「公共性」概念意涵之探索性研究

• Main Author: 蕭鈺
• Language: 中文
• Published: 國立政治大學
• Online Access: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/cdrfb3/gsweb.cgi?o=dstdcdr&i=sid=%22A2010000077%22.

　　本論文以「公共性」為研究焦點，針對其概念意涵進行探索性研究，採取的研究方法除一般常見的文獻分析法之外，主要是以質的研究當中的深度訪談法做為主要的研究方法。在研究對象方面，本論文是以立意抽樣的方式，針對中央機關與地方機關的中階及中高階公務人員，選擇於國立政治大學附設公務人員教育中心進修的學員兩班實施訪談，實際完成訪談者計四十八人。 　　藉由本論文有關訪談內容的分析，可發現本研究受訪者在認知「公共性」此一概念時，其所持觀點及所認知「公共性」概念的應然內涵，與本論文依據文獻探討結果所建構的理念型大致吻合。綜合而言，受訪者對於「公共性」概念意涵的認知可摘述如下：（一）受訪者認知「公共」此一概念明顯偏向採取國家中心論的論點，而認為「公共為顧客」的觀點較能說明所謂「公共」的指涉對象者居多數，「公共為公民」的觀點則次之；（二）多數受訪者認為目前一般民眾缺乏積極參與的公民意識與實務作為，而政府也不相信民眾能夠自主性地參與公共事務，惟今後公共事務的參與勢將朝更為積極的方向邁進；（三）多數受訪者認為不同觀點之間有可能整合，所期待的整合方式則偏向是以「公共為顧客」及「公共為公民」的觀點為核心進行整合，且可以預期「公共為公民」的觀點在整合後的架構中將扮演日益吃重的角色；（四）大多數受訪者同意本研究建構所得「社群意識」、「永續傳承」、「公民自主」、「道德標準」、「實質理性」、「責任倫理」、「共同參與」、「互動對話」等八項特質都能夠說明「公共性」的應然內涵。 　　本論文針對相關議題進行討論所獲得的結論是，我國中階及中高階公務人員對於「公共性」概念的認知大體呈現出一種「順勢而為」的態勢，其中對於公民參與的未來則是明顯具有「審慎樂觀」的看法，此種認知確實在達成公共行政應有的公共目的上有其正面助益。另一方面，從本論文就相關議題進行的延伸探討中，則可據以獲得以下對於我國公共行政實務運作的某些重要啟示：（一）公共行政的角色應定位為培能性的公共服務；（二）顧客導向概念的內涵應根據公共行政的公共目的進行轉化以銜接「公共為公民」的觀點；（三）「公共為公民」的觀點不應被視為一種過於理想化的看法；（四）「公共性」概念的整合須經由公私部門協力、合夥或合產等合作行為予以落實，其最佳的實踐場域就在基層的社區；（五）面對「公共性」概念內涵的變動可能，公共行政人員必須學習如何「理解公共」；（六）政府再造的首要事項應係回歸本質面的思考，讓共同治理成為政府與人民的共同責任。 　　最後，為了避免理想只是徒託空言，而讓公共事務的處理能夠超越各說各話、各行其是的困境，本論文認為當務之急莫過於，在行政體系內部與社會中分別建立讓公務人員與民眾均能作交互溝通性學習、討論及思辯的行政運作機制與互動對話機制，俾使公共行政真正成為由「公眾」賦予生命力的「公共」行政。 === 　　This dissertation is an empirical study on the concept of “publicness.” The primary qualitative research method used for this dissertation is the in-depth interview and literature review. Through purposive sampling, the interviewees are middle and higher-ranking civil servants from central and local governmental organizations. Forty-eight samples are collected. 　　Based on analysis of the interview results, the author discovered that the interviewees’ perceptions of the meaning of “publicness” correspond mostly to the ideal type established as a result of the author’s review of the literature. Generally speaking, the interviewees’ conception of “publicness” is as follows: 1) the interviewees’ perception of “publicness” leans obviously towards the state-centered view. The majority of the interviewees think that “public” refers to “the public as customer.” The second highest percentage of the interviewees’ view is that “public” refers to “the public as citizen;” 2) most of the interviewees consider that there is a lack of citizens’ awareness to actively participate and actually act in the current general public. At the same time, the interviewees express that the government also does not think that the general public can take the initiative to participate in public affairs. However, the interviewees believe that participation in public affairs will lead toward a more positive direction; 3) most of the interviewees think that it is possible to integrate the various points of the perspectives. The anticipated conceptual integration framework is based on “the public as customer” and “the public as citizen.” It can also be expected that “the public as citizen” will play a more and more important role in the structure after the integration; 4) most of the interviewees agree that the following eight characteristics can represent what meaning “publicness” should carry: “sense of community,” “sustainable development,” “civic autonomy,” “moral standards,” “substantial rationality,” “responsible ethics,” “public participation” and “in-depth dialog.”