The judgement analysis in building Su-Hua Free Highway

• Main Authors: Hau-jhih Yen, 顏豪志
• Other Authors: Ning Chang
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2008
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/66862891825668435299

碩士 === 義守大學 === 管理研究所碩士班 === 96 === During the past decades pursuing Su-Hua Free Highway construction by the residents in Hualien, promoting more commercial activities and sightseeing affairs, even though the voice of environmental groups called for the postponing or siege of the construction appeared and some resistance occurred, through the opinion survey we still find that most local habitants still stand on the side of proceeding the construction. This public construction required budget up to 93 billion NT dollars, had been past by the central government without environmental evaluation, discussing acception opinion from common people in 2002. Therefore, under NPOs protest, the former primer Yu Shyi-Kun declared to postpone the construction. The study uses Su-Hua Free Highway as the task and local stakeholders like citizens, government officers, tourism and environment protect group are interviewed and surveyed using the Social Judgment Theory (SJT) as the guiding methodology. Social Judgment Theory mainly plumbs the issue of “understanding” which generated from the discrepancy between decision maker’s subjective cognition and objective environment, and the issue of “conflict” which resulted from the discrepancy of every decision maker’s subjective cognition, as well as seeks for what causes the cognitive conflict in public policy decisions and explores the method to reduce the cognitive conflict.To survey the conflicts’ degree in every decision maker and provide suggestions to government for consultation to draw up relative policies while facing similar controversial issue is what the study for. The result shows all groups have accordable comments on “economical develop”. Maybe the government deal with Su-Hua Free Highway issue should satisfy all group’s needs and opinions as could as possible and try to gain a consensus. The officers get highest weights in this factor. We can know they take the factor as important. The conservation groups get the lowest weights in this factor. However, the research result shows officers support this factor. All groups get quite high weights on “the degrees of environment destroy” and support it. This result also tells us all groups pay much attention to this factor. For this reason the decision-maker should try to balance economy development and environment protection. The officers get the highest weights in this factor and the conservation groups get the lowest. But the research result shows the conservation groups support this factor .But the officers get lowest. Finally, we can know all groups get common views on “the degree of the traffic safety and convenient”. All groups argue that “the degree of the traffic safety and convenient” get higher, they support it more. The research result shows the officers get the highest weights in this factor and the conservation groups get the lowest. This result tells almost groups of subjects have an idea that they need a raod of safety and convenient.