| dc.contributor.advisor | 黃秉德 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author (Authors) | 林育生 | zh_TW |
| dc.creator (作者) | 林育生 | zh_TW |
| dc.date (日期) | 2006 | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 18-Sep-2009 14:55:31 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 18-Sep-2009 14:55:31 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 18-Sep-2009 14:55:31 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) | G0092932009 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/35398 | - |
| dc.description (描述) | 碩士 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 國立政治大學 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 經營管理碩士學程(EMBA) | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 92932009 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 95 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 隨著台灣民主的多元深化，各種公共政策議題的倡議也愈趨複雜細膩，而利益團體及非營利組織在政策制訂過程的地位也愈趨重要，但實務上，台灣的非營利組織在政策制訂過程中的地位仍屬模糊，特別是在立法過程中的角色扮演與策略選擇，不僅在理論層次的研究中缺少關懷，在實務操作層次上也未獲一般的非營利組織重視，而使得非營利組織在政策立法過程中的未能適切的發揮其應有的功能。因此，本文希望透過非營利組織理論和議題倡導策略分析的結合，建構一個非營利組織在我國立法運作中倡導議題的基本框架，並作為未來相關非營利組織在立法過程中策略選擇的參考依據。以非營利組織相關理論和公共政策類型區分，可知相關的組織角色和政策類型種類繁多，但本文限於研究範圍，主要將關注於「價值維護者」非營利組織對於「管制性政策」在立法過程中的倡導策略，並選擇以董氏基金會推動「菸害防制法」修訂作為主要的研究個案。本文並以立法過程作為時間的縱面，切割為程序委員會及院會一讀的「立法形成期」、委員會審查的「法案角力期」和黨團協商及院會二三讀的「折衝妥協期」等三個階段，分別分析董氏基金會在不同階段推動「菸害防制法」修訂所採取的各種議題倡導策略，並透過深度訪談等方式蒐集資料，對其所運用的議題倡導策略的利弊得失進行審視評估。本文研究發現，董氏基金會在歷時兩年半的菸害防制法修法過程中所採取的議題倡導策略，主要有「道德化『困窘策略』的策略主軸」、「結合媒體訴求的行動策略模式」、「單一而執著的直線操作」等幾項特點，而可能忽略了立法院妥協的議事文化、並對於立法院議事技巧不夠熟悉，從而造成菸害防制法修訂的延宕與議題倡導的挫敗。從董氏基金會推動菸害防制法的案例中，本研究認為，有關國內非營利組織進行議題倡導及立法遊說時，最為缺乏而急迫需要的，就是議題倡導及立法遊說的專業化訓練，因此建議我國非營利組織應該加強對於在立法過程中議題倡導策略的專業訓練，使其能夠更為順暢地完成其議題倡導的使命。關鍵字：非營利組織、議題倡導、立法過程、董氏基金會、菸害防制法 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | As the democracy in Taiwan became more intensely diversified, the promotion of various types of bills on public policies turned more complex and more delicate. In addition, the status of both profit-bearing and non-profit organizations in the process of policy establishment also became rather important. However, practically, the status of Taiwan’s non-profit organizations in the process of policy establishment is still blurred especially in the role-play and the strategy selection in the process of the theories of non-profit organizations, bill promotion and strategy analysis, and to use the research findings as a reference for the relevant non-profit organizations in strategy selections in future legislation processes.It is evident that there are various types of relevant organization roles and policies if the categorization is divided into the relevant theories for non-profit organization and the types of public policies. Due to the limitations on the scope of research, this paper mainly focuses on the promotion strategies of the “value guardian”, the non-profit organizations on “control policies” in the legislation processes. Furthermore, the establishment of the “Tobacco Hazard Prevention and Control Act” promoted by John Tung Foundation, is selected as the main case study for the research. This paper then takes the period of legislation process as the timeline and divides the time into 3 stages: the “legislation formation period” for the Procedural Committee and where the 1st Reading is passed by the Legislation Session; the “bill wresting period” where the bills are examined by the Committees; and the “negotiation period” where negotiations take place between the parties and the organizations and the 2nd and 3rd Readings are passed by the Legislation Session. The 3 different stages are used to analyze the various types of bill promotion strategies employed by John Tung Foundation in the promotion for the establishment of the “Tobacco Hazard Prevention and Control Act” in the different stages, where information are collected through in-depth interviews and other methods to undergo examinations and evaluations on the pros and cons in the bill promotion strategies used.It is found in this research that a number of characteristics including the “strategy focus of a moralized ‘impoverished strategy’”, the “mobile strategy