係探究：以審議社造中數個社區的被發明傳統為例。社區營造學報，1（1），18-38。 葉欣怡、陳東升、林國明、林祐聖（2016）。參與式預算在社區－文化部推展公民審議及參與式預算實驗計畫。國土及公共治理季刊，4（4），29-40。 廖翊均（2023）。地方創生發展之公私協力研究──以臺南市後壁區仕安社區為例。國立成功大學政治學系碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，臺南市。 劉育育（2025）。鎮長週記：大家好，我是苗栗苑裡鎮長劉育育。臺北：離島出版。 謝政勳、邱鈺婷（2023）。參與在虛實之間─解析公民參與在基層官僚設計推動下的真實樣貌。中國行政評論，29（3），86-118。 謝美珍、林婷鈴、陳逸媛（2021）。物資循環、共創共享價值及生態系統建立：以小型社會企業「贈物網」為例。中山管理評論，29（3），467-514。 謝儲鍵（2022）。從協力創新析探社區空氣污染治理之發展。人文社會科學研究，16（2），97-127。 顏嘉慧（2025）。以價值共創觀點探究文資活化為基礎之地方創生──以台糖公司橋頭糖廠為例。國立成功大學經營管理碩士學位學程碩士論文，未出版，臺南市。 羅玉緞（2020）。客庄基層官僚推動參與式預算觀感之研究：以桃園市楊梅區為例。國立中央大學客家語文暨社會科學學系碩士論文，未出版，桃園市。 羅凱凌（2017）。公共參與真的能提升效能感嗎？以全民健康保險會之利害關係團體參與為例。公共行政學報，53，25-77。 蘇方筠（2021）。生態系統觀點之地方創生的實證研究──共創「官田烏金」之價值。國立成功大學企業管理學系碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，臺南市。 蘇彩足（2017）。公部門推動參與式預算之經驗與省思。文官制度季刊，9（2），1-22。 外文部分 Almen, O. (2016). Local participatory innovations and experts as political entrepreneurs: the case of China’s democracy consultants. Democratization, 23(3), 478–497. Altman, D. (2019). Citizenship and contemporary direct democracy. Cambridge University Press. Anderson, C. J., A. Blais, S. Bowler, T. Donovan, & O. Listhaug (2005). Losers' consent: Elections and democratic legitimacy. Oxford University Press. Åström, J., H. Hinsberg, M.E. Jonsson, & M. Karlsson (2013). Crisis, innovation and e-participation: towards a framework for comparative research. In M.A. Wimmer, E. Tambouris, & A. Macintosh (Eds), Electronic Participation (pp. 26-36). ePart 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8075. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40346-0_3 Baiocchi, G., & E. Ganuza (2017). Popular democracy: the paradox of participation. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Baiocchi, G. (2005). Militants and citizens: the politics of participatory democracy in porto alegre. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Bang, H. P., & T. B. Dyrberg (2001). Governance, self-representation and democratic imagination. In M. Saward (Ed.), Democratic innovation: deliberation, representation and association (pp. 146-157). London: Routledge. Barber, B. R. (1984). Strong democracy: participatory politics for a new age. Berkeley, CA: California University Press. Beck, U. (2006). Reflexive governance: politics in the global risk society. In J-P. Voß, D. Bauknecht, & R. Kemp (Eds.), Reflexive governance for sustainable development (pp. 3-28). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Bernburg, J. G. (2016). Economic crisis and mass protest: The pots and pans revolution in Iceland. Routledge. Beste, S., & D. Wyss (2019). Quantitative methods in democratic innovation research. In S. Elstub, & O. Escobar (Eds.), Handbook of democratic innovation and governance (pp. 472–485). Edward Elgar Publishing. Bherer, L., M. Gauthier, & L. Simard (2017). The professionalization of public participation. New York and Lon-don: Routledge. Blaug, R. (2002). Engineering democracy. Political Studies, 50(1), 102–116. Blijleven, W., M. van Hulst, & F. Hendriks (2019). Public servants in innovative democratic governance. In S. Elstub, & O. Escobar (Eds.), Handbook of democratic innovation and governance (pp. 209–224). Edward Elgar Publishing. Boulianne, S. (2019). Building faith in democracy: deliberative events, political trust and efficacy. Political Studies, 67(1), 4–30. Bryson, J. M., B. C. Crosby, & L. Bloomberg (2015). Public value and public administration. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Bua, A. (2012). Agenda setting and democratic innovation: the case of the sustainable communities act (2007). Politics, 32 (1), 10–20. Bua, A. (2019). Democratic innovations and the policy process. In S. Elstub, & O. Escobar (Eds.), Handbook of democratic innovation and governance (pp. 282–296). Edward Elgar Publishing. Caluwaerts, D., & M. Reuchamps (2016). Generating democratic legitimacy through deliberative innovations: The role of embeddedness and disruptiveness. Representation, 52(1), 13–27. Caluwaerts, D., & M. Reuchamps (2018). The legitimacy of citizen-led deliberative democracy: The G1000 in Belgium. Routledge. Campbell, A., P. Converse, W. Miller, & D. Stokes (1960). The American voter. New York: John Wiley. Cohen, J. (2009). Reflections on deliberative democracy. In T. Christiano, & J. Christman (Eds), Contemporary debates in political philosophy(pp. 247–263). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Collier, R., & D. Collier (1991). Shaping the political arena. Princeton University Press. Converse, P. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 206-261). New York: The Free Press. Dalton, R. J. (1996). Citizen politics, chatham. NJ: Chatham House. Dalton, R. J. (2004). Democratic challenges, democratic choices: the erosion of political support in advanced industrial democracies. New York: Oxford University Press. Dalton, R. J., & C. Welzel (2014). The civic culture transformed: From allegiant to assertive citizens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Davidson, S., & S. Elstub (2014). Deliberative and participatory democracy in the UK. The British Journal of Politics & International Relations, 16(3), 367–385. della Porta, D., & A. Felicetti (2019). Innovating democracy against democratic stress in Europe: Social movements and democratic experiments. Representation, https://doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2019.1624600. della Porta, D. (2020). How social movements can save democracy: Democratic Innovations from Below. Cambridge: Polity Press. Diamond, L. (2015). Facing up to the democratic recession. Journal of Democracy, 26 (1), 141–155. Dryzek, J. S. (2000). Deliberative democracy and beyond: Liberals, critics, contestations. Oxford University Press. Durose, C. (2009). Front-line workers and “local knowledge”: Neighbourhood stories in contemporary UK local governance. Public Administration, 87(1), 35–49. Dyck, J. J. (2009). Initiated distrust: Direct democracy and trust in government. American Politics Research, 37(4), 539–568. Elstub, S., & O. Escobar (2019). Handbook of democratic innovation and governance. Cheltenham, U.K. : Edward Elgar Publishing. Elstub, S. (2014). Deliberative pragmatic equilibrium review: a framework for comparing institutional devices and their enactment of deliberative democracy in the UK. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 16(3), 386–409. Elstub, S. (2018). Deliberation and participatory democracy. In A. Bächtiger, J.S. Dryzek, J. Mansbridge, & M.E. Warren (Eds), The oxford handbook of deliberative democracy(pp.187–202). