Facing labor shortages and looming economic challenges, East Asian countries decided to open their labor markets and recruit low-skilled foreign workers. For example, Taiwan adopted a guest-worker program in 1992 that heavily involved private recruitment agencies as labor mediators, whereas Korea launched a temporary labor migration program in 2003 through government-to-government agreements. Despite their similar democratic experiences and developmental histories, why has Korea developed a government-managed guest-worker program while Taiwan has established a brokerage-driven program to control foreign workers? What are the driving factors behind the divergence of labor migration governance between Taiwan and Korea? To answer the question, this paper first compares key features of their foreign labor policy, including recruitment, admission, employment, and return of migrant workers, and then examines the main drivers behind the institutional divergence. This study argues that three factors have largely determined the divergent outcomes of labor migration policies: (1) the power balance between economic and social ministries in the government, (2) political pressures from civil society for migrants’ rights, and (3) systematic participation of labor unions in social movements for labor migrants.
Regular Issue
第 24 卷・第 2 期
發行於 十二月, 2020
Local elected officials are expected to advise or mandate their citizens to take protective action when their communities face imminent risk. These decisions are challenging, as they must be made with imperfect information. This study identifies the factors that influence Taiwan’s local elected officials’ decisions to suspend public and school operations in response to impending typhoon risk. Through an analysis of data collected from semi-structured interviews with nineteen informants, this article reveals multiple interrelated factors that influence such decisions. These factors include (1) the storm’s strength, timing, speed, and path; (2) a jurisdiction’s geographical, economic, and social characteristics; (3) internal stakeholder factors; (4) external stakeholder factors; and (5) the elected officials’ experience, knowledge, and values. These factors contribute to the suspension decision process because officials are under pressure to meet legal, managerial, and political accountabilities. This study reveals the complexities associated with risk response decision making and contributes to our understanding of how public officials make decisions in uncertain situations.
原住民族遺骨與文物返還是近來國際原住民族運動與原住民族研究（indigenous studies）的一大熱點。而 2017 年發生的「馬遠布農族遺骸爭議」，恰恰標示出了本土返還議題的爭點所在。有鑑於此，本研究擬從馬遠事件出發，透過制度性的視角來對相關議題進行批判性的檢討。本文指出，所謂的「返還」不只是遺骨或文物物理上的移動與回歸；它所真正處理的其實是權利的重新定義與再探索，更是各關鍵利害關係人間（特別是政府、大學／博物館／研究機構、學術社群、原住民族等）的關係重構。有鑑於問題的複雜，本文提出：吾人應把馬遠一案視為通盤檢討類似案例的契機，透過權利論述與制度設計的雙管齊下，來促成遺骨與文物返還的終極解決。為此，作者指出政府宜展現面對過往黑暗歷史（dark history）的決心，並提供政策引導、經費支持、與法制規範，來協助返還的進程。唯有如此，先人的遺骨才能早日返家安息。
過往探討一國外交政策發展，論者以為影響外交政策走向多因內部或外部因素所致，前者以為外交政策受國家內部政治發展影響甚鉅，外交政策變化和國內政權轉換過程有極大關連，多數外交決策分析研究途徑著重於此。相對於內部因素，其他研究指出外部強權才是影響國家外交政策走向的主要因素，國際權力體系格局才是主宰國家行為的關鍵所在。內部或外部因素影響這一群國家外交政策發展各有支持論調，作者在這個基礎上提出一些觀察。
本文選擇烏克蘭與吉爾吉斯作為觀察外交政策走向，並以此研究內外因素主導如何影響這兩國政策路線發展，選擇這兩國主要因素是烏、吉兩國近期內部有極大的政權震盪現象，如果我們能觀察到這些國家內部發生極大變動之際又能找出其與外交政策變動關聯，那麼就能確認內部因素的重要性。反之，即便內部因素產生激烈震盪但外交政策卻無甚改變，那麼我們就必須重新思考其他因素影響外交政策走向的可能。本文研究指出烏克蘭革命與該國外交政策走向同幅，外交路線配合政權更迭而更動；吉爾吉斯革命與外交政策走向無甚關連。本文的解釋是：一、革命對烏、吉兩國外交路線變化影響甚微，外部強權擠壓或大小國家間不對稱性依賴才是影響兩國路線主因；二、外部地緣政治因素是決定兩國外交政策走向根本性因素，革命造成的政權轉移對外交路線選擇影響，僅為放大、縮小或無甚關聯方式存在。
本研究基於社群主義的觀點，透過柬埔寨兩處偏鄉村落的深度訪談、田野觀察，再輔以文件資料分析，檢視偏鄉公民社會的樣態，並從兩村異同處，剖析阻礙共善建構的因素，藉此了解何以在社群主義價值普及的社會裡，村民面對威脅生計的生態環境危機無法觸發共善行動。研究結果顯示，兩村面對環境危機之所以皆無積極作為，原因在於低教育水準與低所得使村民低估自己參與解決環境問題的可能性，以及赤柬時期對整體社會帶來的集體創傷尚未修復，導致人際信任程度仍不足以支撐成本較高且回饋不確定的共善行動。而從兩村在社群意識上的差異比較，則可看出所得水準、村落型態、與非政府組織提供協助的類型，是導致差異的主要原因。