| Summary: | 村里組織是台灣實施地方自治的最基層編組，而村里資源如何運用與分配，更是影響地方自治行政功能甚鉅，然過去研究鮮少討論村里公共資源的分配政治現象。於此，本研究以政治學的分配理論為基礎，採取質性研究方法，以村里基層工作經費為研究主軸，透過深入訪談及文件分析探討村里長是分配村里資源的情形，並分析公所與村里長之間委託-代理關係的監督失靈現象。
研究結果顯示，村里長分配村里資源的模式偏向Cox-McCubbins的模型，村里長以是否為「選舉票倉區」，作為分配村里基層工作經費的基準，而鄉鎮公所與村里長之間的委託-代理關係，則因資訊不對稱及里幹事聯繫失衡對村里長的行政監督有所失靈。
基於研究發現，本文建議，村里基層工作經費應依照村里的大小及人口予以公式化的補助金分配，此外村里長與公所之間的行政責任釐清，可助於減少資訊不對稱的問題，最後村里長運用村里資源的情形應建立衡量指標，落實稽核制度。本文為一初探性嘗試，提供台灣分配政策與政治研究另外一種思考的面向，並且提供未來台灣分配政治研究的實證基礎。 === Village and Neighborhood organization is the most basic unit of local governance in Taiwan, and how the village and neighborhood uses and allocates resources has important impact on the local self-government administration. However, existing research rarely discusses distributive politics of public resources in the village arena. Therefore, based on the perspective of distributive theory, this study explores the allocation of village resources by in-depth interviews and archival research. It further presents the supervision failure by township, on village and neighborhood.
The results of this study confirm Cox-McCubbins ’s model on resources allocation. The village and neighborhood chiefs use "election support zone" as criteria to allocate the village and neighborhood funds. The principal-agency relationship between township and village was disconnected due to information asymmetries and loss of contact with the village secretary, which leads to the failure of administrative supervision on village chiefs regarding allocation of the funds..
This study proposes three suggestions for reforms. First, the village and neighborhood funds should be distributed in accordance with a formula based on the size of the village and neighborhood. Second, the administrative responsibility should be clarified between the village and neighborhood chief and townships to reduce the information asymmetry problem. Finally, the indicators measuring the effectiveness of the fund’s usage, should be constructed in order to enforce the audit system. This research is a pilot attempt to provide another perspective and empirical analysis on the distributive policy at local level. It has theoretical and empirical implications for distributive politics.
|
|---|