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Escobar, O. (2017). Pluralism and democratic participation: what kind of citizen are citizens invited to be? Contemporary Pragmatism, 14, 416–438. Evans, G., A. Heath, & M. Lalljee (1996). Measuring left–right and libertarian– authoritarian values in the British electorate. British Journal of Sociology, 47(1), 93–112. Farrell, D.M., J. Suiter, & C. Harris (2018). Systematizing constitutional deliberation: the 2016–18 citizens assembly in Ireland. Irish Political Studies, 34(1), 1–11. Farrelly, M., & C. Skelcher (2010). Democratic milieu: Analysing democratic practice in the new governance. Representation, 46(2), 139-150. Fischer, F. (2000). Citizens, experts, and the environment: the politics of local knowledge. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy: discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fischer, F. (2009). Democracy and expertise: reorienting policy inquiry. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fishkin, J. S. (2009). When the people speak: deliberative democracy and public consultation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fishkin, J. S. (2012). Deliberative polling: reflections on an ideal made practical. In B. Geissel, & K. Newton (Eds), Evaluating democratic innovations: curing the democratic malaise?( pp. 71–89). London: Routledge. Floridia, A. (2014). Beyond participatory democracy, towards deliberative democracy: Elements of a possible theoretical genealogy. Rivista Italiana Di Scienza Politica, 3, 299–326. Font, J., G. Smith, C. Galais, & P. Alarcón (2018). Cherry-picking participation: Explaining the fate of proposals from participatory processes. European Journal of Political Research, 57(3), 615–636. Freeden, M. (1994). Political concepts and ideological morphology. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 2(2), 140–164. Fung, A. (2003). Survey article: recipes for public spheres: eight institutional design choices and their consequences. Journal of Political Philosophy, 11(3), 338–367. Fung, A. (2004). Empowered participation: Reinventing urban democracy. Princeton University Press. Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review, 66(s1), 66–75. Fung, A. (2015). Putting the public back into governance: the challenges of citizen participation and its future. Public Administration Review, 75(4), 513–522. Fung, A., & E. O. Wright (2003). Thinking about empowered participatory governance. In A. Fung, & E. O. Wright (Eds.), Deepening democracy (pp. 3–42). New York, NY: Verso. Gallie, W.B. (1955). Essentially contested concepts. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 56, 167–198. Ganuza, E., & G. Baiocchi (2012). The power of ambiguity: how participatory budgeting travels the globe. Journal of Public Deliberation, 8(2): article 8. http://www.publicdeliberation.net/jpd/vol8/iss2/art8 Geissel, B. (2012). Impacts of democratic innovations in Europe: findings and desiderata. In B. Geissel, & K. Newton (Eds), Evaluating democratic innovations: curing the democratic malaise?( pp. 163–183). London and New York: Routledge. Geissel, B. (2013). Introduction: on the evaluation of participatory innovations - a preliminary framework. In B. Geissel, & M. Joas (Eds.), Participatory democratic innovations in Europe: improving the quality of democracy? (pp. 9–32). Opladen: Barbara Budrich Publishers Geissel, B. (2019). Democratic innovations in Europe. In S. Elstub, & O. Escobar (Eds.), Handbook of democratic innovation and governance (pp. 404–420). Edward Elgar Publishing. Geissel, B., & P. Hess (2017). Explaining political efficacy in deliberative procedures – a novel methodological approach. Journal of Public Deliberation, 13(2), Article 4. Goodin, R. E. (2008). Innovating democracy: democratic theory and practice after the deliberative turn. Oxford University Press. Grimes, M. (2006). Organizing consent: the role of procedural fairness in political trust and compliance. European Journal of Political Research, 45(2), 285–315. Gutmann, A. (1996). Democracy, philosophy, and justification. In S. Benhabib (Ed.), Democracy and difference(pp. 340–347). Princeton University Press. Gylfason, T. (2013). Democracy on ice: a post-mortem of the Icelandic Constitution. 19 June, accessed 19 March 2025 at www.opendemocracy.net/thorvaldur-gylfason/democracy-on-ice-post-mortem-of-icelandic-constitution. Hendriks, C. M. (2002). Institutions of deliberative democratic processes and interest groups: Roles, tensions, and incentives. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 61(1), 64–75. Hendriks, C. M. (2016). Coupling citizens and elites in deliberative systems: the role of institutional design. European Journal of Political Research, 55(1), 43–60. Hendriks, C.M., & A.W. Dzur (2015). Innovating in the mainstream? enhancing public deliberation in conventional politics [Conference presentation]. The European Consortium of Political Research Annual Conference, August 26–29, Montreal, Canada. Hetherington, M. (1998). The political relevance of political trust. American Political Science Review, 92(4), 791–821. Inglehart, R, & C. Welzel (2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy: the human development sequence. New York: Cambridge University Press. Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: cultural, eco-nomic and political change in 43 societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Keele, L. (2007). Social capital and the dynamics of trust in government, American Journal of Political Science, 51(2), 241–254. Key, V. O. (1966). The responsible electorate: rationality in presidential voting 1936–60. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. King, C. S., & C. Stivers (1998). Government is us: public administration in an anti-government era. Sage Publications. Klijn, E.-H., & J. Koppenjan (2002). Politicians and interactive decision making: Institutional spoilsports or play-makers. Public Administration, 78(2), 365–387. Knobloch, K. R., & J. Gastil (2015). Civic (re)socialisation: the educative effects of deliberative participation. Politics, 35(2), 183–200. Kooiman, J. (2002). Governance: A Social Political Perspective. In J. R. Grote, & B. Gbikpi (Eds.), Participatory Governance: political and societal implications (pp. 51-69). Opladen: Leske+Budrich. Kössler, K. (2015). Laboratories of democratic innovation? Direct, participatory, and deliberative democracy in Canadian provinces and municipalities. In C. Fraenkel-Haeberle, S. Kropp, F. Palermo, & K. P. Sommermann (Eds), Citizen participation in multi-level democracies(pp. 286–308). Leiden; Boston: Brill Nijhoff. Lee, C. W. (2015). Do-it-yourself democracy: the rise of the public engagement industry. Oxford University Press. Levitsky, S., & L. Way (2015). The myth of democratic recession. Journal of Democracy, 26(1), 45–58. Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy: dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Lovan, W. R., M. Murray, & R. Shaffer (2004). Participatory governance: planning, conflict mediation and public decision making in civil society. Burlington, VT: Ashgae. Mattijssen, T. J. M., J. H. Behagel, & A.E. Buijs (2014). How democratic innovations realise democratic goods: two case studies of area committees in the Netherlands. