| Summary: | 博士 === 國立政治大學 === 地政學系 === 105 === The government is based on the political policy, the public interest, and through the decentralization of power to reduce (or avoid) the factors that lead to government failure. Are the systems for the establishment of such internal government deliberations sound and can they provide a fair environment for consideration? Will they seriously affect the follow-up administrative sanctions of the competent authorities?
The purpose of this paper is as follows: First, to discuss whether there are informal rules in the operation of the organization, and if so, do these informal rules affect the formal rules? How should the review be assessed to avoid distorting the formal rules? Second, to explore the organization through different members of the organization of individual behavior, how does one complete the operation of the organization so that the amendment is subject to independent consideration? Third, what are the collective actions of the government's internal deliberations that make the resolution of its action fair and avoid black box operations? Fourth, to consider the relationship between the system and public participation as to how the hearing system should be arranged with the review system to establish public and private cooperation and insure an open and transparent administrative review system?
Consider how the investigators who have discussed the objectivity of the organization in this paper (staff members and applicants) and are involved in the discussion of the operation of the organization facilitate in-depth interviews through personal contact, and can participate in observing the organization. There is use of multiple methods, and the nature of the analysis and quantitative analysis, the first qualitative method of literature analysis, to understand the members and staff members and their review of the organization. The questionnaires were then used to quantitatively analyze the similarities and differences of the interviewees. Finally, the relevant topics were confirmed by qualitative observation and the results were summarized and analyzed.
The establishment of a successful review system should include the following four factors: (i) a fair and balanced system of consideration. (ii) participants who can independently express their views on the organization of the operating environment. (iii) resolutions supported by the majority of people that can influence the implementation decisions of the competent authorities. (iv) multiple opinions and full arguments to balance the conflict.
Summary of conclusions: First, consider that the organizing process of the informal rules should be timely reviewed. Second, provide consideration of members of the independent review of the environment. Third, clearly review the organization's decision-making model to enhance the consideration of fairness and efficiency. Fourth, collectively expand and improve the diversity of participation through wide public opinion.
Recommendations: First, the institutional aspects: (a) the assessment of land use values life judgments rather than only professional and technical planning. (b) it is better for more people to participate and the sooner the better. (c) the fairness of land use consideration should prevail over efficiency. (d) include different roles for the purpose of multi-oriented analysis. Second, the organization should amend the relevant institutional arrangements, and the internal government should consider the organization as a "public agent" type agency.
Keywords: deliberative organization, system establishment, organization of operation, consideration of democracy, informal rules
|
|---|
