從經濟人走向社會人：對公共政策理論的再詮釋

From Economic Man to Social Man: A Reinterpretation of Public Policy Theory

過去在古典經濟學及理性主義的影響下，從Lasswell於1951年發展「政策科學」（policy science）一詞開始，影響了後續政府在制定公共政策時，傾向找出一個能夠滿足問題需求及利害關係人滿意的最佳解。然在真實世界中，理性主義期盼的答案並不存在，人類經常基於某些個人內在因素，做出理性主義無法解釋的種種「異常」或「非理性」行為。由於政府對於「異常」及「非理性」的陌生與無知，導致公共政策在制定與執行上，難以契合許多利害關係人的真實需求，以致失去了民眾對政策的支持。行為經濟學及演化心理學的出現，給了公共政策另一個可能的答案：人類並非是經濟人，而是作為社會人存在。本文透過文獻分析法，從行為經濟學的展望理論、捷思、認知偏誤，以及演化心理學中的心智模組、社會適應等觀點，提出人們做決定時可能產生的思考慣性及生物機制，部分回應了過去公共政策過程理論無法完整回答的微觀層次問題，也對未來的公共政策決策者在政策實務規劃及設計上，提供不同角度的寶貴見解。

In the past, the influence of classical economics and rationalism, beginning with Lasswell’s introduction of the term policy science in 1951, has influenced subsequent governments to develop public policy to find the best solution that meets the needs of a particular public problem and its satisfactory outcome with the stakeholders. Nevertheless, under practical circumstances, the expected outcomes posited by rationality may not always be manifested. Human beings frequently make decisions that are considered“anomalous”or“irrational”due to personal circumstances that cannot be fully explained by rationality. As a result of the government’s lack of awareness and knowledge regarding such“anomalous”and“irrational”behaviors, the development and execution of public policies encounter challenges in effectively addressing the genuine requirements of various stakeholders. Consequently, this misalignment contributes to a decline in public endorsement for these programs. The advent of behavioral economics and evolutionary psychology presents an additional potential answer for public policies: People are not existing as economic men but social men. This study employs an analysis of relevant literature to shed light on the cognitive habits and biological mechanisms that individuals may acquire when engaging in decision-making processes. It explores these phenomena from the perspectives of prospect theory, heuristics, cognitive biases, mental models, and social adaptation within the domains of cognitive psychology and biology. The current study partially addresses the micro-level inquiries that previous theories on the process of public policy were unable to comprehensively address. Moreover, it offers useful insights for future decision-makers in public policy, aiding them in practical planning and design from various perspectives