model that combines media appeals”, and the “single and persistent linear operation” are the main bill promotion strategies taken by John Tung Foundation in the promotion for the establishment of the “Tobacco Hazard Prevention and Control Act” that took 2.5 years to get through. The bill discussion culture and the compromise of the Legislative Yuan may have been neglected and the unfamiliarity with bill discussion techniques in the Legislative Yuan may have caused the delay and the failure of the bill promotion in the establishment of the Tobacco Hazard Prevention and Control Act. This research feels that from the example of John Tung Foundation’s promotion of the Tobacco Hazard Prevention and Control Act, the most lacking and the most urgently required for local non-profit organizations in bill promotion and legislation persuasion would be the professional training for bill promotion and legislation persuasion. It is therefore recommended that the local non-profit organizations should strengthen their professional training for bill promotion strategies in the legislation processes in order for them to smoothly complete the mission in bill promotion.Keywords: Non-profit Organizations, Bill Promotion, Legislation Processes, John Tung Foundation, Tobacco Hazard Prevention and Control Act. | en_US |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 第一章 緒論 1第一節 研究動機與研究目的 1第二節 研究範圍與概念界定 3第三節 研究方法 8第四節 研究流程與章節安排 13第二章 理論基礎與分析架構 17第一節 非營利組織的基礎理論 18第二節 議題倡導與議題倡導策略 24第三節 我國立法過程的分析 36第四節 研究架構—非營利組織在立法過程中的議題倡導策略 41第三章 程序委員會及院會一讀---董氏基金會推動「菸害防制法」修訂的立法形成期 …………………………………………………………………………..43第一節 立法過程與國會運作 43第二節 菸害防制法的修法進程 49第三節 董氏基金會的議題倡導策略分析 53第四節 董氏基金會的議題倡導策略評估 57第五節 小結 61第四章 衛生環境及福利委員會---審查董氏基金會推動「菸害防制法」修訂的法案角力期 63第一節 立法過程與國會運作 63第二節 菸害防制法的修法進程 69第三節 董氏基金會的議題倡導策略分析 84第四節 董氏基金會的議題倡導策略評估 89第五節 小結 97第五章 黨團協商及院會二三讀—董氏基金會推動「菸害防制法」修訂的折衝妥協期 ……………………………………………………………………………..99第一節 立法過程與國會運作 99第二節 菸害防制法的修法進程 108第三節 董氏基金會的議題倡導策略分析 114第四節 董氏基金會的議題倡導策略評估 122第五節 小結 132第六章 結論 133第一節 研究發現 133第二節 研究評估與建議 149參考書目 ……………………………………………………………………153圖次圖1-1：研究流程圖 15圖2-1：非營利組織在立法過程議題倡導策略分析架構 42表次表1-1：「菸害防制法」（菸害防制法）修法大事記 3表1-2：研究訪談名單 12表2-1：議題倡導策略的類型及內涵 34表3-1：「立法形成期」的國會運作與政治文化 47表3-2：「立法形成期」菸害防制法修法進程表 53表4-1：「法案角力期」的國會運作與政治文化 67表4-2：「法案角力期」的菸害法制法修法進程 83表5-1：「折衝妥協期」的國會運作與政治文化 106表5-2：「折衝妥協期」的菸害防制法修法進程 113表6-1：菸害防制法重要議題討論情況一覽表 135表6-2：董氏基金會推動「菸害防制法」的議題倡導內容及結果 138表6-3：董氏基金會推動菸害防制法修正之議題倡導策略總覽 144 | zh_TW |
| dc.format.extent | 92274 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 73375 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 83361 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 108241 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 368083 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 529817 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 364518 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 420499 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 394869 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 256171 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 134942 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | - |
| dc.source.uri (資料來源) | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0092932009 | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 非營利組織 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 議題倡導 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 立法過程 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 董氏基金會 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 菸害防制法 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Non-profit Organizations | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Bill Promotion | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Legislation Processes | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | John Tung Foundation | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Tobacco Hazard Prevention and Control Act | en_US |
| dc.title (題名) | 我國非營利組織在立法過程中的議題倡導策略—以董氏基金會推動「菸害防制法」修訂為例 | zh_TW |
