| Summary: | 碩士 === 南華大學 === 公共行政與政策研究所 === 97 === In Taiwan, a climbing quantity of trash had been following the economic rapid growth and increase of population and thus, ways of collecting trash treatment fee with the residents were under discussion by more and more people. One of the ways Taipei City Government had adopted was to count the fee based on how much water a family uses person. However, many residents doubted its fairness and most important of all, its result showed that it was not helpful to trash reduction and increase of recyclables. The city government had repeated its researches and discussions on the new policy of collecting the way before deciding to replace the way, in question, with a new one. Then, the government had decided to implement, since July 1, 2000, the per bag trash collection fee policy and the fee was counted based on how much trash a person or family threw. This was a user-charge idea hidden under this trash treatment measure because the city government expected a fair and reasonable system of collecting trash treatment fee in order to trash reduction and recycle more. Additionally, a failure or success of this policy would be a significant benchmark because Taipei City has been the first district where it was undertaken.
I use, in my thesis, a case-study research method. I apply William Dunn''s policy evaluation model to review Taipei City''s per bag trash collection fee policy. This model consists of six indices and they are, respectively, effectiveness, efficiency, adequacy, equity, responsiveness and appropriateness. The study finds that the policy outcome reaches the specified level composed of those six indicators. Following the appraisal is to further make an analysis of how this policy is designed and what factors may be contained in it. I will examine it from cause-and-consequence approach, and policy goal, tool target and implementation. I expect to provide a basis for other local governments to learn upon and make possible the practice in other cities or counties of Taiwan.
However, there are still some risks of a failure in practices such as illegal trash treatments and exclusive trash bags counterfeited. I suggest that, in addition to more usual and careful checks, local governments should emphasize a trash reduction prior to consumptions as well as educate the public with ideas of environmental protection to arouse their consciousness of loving where they live. I think that the ways are the better solutions to the trash problem to achieve the goals of trash reduction and recycling more.
|
|---|
