Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy
logo-Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy

Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy
logo_m-Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy

    Jump To中央區塊/Main Content :::
  • About JSSP
    • About JSSP
    • Indexed in
    • Subscription Information
    • Contact Us
  • Editorial Board
  • Notes to Contributors
    • Guidelines for Submitted Manuscripts
    • Publication Ethics Statement
    • Statement Regarding Artificial Intelligence (AI)
    • Review Process
    • Online Submission
  • Volumes and Issues
    • Forthcoming Papers
  • Annual Statistics
    • Submission Trends by Academic Discipline in 2014-2024
    • First Round Processing Time of Submissions in 2024
    • Top 10 Most Viewed Papers in 2024
    • Top 10 Most Downloaded Papers in 2024
  • RCHSS
中文
RCHSS
search
Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy
  • Home
  • Volumes and Issues
  • 《Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy》 Volume 36, Number 04
  • Facebook
  • line
  • email
  • Twitter
  • Print
2024 / December Volume 36 No.4
Participatory Budgeting with Enclave Deliberation: A Case Study of a Project on Disability Employment Promotion

Number of Clicks:3979; Number of Full Text Downloads:233; Number of Abstract Downloads:9;

發刊日期/Published Date
2024 / December
中英文篇名/Title
飛地審議模式的參與式預算實踐:以身心障礙者就業之參與式預算試辦計畫為例
Participatory Budgeting with Enclave Deliberation: A Case Study of a Project on Disability Employment Promotion
論文屬性/Type
研究論文 Research Article
作者/Author
盧孟宗, 葉欣怡
Meng-tsung Lu, Hsin-yi Yeh
頁碼/Pagination
903-941
摘要/Abstract

本文以「身心障礙者就業促進參與式預算試辦計畫」為案例,探討飛地審議(enclave deliberation)的內涵及實踐。參與者由於具有類同群體身分,既能強化平等感及參與意願,也得以認識群體內部差異,並經由審議促進群體認同與需求共識,而非質疑者所推論將導向極化立場與單一價值。同時,政策主體的現身,雖確能部分提升障礙者社會形象與地位,並轉化其與福利服務團體、行政部門間的權力關係,但單一計畫仍不足以全然改變整體政策環境結構。而後續仍需經驗探討飛地模式結合各類審議實作的方式,及整合至審議體系的策略,以期更妥善地回應包容與平等原則。

Taking the participatory budgeting project on disability employment promotion as an example, this study aims at illuminating the concept of enclave deliberation. By adopting enclave deliberation, people with similar characteristics or social positions were encouraged to participate more due to a sense of equality based on the similarities. Although the participants simultaneously comprehended the differences among them, they were still able to build group identity and form consensus on policy needs through deliberation. Unlike some arguments, enclave deliberation does not result in opinion polarization. Meanwhile, whereas the presence of policy subjects did improve the social impression, and status also partially changed the power relationships between the disabled, non-profit organizations on welfare, and public sectors, this single PB project still could not transform the existing structures entirely. Future studies should investigate how enclave deliberation can bring marginal groups’ opinions into the decision-making process and fulfill the inclusion and equality principles more properly.

關鍵字/Keyword
飛地審議, 審議民主, 參與式預算, 身心障礙者, 公共參與
enclave deliberation, deliberative democracy, participatory budgeting, disabilities, public Participation
學科分類/Subject
政治學, 社會學
Political Science, Sociology
主題分類/Theme

DOI
10.53106/1018189X202302001
檔案下載/Download
Full Text Abstract
相關文章
  • Citizen Consciousness and Citizen Participation in Taiwan
  • Does Deliberation Foster Civic Activism? Public Deliberation, Social Capital and Political Engagement
  • Popular Sovereignty and Dernocracy: An Interpretation of Carl Schrnitt's Theory of Dernocracy
  • The Impact of Citizenship on Political Participation among Taiwan’s Public: Evidence from Two Citizenship Surveys in 2012 and 2018
  • Autonomy and Democracy

  • About JSSP
  • Editorial Board
  • Notes to Contributors
  • Volumes and Issues
  • Annual Statistics

Research Center for Humanities and Social Sciences, Academia Sinica, No. 128, Sec. 2, Academia Rd, Taipei 115, Taiwan

Tel: 886-2-27898156 Fax: 02-27898157 Email: issppub@sinica.edu.tw

© Copyright 2025. RCHSS Sinica All Rights Reserved.Privacy Policy & Security PolicyVersion:V1.1.3