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 58(6), 997–1014. McKenna, D. (2012). Local politicians attitudes towards participatory initiatives: a Bulpittian perspective. Public Money & Management, 32(2), 103–111. Miller, A. (1974). Political issues and trust in government: 1964–1970. American Political Science Review, 68(3): 951–972. Möller, K. (2013). Theory map of business marketing: Relationships and networks perspectives. Industrial Marketing Management, 42(3), 324-335. Moore, J. F. (1993) Predators and prey: a new ecology of competition. Harvard Business Review, 71(3), 75-83. Moore, M. H. (2013). Recognizing public value. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Morrell, M. E. (2005). Deliberation, democratic decision-making and internal political efficacy. Political Behavior, 27(1), 49–69. Newton, K., & B. Geissel (2012). Evaluating democratic innovations: curing the democratic malaise? London: Routledge. Newton, K. (2006). Political support, social capital, civil society and political and economic performance, Political Studies, 54, 846–864. Newton, K. (2012). Curing the democratic malaise with democratic innovations. In B. Geissel, & K. Newton (Eds.), Evaluating democratic innovations: curing the democratic malaise?( First published pp.3-20 ). Taylor & Francis: Routledge. Norris, P. (1999). Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government. Oxford University Press. Norris, P. (2011). Democratic deficit: Critical citizens revisited. Cambridge University Press. Page, B. I., & R. I. Shapiro (1993). The rational public and democracy. In G. E. Marcus, & R. L. Hansen (Eds), Reconsidering the democratic public (pp. 348–377). State College, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press. Parkinson, J., & J. Mansbridge (2012). Deliberative systems: deliberative democracy at the large scale. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Parry, G. (1972). Introduction. In G. Parry (ed.), Participation in Politics(pp. 3-38). Manchester University Press. Pateman, C. (1970). Participation and democratic theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pitkin, H. F. (2004). Representation and democracy: Uneasy alliance. Scandinavian Political Studies, 27(3), 335-342. Quirk, B. (2006). Innovation in local democracy: the London borough of Lewisham. Local Government Studies, 32(3), 357–372. Ranson, S., & J. Stewart (1994). Managing for the public domain: enabling the learning society. Basingstoke: Macmillan Press. Rask, M., & R. Worthington (2015). Governing biodiversity through democratic deliberation. London and New York: Routledge. Rask, M., R. Worthington, & L. Minna (2012). Citizen participation in global environmental governance. Abingdon, New York: Earthscan. Rättilä, T., & Rinne, J. (2017). Local resident activism and unofficial political representation: new theoretical contours. Representation, 53(3-4), 219–231. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997). Understanding governance: policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Buckingham: Open University Press Ryfe, D., & B. Stalsburg (2012). The participation and recruitment challenge. In T. Nabatchi, J. Gastil, M. Leighninger, & G. M. Weiksner (Eds), Democracy in motion: evaluating the practice and impact of deliberative civic engagement (pp. 43–58). New York: Oxford University Press. Sartori, G. (1987). The theory of democracy revisited, chatham. NJ: Chatham House. Saward, M. (2000). Democratic innovation: deliberation, representation, and association. London: Routledge. Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York: Harper and Row. Setälä, M. (2017). Connecting deliberative mini-publics to representative decision making. European Journal of Political Research, 56(4), 846–863. Sintomer, Y., A. Röcke, & C. Herzberg (2016). Participatory budgeting in Europe: democracy and public governance. Routledge. Smith, G. (2005). Beyond the ballot:57 democratic innovations from around the world– a report for the POWER Inquiry. London: Power Inquiry. Smith, G. (2009). Democratic innovations: designing institutions for citizen participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Smith, G. (2019). Reflections on the theory and practice of democratic innovations. In S. Elstub, & O. Escobar (Eds.), Handbook of democratic innovation and governance (pp. 572–582). Edward Elgar Publishing. Sørensen, E. (2017). Political innovations: innovations in political institutions, processes and outputs. Public Management Review, 19(1), 1–19. Spada, P., & M. Ryan (2017). The failure to examine failures in democratic innovation. Political Science & Politics, 50(3), 772–778. Stewart, J. (1996). Innovation in democratic practice in local government. Policy and Politics, 24(1), 29–41. Stoker, G. (1998). Governance as theory: five propositions. International Social Science Journal, 50(155), 17–28. Stoker, G. (2017). Why politics matters, 2nd edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Suiter, J., & Reidy, T. (2019). Does deliberation help deliver informed electorates? Evidence from Irish referendum votes. Representation, 55(1), 1-13. Suiter, J., D. M. Farrell, C. Harris, & E. O’Malley (2016). The Irish constitutional convention: A case of ‘high legitimacy’?. In M. Reuchamps, & J. Suiter (Eds.), Constitutional deliberative democracy in Europe (pp. 33-51). ECPR Press. Suteu, S. (2015). Constitutional conventions in the digital era: lessons from Iceland and Ireland. Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, 38(2), 251–276. Thompson, N. (2019). The role of elected representatives in democratic innovations. In S. Elstub, & O. Escobar (Eds.), Handbook of democratic innovation and governance (pp. 255–268). Edward Elgar Publishing. Trettel, M. (2015). The politics of deliberative democracy: a comparative survey of the “Law in action” of citizen participation. Revista de Derecho Político, 94(1), 87–114. Van Cott, D. L. (2008). Radical democracy in the Andes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Verba, S., K. L. Schlozman, & H. E. Brady (1995). Voice and equality: civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wampler, B. (2007). A guide to participatory budgeting. In A. Shah (Ed.), Participatory budgeting (pp. 21-38). Washington, D.C. : World Bank. Wan, P. Y.-Z. (2018). Outsourcing participatory democracy: critical reflections on the participatory budgeting experiences in Taiwan. Journal of Public Deliberation, 14(1), Article 7. Warren, M. E. (2009). Governance-driven democratization. Critical Policy Studies, 3(1), 3–13. Warren, M. E. (2013). Governance-driven democratization. In S. Griggs, A. J. Norval, & H. Wagenaar (Eds.), Practices of freedom: decentred governance, conflict and democratic participation (pp. 38–59). Cambridge University Press. Warren, M. E. (2017). A problem-based approach to democratic theory. American Political Science Review, 111(1), 39–53. Yang, K. (2005). Public administrators trust in citizens: a missing link in citizen involvement efforts. Public Administration Review, 65(3), 273–285. Young, I. M. (2001). Activist challenges to deliberative democracy. Political Theory, 29(5), 670-690. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591701029005004 Zaller, J., & S. Feldman (1992). A simple theory of survey response. American Journal of Political Science, 36, 579–616. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
