| Summary: | 碩士 === 南華大學 === 國際暨大陸事務學系公共政策研究碩士班 === 102 === My thesis attempts to examine the experience of consensus conference held in Taiwan form the viewpoint of Gutmann and Thompson's deliberative democracy theory. By exploring the meaning, purpose, value and range of Gutmann and Thompson's deliberative democracy, it can help clarify questions about the consensus conferences in Taiwan. To view the process of consensus conference by the procedural and substantive principles of deliberative democracy, it can figure out consensus conference fit in with the standard of deliberative democracy or not.
First of all, my thesis is focus on the meaning and features of deliberative democracy. The conception that Gutmann and Thompson pointed out tries to solve the disagreements about the theory, and the disagreements is universal in human society. The moral disagreement is caused by “scarcity of resources’’ , ‘’limited generosity’’, ‘’incompatible vales’’, and’’ incomplete understanding’’. The society itself have no power to solve the problems arisen from these conflicts. The policy problems can be overcome with deliberative procedure, and then the policy and law will be promoted easily. Secondly, This thesis tries to introducing and analyzing the principles and conditions of deliberative democracy: principle of reciprocity, principle of publicity, principle of accountability, basic liberty, basic opportunity and fair opportunity. Thirdly, these principles will be directed the explanation and application to actual case, the certain consensus conference held in Taiwan is examined for the principles of deliberative democracy. Was there something wrong with the process of this consensus conference? Or the conception and principles of deliberative democracy can't apply to the consensus conference. This question would be figured out in this thesis.
The conclusion of this research is︰If the government would like to solve the problems of policy, the conception and principles of deliberative democracy must be expounded and advocated. Only everyone have the idea of deliberation, it may be succeeded by the practices of deliberative democracy.
|
|---|
