賦權於民的參與式預算：以臺北市大安區設置Youbike為例

Abstract

本研究探討參與式預算(participatory budgeting，簡稱PB)的權力關係。PB是公民與政府互動合作改變傳統治理結構的方式，透過賦權(empowerment)使公民擁有權力及主動性治理所在的社區。本研究聚焦在大安區，以PB概念出發，透過本人提案「安全大安，美麗未來」，在國立臺北教育大學前設置Youbike站點，作為了解PB過程的個案，並以David Harvey都市治理的理論概念對賦權尺度及權力關係進行檢視，討論臺北市PB的問題與困境。資料蒐集透過文獻、深度訪談區公所、市政府取得以及本研究對於PB的提案人、桌長經驗，持續對大安區做參與觀察，透過權力理論的對話，了解脈絡下的權力關係。研究發現：在最初臺北市政府參與時，已將民眾提案的框架限制住，陪伴學校、里長與市民之間理想目標並不一致，PB執行時僅能依照框架下的可及範圍操作。且權力掌握確實能將部分PB資源壟斷，賦權於民的治理方式備受侷限；其次，公民提案還是交由議員審議、政府審視公益性來達成，以專業理性判斷案件執行許可，公民僅掌握參與權力，PB最後僅是一種政府治理方式，以及政府的日常業務，而非權力下放或解決資源不均的問題；最後，政府之間資源相互獨立，造成預算執行緩慢，影響PB效益。結論指出，雖然部分市政預算給予民眾操作，在預算制度下資源、權力與資訊不平等，權力還是由政府掌握；加上程序較為冗長，民眾缺乏主動性，容易轉為政府主導、可預測性以及提案以鄰里發展為主的PB。

This study explores Participatory Budgeting (PB). PB is a way for citizens and government to interact and cooperate to change the traditional urban governance structure. Through Empowerment, citizens have the power and initiative to give the community in which they are located. Through my proposal, the research focus on Daan District,“Keep Daan District safe and have a more beautiful future.”Set up Ubike in front of National Taipei University of Education, a case to understand PB. Through David Harvey’s theoretical concept of urban governance to be acquainted with empowerment, and discussed the problems of Taipei city PB. Data about this thesis was collected through literature, in-depth interviews with district halls and Taipei City Hall, as well as the experience of the proponents and PB desk leaders of PB in the thesis, and continued participatory observation of Daan District,throught the dialogue of power theory,understanding the power relationship under the context.The research result is, that when the Taipei City Government participated in the initial stage, it had limited the framework of public proposals, and the ideal goals of schools, the chiefs of village and citizens were not consistent, and the PB could only operate within the scope of the framework. Moreover, the power can monopolize some participatory bud geting resources, and the governance method of empowering the people is limited; secondly, citizens’ proposals are still reached for public benefit, citizens only have the power of participation, and PB is only a form of urban governance, and the daily business of the government, rather than decentralization or solving the problem of uneven resources; finally, resources between other governments is not coordinated,resulting in the slow implementation of participatory budgeting and affecting PB benefit. The conclusion points out that although some municipal budgets are operated by the public, resources, power, and PB information are unequal under the budget system, and the power is still controlled by the government. In addition, the procedures are lengthy and the public lacks initiative, and Participatory budgeting is easy to become the government-led, predictable, and proposal，just focused on neighborhood units.