公共行政學系
108256002資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108256002 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 傅凱若 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Fu, Kai-Jo en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 蔡子弘 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Tsai, Tzu-Hung en_US dc.creator (作者) 蔡子弘 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Tsai, Tzu-Hung en_US dc.date (日期) 2026 en_US dc.date.accessioned 2-Mar-2026 12:30:33 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 2-Mar-2026 12:30:33 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 2-Mar-2026 12:30:33 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0108256002 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/161868 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 公共行政學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 108256002 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 近年來，面對人口高齡化、少子化與城鄉發展失衡等結構性挑戰，我國政府自2019年起推動地方創生政策，期望透過活化地方資源與培力青年，促進人口回流與地方永續發展。然而，既有地方創生研究多聚焦於產業振興與經濟價值共創，較少從民主治理與公民參與角度，探討地方創生作為民主實踐場域的可能性；既有民主創新研究亦多著重制度工具，對其如何在地方脈絡中經由長期實作生成的過程，仍缺乏細緻分析。 本研究以苗栗縣苑裡鎮為個案，探討掀海風團隊如何自社會運動出發，經由地方創生實踐與市場災後治理衝突等關鍵事件，轉化為體制內的民主創新治理模式。研究採質性研究取徑，以della Porta 與 Felicetti（2019）的觀點，結合 Elstub 與 Escobar（2019）之民主創新綜合分析架構，剖析苑裡模式的生成脈絡、制度特徵、關鍵成功因素，以及其在落地生根時所面臨的結構性限制與實務挑戰。 研究發現，苑裡民主創新治理並非單純制度移植，而是奠基於長期社會運動與地方創生所累積的社會資本與治理能力。在制度運作上，苑裡模式展現審議與聚合並行的決策設計，並透過行政轉譯與公私協力網絡，使公民意見得以實質影響政策形成。更重要的是，透過兒童參與式預算與敬老計畫等制度化實踐，於政策過程中重新構想並深化兒童與長者等群體的公民角色。 最後，苑裡案例顯示，不僅地方創生實踐能形成鄉鎮層級民主創新治理的重要基礎。同時，透過在地情感敘事與週期性的審議實踐，苑裡正以「民主價值」重塑地方品牌，亦吸引青年返鄉與外部資源流入，證實了地方創生與民主創新形成可相互強化的循環關係。此外，透過精細的制度設計與賦權過程，即便在資源有限的基層，亦能深化公民與政府間的信任，實現具包容性的在地民主治理。對臺灣地方治理實務與民主創新研究提供關鍵經驗與理論啟發。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) Since 2019, Taiwan has promoted regional revitalization policies to address demographic challenges such as population aging and rural depopulation. While these policies aim to revitalize local communities and encourage young people to return to their hometowns, existing research has largely focused on economic impacts, paying limited attention to regional revitalization as a site of democratic governance and civic participation. Meanwhile, studies on democratic innovations have tended to emphasize institutional designs, with relatively little examination of how such arrangements emerge through long-term, practice-based processes embedded in local contexts. This study bridges these gaps by examining Yuanli Township in Miaoli County. It traces how the grassroots “Sayhihome” team evolved from social movement activism into an institutionalized model of democratic governance through regional revitalization practices, particularly in response to conflicts over post-disaster market management. Adopting a qualitative approach based on interviews and document analysis, and drawing on the analytical frameworks of della Porta and Felicetti (2019) as well as Elstub and Escobar (2019), this research analyzes the origins, key success factors, and challenges of the so-called “Yuanli Model.” The findings show that the success of the Yuanli Model was not the result of a simple top-down implementation, but was instead grounded in social capital accumulated through years of social movement engagement. Institutionally, the model combines deliberation with decision-making, employing processes of “administrative translation” to ensure that citizens’ voices meaningfully shape policy outcomes. Notably, initiatives such as children’s participatory budgeting have contributed to redefining the civic roles of underrepresented groups. Overall, this study demonstrates that regional revitalization and democratic innovations can mutually reinforce one another. By branding the township through democratic values and affective local narratives, Yuanli has successfully attracted returning youth and external resources. The case further shows that even in resource-constrained local settings, carefully designed institutional arrangements can rebuild trust between citizens and government, offering valuable insights for local governance practices and democratic innovations research in Taiwan. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第壹章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景與動機 1 第二節 研究目的與問題 4 第貳章 文獻探討 7 第一節 地方創生發展與研究脈絡 7 第二節 民主創新與公民參與的理論發展 18 第三節 民主創新的生成脈絡：結構危機、社會運動預演與地方性 37 第四節 民主創新研究架構與特徵變數 44 第參章 研究設計與方法 58 第一節 研究範圍與研究架構 58 第二節 研究方法與流程 63 第三節 資料處理與分析原則 68 第肆章 從抗爭到治理的路徑演化 72 第一節 社會運動的啟蒙與轉向：關注程序的抗爭者 73 第二節 抗爭後留下：以日常實作累積地方基礎的政治路徑 76 第三節 地方創生的深耕：切入日常經濟以及文化的復興 80 第四節 政府失靈的顯影：災後處理觸發行動者政治轉向 85 第五節 政治行動的轉向：「毋免拜託」的選舉實踐 93 第六節 本章小結：從社會抵抗到治理能力積累 95 第伍章 苑裡民主創新治理的鑲嵌式個案分析 99 第一節 苑裡兒童參與式預算民主創新治理架構分析 99 第二節 苑裡敬老計畫民主創新治理架構分析 130 第三節 綜合討論 154 第陸章 研究結論與建議 165 第一節 研究發現 165 第二節 研究建議 180 第三節 研究限制與未來研究建議 183 參考文獻 187 中文部分 187 外文部分 192 附錄 201 附錄一 中央各部會地方創生相關計畫清單（2019年） 201 附錄二 臺灣地方創生之相關學位論文 202 附錄三 本研究訪談大綱 205 zh_TW dc.format.extent 2845934 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108256002 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 地方創生 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 民主創新 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 參與式預算 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 鑲嵌式個案研究 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 苗栗苑裡 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Regional Revitalization en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Democratic Innovations en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Participatory Budgeting en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Embedded Case Study en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Yuanli Township en_US dc.title (題名) 地方創生走向民主創新：苗栗苑裡公民參與的治理變革與實踐 zh_TW dc.title (題名) The Regional Revitalization towards Democratic Innovations: Governance Transformation from a Citizen Participation Perspective in Yuanli, Miaoli en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文部分 內政部統計處（2024）。內政統計113年第44週。11月2日。 https://ws.moi.gov.tw/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvNDAwL3JlbGZpbGUvOTAwOS8zMjI1NjAvZDRiZjdhM2MtY2I2Yy00MDIxLWI2MzAtMWMyMTNiMmI3YmYzLnBkZg%3d%3d&n=MTEz5bm056ysNDTpgLHlhafmlL%2fntbHoqIjpgJrloLFf6LaF6auY6b2h56S%2b5pyDLnBkZg%3d%3d 王郁雯（2023）。