| dc.type (資料類型) | thesis | en |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 王千美，1992，〈利益團體遊說活動對政策制訂的影響〉，政治大學公共行政研究所碩士論文 。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 王元廷，2000，〈立法院常設委員會制度與運作之評析〉，立法院法制局專題研究報告專題152號。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 古登美、沈中元、周萬來，1997，《立法理論與實務》，台北：空大。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 田麗虹，2001，《國會助理工作手冊 : 國會生態地圖總導覽》，台北：新自然主義。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 何嵩婷，2005，〈立法院黨團協商制度對國會立法之影響分析：以第五屆立法院為例〉，東吳大學政治學系碩士論文。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 李美華等譯，1998，《社會科學研究方法》，台北：時英。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 吳宜蓁，1998，《議題管理—企業公關的新興課題》，台北：正中。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 林玟純、詹建富，2002，《菸草戰爭》，董氏基金會。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 周漳仁，1999，〈立法遊說之研究－以我國菸害防制法制訂過程為例〉，政治作戰學校政治學系碩士論文。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 周萬來，2000，《議案審議：立法院運作實況》，台北：五南。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 姜誌貞，1998，〈非營利組織政策倡導之研究—以婦女團體為例〉，東吳大學政治學系碩士班碩士論文。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 孫秀蕙，1997，《公共關係—理論、策略與研究實例》，台北：正中。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 徐木蘭、楊君琦、劉仲矩，1998，〈非營利組織公關策略之研究〉，民意研究季刊第204期，p1-25。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 陳淞山，192005，《國會制度解讀：國會權力遊戲手冊》，台北：月旦。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 黃雅文，1999，〈我國非營利組織議題倡導策略之研究〉，國立台灣大學政治學研究所碩士論文。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 黃敦硯，1998，〈我國菸害防制法執行之研究〉，國立中興大學公共政策研究所碩士論文。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 黃瀚鋒，192005，〈利益團體在立法院遊說活動之研究〉，文化大學政治學研究所碩士論文。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 蔡千惠，1998，〈非營利組織遊說策略之研究〉，國立政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 韓意慈，1999，〈非營利組織政策倡導角色之剖析--以台北市廢除公娼事件中的婦女團體為例〉，國立中正大學社會福利系碩士論文。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 羅傳賢，2001，《立法程序與技術》，台北：五南。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Anne1, B. 2003. Strategies of Influence: How Interest Organizations React to Changes in Parliamentary Influence and Activity. Scandinavian Political Studies 26(4): 287-306. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Berry, J. M. 1977. Lobbying for the People: The Political Behavior of Public Interest Groups. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Brudney, J. L. 1993. Volunteer Involvement in the Delivery of Public Services: Advantages and Disadvantages. Public Productivity & Management Review. XVI(3): 283-297. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Fielding, J. E. 192007. Editorial: Revealing and Reversing Tobacco Industry Strategies. American Journal of Public Health. 86(8): 1073-1075. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Givel, M. S. and Glantz, S. 2000. Failure to Defend a Successful State Tobacco Control Program: Policy Lessons from Florida, American Journal of Public Health. 90(5):762-767. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Greenwald, C. 1977. Group power: lobbying & public policy. New York: Praeger. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Hojnacki, M. and Kimball, D. C. 1999. The Who and How of Organizations` Lobbying Strategies in Committee. Journal of Politics. 61(4): 999-1024. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Hrebenar, R. J. and Scott, R. K. 1982. Interest Group Politics in America. New York: Prentice-Hall. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Kingdon, J. W. 192006. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. New York: Harper Collins. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Lijphart, A. 1983. Democracies. New Heaven: Yale University Press. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Menashe, C. L. and Siegel, M. 1999. The Power of a frame: An Analysis of Newspaper Coverage of Tobacco Issues--United States, 1985-192007. Journal of Health Communication. 3(4): 307-325. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Renfro, S. A. 1993. Issues Management and the Use of Technologies in Public Relations. Public Relations Review, 19(3): 261-275. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Smucker, B. 1991. The Nonprofit Lobbying Guide: Advocating Your Cause and Getting Results. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. | zh_TW |
