英文摘要 |
While collaborative policy involvement and policy-making have become the golden rules of public participation, few studies have focused on how the government responds to the public's policy requests through ICTs in the process of collaborative policy involvement and policy-making, not to mention analyzing the underlying reasons and logic were taken by public agencies. Therefore, we treat the theory of policy argument and its modes mentioned by Dunn as a suitable analytical framework and tool for inspecting the underlying reasons and logic of public policy-making. The 152 cases of e-petition on the JOIN.gov platform were selected for this study. We conducted content analysis and cluster analysis to illustrate the models of policy argument used by the government, and identified their specific response patterns; we also explored the relationship between the different response patterns and the attributions of the petitions. According to current data, ''Method'' is the most dominant policy argument mode used by the government, and ''Generalization'' is the least dominant. Six different response patterns and their own attributions are identified, although there is no significant relationship between them. This study also discusses the role and function of ''authority documents'' (i.e., laws, regulations and policies), and analyzes the procedure and form of the government's response. The results from our study provide follow-up academics and practitioners more insight into the reality of e-collaborative policy involvement in Taiwan. |