基隆委託行地方創生的協力網絡：探討政策企業家的角色與功能。國立政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 王翠薇（2022）。地方創生關鍵影響因素之探討──以參與地方創生之中小企業為例。國立雲林科技大學企業管理學系碩士論文，未出版，雲林縣。 王輝煌（2017）。政策創新與官僚角色：臺灣解嚴後治理失能的分析。文官制度季刊，9（3），27-64。 丘昌泰（2013）。公共政策：基礎篇（第五版）。臺北：巨流圖書。 田開瑄（2023）。我國「地方創生青年培力工作站」計畫之協力治理分析。國立臺灣大學公共事務研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 吳博祐（2022）。價值共創導入地方創生之研究：以供需視角探討宜蘭冬山地方創生。國立臺灣科技大學企業管理學系碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 吳澤玫（2024）。從審議系統觀論微型公眾的定位與功能。載於林國明，葉欣怡（編），台灣審議民主的進化時代（頁43-87）。臺北：臺灣大學出版中心。 呂冠瑩（2018）。參與式預算的幕後：臺北市基層公務人員情緒勞務與信任之研究。國立政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 李志銘（2022）。從苑裡「掀海風」到「掀冊店」（下）：書店作為地方創生的文化基地。鳴人堂－聯合新聞網，11月22日。 https://opinion.udn.com/opinion/story/12369/6783488 李宛真（2021）。從公私協力探討我國地方創生之執行──以甘樂文創為例。國立臺北大學公共行政暨政策學系碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，新北市。 杜文苓（2007）。審議民主與社會運動：民間團體籌辦新竹科學園區宜蘭基地公民會議的啟發。公共行政學報，23，67–93。 阮慈琳（2021）。文化創意產業價值鏈與生態系統研究──以陽明山產業聚落為例。中國文化大學企業實務管理數位碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 周桂田（2013）。全球化風險挑戰下發展型國家之治理創新—以台灣公民知識監督決策為分析。政治與社會哲學評論，（44），65-148。 林千佑（2023）。以創意城市戰略實現地方創生的可能性—比較嘉義市和日本金澤市之創意城市戰略。國立臺中科技大學應用日語系日本市場暨商務策略碩士班碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。 林水波（2007）。釐定公民政策參與。國會月刊，35（8），26–38。 林立鈞（2023）。探討地方創生的實踐因素－以俗女村公司為例。國立嘉義大學管理學院碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，嘉義。 林怡君（2025）。從生態系統視角探討地方創生中的利害關係人價值共創機制──以臺中市東區東英社區為例。逢甲大學合作經濟暨社會事業經營學系碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。 林建地（2005）。直接民權與代議政體整合之研究：以各國公民投票制度分析為基礎。國立臺灣師範大學政治學研究所博士論文，未出版，臺北市。 林祐聖、葉欣怡（2018）。弱勢者在公民參與中的美麗與哀愁：以三峽身心障礙者就業促進參與式預算試辦計畫為例。社區發展季刊，161，187–197。 林國明（2009）。國家、公民社會與審議民主：公民會議在臺灣的實踐經驗。臺灣社會學，17，161–217。 林國明、陳東升（2003）。公民會議與審議民主：全民健保的公民參與經驗。台灣社會學，6，61-118。 林煥笙（2021）。公民參與的制度設計與公共價值創造：臺北市的個案研究。國立政治大學公共行政學系博士論文，未出版，臺北市。 施建廷（2020）。造就積極公民：臺中參與式預算的民主實踐。國立中山大學社會學系碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。 施聖文（2021）。船過水無痕? 臺中市參與式預算推動的實踐與反思。新實踐集刊，2，129-175。 范玫芳、張簡妙琳（2021）。從審議系統觀點探討臺灣邵族傳統領域治理與公民行動。臺灣民主季刊，18（2），37-77。 孫煒（2020）。臺灣地方基層官僚推動參與式預算的治理模式：桃園市案例研究。政治科學論叢，85，139–178。 容邵武（2013）。文化親密性與社區營造：在地公共性的民族誌研究。台灣社會學刊。53，55-102。 徐妘禎（2023）。基層官僚執行參與式預算之困境與因應對策：臺北市經驗檢視。國立臺北大學公共行政暨政策學系碩士論文，未出版，新北市。 馬嘉延（2025）。串起地方觀光的珍珠！以創新生態系觀點探究學校與地方創生發展模式。國立臺灣師範大學運動休閒與餐旅管理研究所博士論文，未出版，臺北市。 高婉玲（2025）。公私協力下的觀光地方創生與品牌建立──以「淡蘭古道」為例。國立政治大學行政管理碩士學程碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 國發會（2017）。「設計翻轉、地方創生」計畫規劃作業指引，4月。 https://www.ndc.gov.tw/cp.aspx?n=F5BC16A2AE8C8AB9&s=6D5CD422604E8E53 國發會（2018a）。地方創生國家戰略計畫【核定本】，12月。 https://ws.ndc.gov.tw/Download.ashx?icon=..pdf&n=MTA4MDEwM%2BmZouaguOWumi3lnLDmlrnlibXnlJ%2FlnIvlrrbmiLDnlaXoqIjnlaso5qC45a6a5pysKS5wZGY%3D&u=LzAwMS9hZG1pbmlzdHJhdG9yLzEwL3JlbGZpbGUvMC8xMTUwMC9lOTkzMjYyOC1mNzY4LTQ5N2EtODE3OS1iMDA1MjU3MGEwNGYucGRm 國發會（2018b）。我國地方創生國家戰略初步構想，5月21日。 https://ws.ndc.gov.tw/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9hZG1pbmlzdHJhdG9yLzEwL3JlbGZpbGUvMC8xMTUwMC83NTE2M2QxOS1iOWQ0LTQ1NTQtYTRjYS05MTgwODRjMWU2OTAucGRm&n=MTA3MDUyMSDooYzmlL%2FpmaLlnLDmlrnlibXnlJ%2FmnIPloLHnrKwx5qyh5pyD6K2w57Ch5aCxLnBkZg%3D%3D&icon=..pdf 國發會（2020）。加速推動地方創生計畫（110年至114年）【核定本】，9月。https://ws.ndc.gov.tw/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9hZG1pbmlzdHJhdG9yLzEwL3JlbGZpbGUvMC8xMTUwMC84NjIxMmE4NS04YjZiLTQ1MzEtOThjMi1kN2FhMmY1YTA4NTcucGRm&n=5Yqg6YCf5o6o5YuV5Zyw5pa55Ym155Sf6KiI55Wr6Zmi5qC45a6a5pysLnBkZg%3d%3d&icon=..pdf 國發會（2022）。中華民國人口推估報告（2022年至2070年），8月。 https://www.gender.ey.gov.tw/gecdb/Stat_Statistics_DetailData.aspx?sn=S76QK4jz899u7Khj0vJqDA%40%40&d=m9ww9odNZAz2Rc5Ooj%24wIQ%40%40 國發會（2024a）。打造永續共好地方創生計畫（114年至117年）【核定本】，6月。https://www.twrr.ndc.gov.tw/message/InAuxiliary-points/5084345b-76bb-452c-a65b-67cb9a72c36d 國發會（2024b）。前瞻基礎建設計畫介紹。重大公共建設計畫網，檢索日期：2024年5月10日，取自： https://www.ndc.gov.tw/Content_List.aspx?n=608FE9340FE6990D&upn=60F66A08939511F4 國發會地方創生南區輔導中心（2024）。「加速推動地方創生」計畫說明。檢索日期：2025年3月2日，取自： https://engage.nsysu.edu.tw/societies/%E5%9C%B0%E6%96%B9%E5%89%B5%E7%94%9F/ 國發會國土處（2021）。地方創生推動新方向，啟動多元徵案新途徑，國發會新聞稿，2月1日。https://www.ndc.gov.tw/nc_8456_34737 國發會國土處（2023）。地方創生2.0推動情形。4月27日 https://www.ey.gov.tw/File/E5CD72E173683129?A=C 崔芳瑜（2018）。「標案模式」的參與式預算：以中介者的日常行動為核心。國立中山大學社會學系碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。 張婷瑄（2018）。公部門專案管理的協調之初探─以臺北市參與式預算提案為例。國立政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 張皓鈞（2020）。地方創生浪潮的發展、政權重構與共利性演繹──以桃園大溪為例。國立臺灣大學建築與城鄉研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 掀海風（2025）。海風行動－苑裡教芋部簡介。掀海風官方網站。檢閱日期：2025年12月23日， https://www.hihomeway.com/pages/taro-education?utm_source=chatgpt.com 教育部（2023）。我國少子女化對策計畫 （107年－113年）【核定本】，8月。https://www.edu.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=D33B55D537402BAA&s=1F066099DDDA393B 梁弘毅（2021）。地方創生之流程與挑戰：GS公司如何在南庄發展地方創生。國立清華大學高階經營管理碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。 梅佳蓁（2021）。地方創生的評估—以台灣南部地方創生案為例。逢甲大學財務金融學系碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。 陳介英（2015）。社區營造與文化資源的創造。庶民文化研究，12，144-174。 陳坤毅、黃心怡（2020）。民眾電子連署內容與政府回應方式：以提點子平臺為例。民主與治理，7（2），1-40。 陳怡縈（2021）。社區非營利組織推動公民參與及地方創生之研究──以高雄蚵仔寮社區為例。大仁科技大學文化創意產業研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東縣。 陳奕淳（2022）。臺中市大安區長照事業與地方創生之研究：公私協力觀點。東海大學公共事務碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。 陳美伶（2021）。美伶姐的台灣地方創生故事。臺北：天下文化。 陳靖瑜（2024）。以服務主導邏輯觀點探究地方創生之價值共創。國立成功大學企業管理學系碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，臺南市。 傅凱若（2019）。民主創新與公共價值創造的實踐－以臺灣都會區參與式預算為例。臺灣民主季刊，16（4），93-141。 彭莞婷（2018）。從基層官僚的觀點探討參與式預算的政策執行──以臺北市區公所為例。國立政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 曾泰豪（2023）。探討地方創生政見對候選人得票率影響──以2022鄉長選舉為例。東海大學企業管理學系碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。 曾莉婷（2018）。地方政府推動參與式預算方案執行之研究：官僚回應性的觀點。國立中央大學法律與政府研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園市。 程航、吳明儒（2019）。文化資本透過社會資本中介影響地方發展的研究—以新港鄉為例。台灣社區工作與社區研究學刊，9（2），161-212。 黃美枝（2023）。以跨組織合作觀點探究地方創生之多元提案－以地方創生S 工作站為例。輔仁大學企業管理學系管理學碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，新北市。 楊弘任（2014）。社區如何動起來？黑珍珠之鄉的派系、在地師傅與社區總體營造（增訂版）。新北：群學出版社。 萬毓澤（2016）。臺灣當前的參與式預算概況：反省與前瞻。巷仔口社會學。檢索日期：2026年 1月1 8日，取自： https://twstreetcorner.org/2016/03/01/wanyuze-2/ 葉文豪（2023）。地方依附、公共參與對地方創生態度與行為影響之研究──以中興新村光明里居民為例。國立中興大學國家政策與公共事務研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。 葉欣怡（2022）。審議、記憶與地方感的關係探究：以審議社造中數個社區的被發明傳統為例。社區營造學報，1（1），18-38。 葉欣怡、陳東升、林國明、林祐聖（2016）。參與式預算在社區－文化部推展公民審議及參與式預算實驗計畫。國土及公共治理季刊，4（4），29-40。 廖翊均（2023）。地方創生發展之公私協力研究──以臺南市後壁區仕安社區為例。國立成功大學政治學系碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，臺南市。 劉育育（2025）。鎮長週記：大家好，我是苗栗苑裡鎮長劉育育。臺北：離島出版。 謝政勳、邱鈺婷（2023）。參與在虛實之間─解析公民參與在基層官僚設計推動下的真實樣貌。中國行政評論，29（3），86-118。 謝美珍、林婷鈴、陳逸媛（2021）。物資循環、共創共享價值及生態系統建立：以小型社會企業「贈物網」為例。中山管理評論，29（3），467-514。 謝儲鍵（2022）。從協力創新析探社區空氣污染治理之發展。人文社會科學研究，16（2），97-127。 顏嘉慧（2025）。以價值共創觀點探究文資活化為基礎之地方創生──以台糖公司橋頭糖廠為例。國立成功大學經營管理碩士學位學程碩士論文，未出版，臺南市。 羅玉緞（2020）。客庄基層官僚推動參與式預算觀感之研究：以桃園市楊梅區為例。國立中央大學客家語文暨社會科學學系碩士論文，未出版，桃園市。 羅凱凌（2017）。公共參與真的能提升效能感嗎？以全民健康保險會之利害關係團體參與為例。公共行政學報，53，25-77。 蘇方筠（2021）。生態系統觀點之地方創生的實證研究──共創「官田烏金」之價值。國立成功大學企業管理學系碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，臺南市。 蘇彩足（2017）。公部門推動參與式預算之經驗與省思。文官制度季刊，9（2），1-22。 外文部分 Almen, O. (2016). Local participatory innovations and experts as political entrepreneurs: the case of China’s democracy consultants. Democratization, 23(3), 478–497. Altman, D. (2019). Citizenship and contemporary direct democracy. Cambridge University Press. Anderson, C. J., A. Blais, S. Bowler, T. Donovan, & O. Listhaug (2005). Losers' consent: Elections and democratic legitimacy. Oxford University Press. Åström, J., H. Hinsberg, M.E. Jonsson, & M. Karlsson (2013). Crisis, innovation and e-participation: towards a framework for comparative research. In M.A. Wimmer, E. Tambouris, & A. Macintosh (Eds), Electronic Participation (pp. 26-36). ePart 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8075. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40346-0_3 Baiocchi, G., & E. Ganuza (2017). Popular democracy: the paradox of participation. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Baiocchi, G. (2005). Militants and citizens: the politics of participatory democracy in porto alegre. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Bang, H. P., & T. B. Dyrberg (2001). Governance, self-representation and democratic imagination. In M. Saward (Ed.), Democratic innovation: deliberation, representation and association (pp. 146-157). London: Routledge. Barber, B. R. (1984). Strong democracy: participatory politics for a new age. Berkeley, CA: California University Press. Beck, U. (2006). Reflexive governance: politics in the global risk society. In J-P. Voß, D. Bauknecht, & R. Kemp (Eds.), Reflexive governance for sustainable development (pp. 3-28). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Bernburg, J. G. (2016). Economic crisis and mass protest: The pots and pans revolution in Iceland. Routledge. Beste, S., & D. Wyss (2019). Quantitative methods in democratic innovation research. In S. Elstub, & O. Escobar (Eds.), Handbook of democratic innovation and governance (pp. 472–485). Edward Elgar Publishing. Bherer, L., M. Gauthier, & L. Simard (2017). The professionalization of public participation. New York and Lon-don: Routledge. Blaug, R. (2002). Engineering democracy. Political Studies, 50(1), 102–116. Blijleven, W., M. van Hulst, & F. Hendriks (2019). Public servants in innovative democratic governance. In S. Elstub, & O. Escobar (Eds.), Handbook of democratic innovation and governance (pp. 209–224). Edward Elgar Publishing. Boulianne, S. (2019). Building faith in democracy: deliberative events, political trust and efficacy. Political Studies, 67(1), 4–30. Bryson, J. M., B. C. Crosby, & L. Bloomberg (2015). Public value and public administration. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Bua, A. (2012). Agenda setting and democratic innovation: the case of the sustainable communities act (2007). Politics, 32 (1), 10–20. Bua, A. (2019). Democratic innovations and the policy process. In S. Elstub, & O. Escobar (Eds.), Handbook of democratic innovation and governance (pp. 282–296). Edward Elgar Publishing. Caluwaerts, D., & M. Reuchamps (2016). Generating democratic legitimacy through deliberative innovations: The role of embeddedness and disruptiveness. Representation, 52(1), 13–27. Caluwaerts, D., & M. Reuchamps (2018). The legitimacy of citizen-led deliberative democracy: The G1000 in Belgium. Routledge. Campbell, A., P. Converse, W. Miller, & D. Stokes (1960). The American voter. New York: John Wiley. Cohen, J. (2009). Reflections on deliberative democracy. In T. Christiano, & J. Christman (Eds), Contemporary debates in political philosophy(pp. 247–263). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Collier, R., & D. Collier (1991). Shaping the political arena. Princeton University Press. Converse, P. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 206-261). New York: The Free Press. Dalton, R. J. (1996). Citizen politics, chatham. NJ: Chatham House. Dalton, R. J. (2004). Democratic challenges, democratic choices: the erosion of political support in advanced industrial democracies. New York: Oxford University Press. Dalton, R. J., & C. Welzel (2014). The civic culture transformed: From allegiant to assertive citizens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Davidson, S., & S. Elstub (2014). Deliberative and participatory democracy in the UK. The British Journal of Politics & International Relations, 16(3), 367–385. della Porta, D., & A. Felicetti (2019). Innovating democracy against democratic stress in Europe: Social movements and democratic experiments. Representation, https://doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2019.1624600. della Porta, D. (2020). How social movements can save democracy: Democratic Innovations from Below. Cambridge: Polity Press. Diamond, L. (2015). Facing up to the democratic recession. Journal of Democracy, 26 (1), 141–155. Dryzek, J. S. (2000). Deliberative democracy and beyond: Liberals, critics, contestations. Oxford University Press. Durose, C. (2009). Front-line workers and “local knowledge”: Neighbourhood stories in contemporary UK local governance. Public Administration, 87(1), 35–49. Dyck, J. J. (2009). Initiated distrust: Direct democracy and trust in government. American Politics Research, 37(4), 539–568. Elstub, S., & O. Escobar (2019). Handbook of democratic innovation and governance. Cheltenham, U.K. : Edward Elgar Publishing. Elstub, S. (2014). Deliberative pragmatic equilibrium review: a framework for comparing institutional devices and their enactment of deliberative democracy in the UK. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 16(3), 386–409. Elstub, S. (2018). Deliberation and participatory democracy. In A. Bächtiger, J.S. Dryzek, J. Mansbridge, & M.E. Warren (Eds), The oxford handbook of deliberative democracy(pp.187–202). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Escobar, O. (2017). Pluralism and democratic participation: what kind of citizen are citizens invited to be? Contemporary Pragmatism, 14, 416–438. Evans, G., A. Heath, & M. Lalljee (1996). Measuring left–right and libertarian– authoritarian values in the British electorate. British Journal of Sociology, 47(1), 93–112. Farrell, D.M., J. Suiter, & C. Harris (2018). Systematizing constitutional deliberation: the 2016–18 citizens assembly in Ireland. Irish Political Studies, 34(1), 1–11. Farrelly, M., & C. Skelcher (2010). Democratic milieu: Analysing democratic practice in the new governance. Representation, 46(2), 139-150. Fischer, F. (2000). Citizens, experts, and the environment: the politics of local knowledge. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy: discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fischer, F. (2009). Democracy and expertise: reorienting policy inquiry. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fishkin, J. S. (2009). When the people speak: deliberative democracy and public consultation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fishkin, J. S. (2012). Deliberative polling: reflections on an ideal made practical. In B. Geissel, & K. Newton (Eds), Evaluating democratic innovations: curing the democratic malaise?( pp. 71–89). London: Routledge. Floridia, A. (2014). Beyond participatory democracy, towards deliberative democracy: Elements of a possible theoretical genealogy. Rivista Italiana Di Scienza Politica, 3, 299–326. Font, J., G. Smith, C. Galais, & P. Alarcón (2018). Cherry-picking participation: Explaining the fate of proposals from participatory processes. European Journal of Political Research, 57(3), 615–636. Freeden, M. (1994). Political concepts and ideological morphology. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 2(2), 140–164. Fung, A. (2003). Survey article: recipes for public spheres: eight institutional design choices and their consequences. Journal of Political Philosophy, 11(3), 338–367. Fung, A. (2004). Empowered participation: Reinventing urban democracy. Princeton University Press. Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review, 66(s1), 66–75. Fung, A. (2015). Putting the public back into governance: the challenges of citizen participation and its future. Public Administration Review, 75(4), 513–522. Fung, A., & E. O. Wright (2003). Thinking about empowered participatory governance. In A. Fung, & E. O. Wright (Eds.), Deepening democracy (pp. 3–42). New York, NY: Verso. Gallie, W.B. (1955). Essentially contested concepts. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 56, 167–198. Ganuza, E., & G. Baiocchi (2012). The power of ambiguity: how participatory budgeting travels the globe. Journal of Public Deliberation, 8(2): article 8. http://www.publicdeliberation.net/jpd/vol8/iss2/art8 Geissel, B. (2012). Impacts of democratic innovations in Europe: findings and desiderata. In B. Geissel, & K. Newton (Eds), Evaluating democratic innovations: curing the democratic malaise?( pp. 163–183). London and New York: Routledge. Geissel, B. (2013). Introduction: on the evaluation of participatory innovations - a preliminary framework. In B. Geissel, & M. Joas (Eds.), Participatory democratic innovations in Europe: improving the quality of democracy? (pp. 9–32). Opladen: Barbara Budrich Publishers Geissel, B. (2019). Democratic innovations in Europe. In S. Elstub, & O. Escobar (Eds.), Handbook of democratic innovation and governance (pp. 404–420). Edward Elgar Publishing. Geissel, B., & P. Hess (2017). Explaining political efficacy in deliberative procedures – a novel methodological approach. Journal of Public Deliberation, 13(2), Article 4. Goodin, R. E. (2008). Innovating democracy: democratic theory and practice after the deliberative turn. Oxford University Press. Grimes, M. (2006). Organizing consent: the role of procedural fairness in political trust and compliance. European Journal of Political Research, 45(2), 285–315. Gutmann, A. (1996). Democracy, philosophy, and justification. In S. Benhabib (Ed.), Democracy and difference(pp. 340–347). Princeton University Press. Gylfason, T. (2013). Democracy on ice: a post-mortem of the Icelandic Constitution. 19 June, accessed 19 March 2025 at www.opendemocracy.net/thorvaldur-gylfason/democracy-on-ice-post-mortem-of-icelandic-constitution. Hendriks, C. M. (2002). Institutions of deliberative democratic processes and interest groups: Roles, tensions, and incentives. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 61(1), 64–75. Hendriks, C. M. (2016). Coupling citizens and elites in deliberative systems: the role of institutional design. European Journal of Political Research, 55(1), 43–60. Hendriks, C.M., & A.W. Dzur (2015). Innovating in the mainstream? enhancing public deliberation in conventional politics [Conference presentation]. The European Consortium of Political Research Annual Conference, August 26–29, Montreal, Canada. Hetherington, M. (1998). The political relevance of political trust. American Political Science Review, 92(4), 791–821. Inglehart, R, & C. Welzel (2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy: the human development sequence. New York: Cambridge University Press. Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: cultural, eco-nomic and political change in 43 societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Keele, L. (2007). Social capital and the dynamics of trust in government, American Journal of Political Science, 51(2), 241–254. Key, V. O. (1966). The responsible electorate: rationality in presidential voting 1936–60. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. King, C. S., & C. Stivers (1998). Government is us: public administration in an anti-government era. Sage Publications. Klijn, E.-H., & J. Koppenjan (2002). Politicians and interactive decision making: Institutional spoilsports or play-makers. Public Administration, 78(2), 365–387. Knobloch, K. R., & J. Gastil (2015). Civic (re)socialisation: the educative effects of deliberative participation. Politics, 35(2), 183–200. Kooiman, J. (2002). Governance: A Social Political Perspective. In J. R. Grote, & B. Gbikpi (Eds.), Participatory Governance: political and societal implications (pp. 51-69). Opladen: Leske+Budrich. Kössler, K. (2015). Laboratories of democratic innovation? Direct, participatory, and deliberative democracy in Canadian provinces and municipalities. In C. Fraenkel-Haeberle, S. Kropp, F. Palermo, & K. P. Sommermann (Eds), Citizen participation in multi-level democracies(pp. 286–308). Leiden; Boston: Brill Nijhoff. Lee, C. W. (2015). Do-it-yourself democracy: the rise of the public engagement industry. Oxford University Press. Levitsky, S., & L. Way (2015). The myth of democratic recession. Journal of Democracy, 26(1), 45–58. Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy: dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Lovan, W. R., M. Murray, & R. Shaffer (2004). Participatory governance: planning, conflict mediation and public decision making in civil society. Burlington, VT: Ashgae. Mattijssen, T. J. M., J. H. Behagel, & A.E. Buijs (2014). How democratic innovations realise democratic goods: two case studies of area committees in the Netherlands. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 58(6), 997–1014. McKenna, D. (2012). Local politicians attitudes towards participatory initiatives: a Bulpittian perspective. Public Money & Management, 32(2), 103–111. Miller, A. (1974). Political issues and trust in government: 1964–1970. American Political Science Review, 68(3): 951–972. Möller, K. (2013). Theory map of business marketing: Relationships and networks perspectives. Industrial Marketing Management, 42(3), 324-335. Moore, J. F. (1993) Predators and prey: a new ecology of competition. Harvard Business Review, 71(3), 75-83. Moore, M. H. (2013). Recognizing public value. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Morrell, M. E. (2005). Deliberation, democratic decision-making and internal political efficacy. Political Behavior, 27(1), 49–69. Newton, K., & B. Geissel (2012). Evaluating democratic innovations: curing the democratic malaise? London: Routledge. Newton, K. (2006). Political support, social capital, civil society and political and economic performance, Political Studies, 54, 846–864. Newton, K. (2012). Curing the democratic malaise with democratic innovations. In B. Geissel, & K. Newton (Eds.), Evaluating democratic innovations: curing the democratic malaise?( First published pp.3-20 ). Taylor & Francis: Routledge. Norris, P. (1999). Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government. Oxford University Press. Norris, P. (2011). Democratic deficit: Critical citizens revisited. Cambridge University Press. Page, B. I., & R. I. Shapiro (1993). The rational public and democracy. In G. E. Marcus, & R. L. Hansen (Eds), Reconsidering the democratic public (pp. 348–377). State College, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press. Parkinson, J., & J. Mansbridge (2012). Deliberative systems: deliberative democracy at the large scale. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Parry, G. (1972). Introduction. In G. Parry (ed.), Participation in Politics(pp. 3-38). Manchester University Press. Pateman, C. (1970). Participation and democratic theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pitkin, H. F. (2004). Representation and democracy: Uneasy alliance. Scandinavian Political Studies, 27(3), 335-342. Quirk, B. (2006). Innovation in local democracy: the London borough of Lewisham. Local Government Studies, 32(3), 357–372. Ranson, S., & J. Stewart (1994). Managing for the public domain: enabling the learning society. Basingstoke: Macmillan Press. Rask, M., & R. Worthington (2015). Governing biodiversity through democratic deliberation. London and New York: Routledge. Rask, M., R. Worthington, & L. Minna (2012). Citizen participation in global environmental governance. Abingdon, New York: Earthscan. Rättilä, T., & Rinne, J. (2017). Local resident activism and unofficial political representation: new theoretical contours. Representation, 53(3-4), 219–231. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997). Understanding governance: policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Buckingham: Open University Press Ryfe, D., & B. Stalsburg (2012). The participation and recruitment challenge. In T. Nabatchi, J. Gastil, M. Leighninger, & G. M. Weiksner (Eds), Democracy in motion: evaluating the practice and impact of deliberative civic engagement (pp. 43–58). New York: Oxford University Press. Sartori, G. (1987). The theory of democracy revisited, chatham. NJ: Chatham House. Saward, M. (2000). Democratic innovation: deliberation, representation, and association. London: Routledge. Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York: Harper and Row. Setälä, M. (2017). Connecting deliberative mini-publics to representative decision making. European Journal of Political Research, 56(4), 846–863. Sintomer, Y., A. Röcke, & C. Herzberg (2016). Participatory budgeting in Europe: democracy and public governance. Routledge. Smith, G. (2005). Beyond the ballot:57 democratic innovations from around the world– a report for the POWER Inquiry. London: Power Inquiry. Smith, G. (2009). Democratic innovations: designing institutions for citizen participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Smith, G. (2019). Reflections on the theory and practice of democratic innovations. In S. Elstub, & O. Escobar (Eds.), Handbook of democratic innovation and governance (pp. 572–582). Edward Elgar Publishing. Sørensen, E. (2017). Political innovations: innovations in political institutions, processes and outputs. Public Management Review, 19(1), 1–19. Spada, P., & M. Ryan (2017). The failure to examine failures in democratic innovation. Political Science & Politics, 50(3), 772–778. Stewart, J. (1996). Innovation in democratic practice in local government. Policy and Politics, 24(1), 29–41. Stoker, G. (1998). Governance as theory: five propositions. International Social Science Journal, 50(155), 17–28. Stoker, G. (2017). Why politics matters, 2nd edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Suiter, J., & Reidy, T. (2019). Does deliberation help deliver informed electorates? Evidence from Irish referendum votes. Representation, 55(1), 1-13. Suiter, J., D. M. Farrell, C. Harris, & E. O’Malley (2016). The Irish constitutional convention: A case of ‘high legitimacy’?. In M. Reuchamps, & J. Suiter (Eds.), Constitutional deliberative democracy in Europe (pp. 33-51). ECPR Press. Suteu, S. (2015). Constitutional conventions in the digital era: lessons from Iceland and Ireland. Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, 38(2), 251–276. Thompson, N. (2019). The role of elected representatives in democratic innovations. In S. Elstub, & O. Escobar (Eds.), Handbook of democratic innovation and governance (pp. 255–268). Edward Elgar Publishing. Trettel, M. (2015). The politics of deliberative democracy: a comparative survey of the “Law in action” of citizen participation. Revista de Derecho Político, 94(1), 87–114. Van Cott, D. L. (2008). Radical democracy in the Andes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Verba, S., K. L. Schlozman, & H. E. Brady (1995). Voice and equality: civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wampler, B. (2007). A guide to participatory budgeting. In A. Shah (Ed.), Participatory budgeting (pp. 21-38). Washington, D.C. : World Bank. Wan, P. Y.-Z. (2018). Outsourcing participatory democracy: critical reflections on the participatory budgeting experiences in Taiwan. Journal of Public Deliberation, 14(1), Article 7. Warren, M. E. (2009). Governance-driven democratization. Critical Policy Studies, 3(1), 3–13. Warren, M. E. (2013). Governance-driven democratization. In S. Griggs, A. J. Norval, & H. Wagenaar (Eds.), Practices of freedom: decentred governance, conflict and democratic participation (pp. 38–59). Cambridge University Press. Warren, M. E. (2017). A problem-based approach to democratic theory. American Political Science Review, 111(1), 39–53. Yang, K. (2005). Public administrators trust in citizens: a missing link in citizen involvement efforts. Public Administration Review, 65(3), 273–285. Young, I. M. (2001). Activist challenges to deliberative democracy. Political Theory, 29(5), 670-690. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591701029005004 Zaller, J., & S. Feldman (1992). A simple theory of survey response. American Journal of Political Science, 36, 579–616. zh_TW
