評析Schmidt「論述制度論」與對政策制訂的啟示

Analysis of Schmidt's Discursive Institutionalism and Its Implication for Policy Making

學者Vivien Schmidt 提出「論述制度論」試圖矯治原來三種新制度論過度結構化的傾向以及受限於路徑依賴、文化規範與固定利益計算等因素，因此無法對於行為者自主與自發性的行動與決策提出合理解釋的缺陷。Schmidt 認為制度分析必須從行為者理念與論述的實質內涵分析著手，才能將政策理念的通則化層次釐清。其次，政策理念的傳達必需重視政策面的協調論述，取得政治菁英的共識。同時，必須注重從上到下的溝通論述，始能將理念傳達至市民社會與草根大眾，獲得共識與實踐能力。本文認為政策理念的語言論述能力考驗現代民主國家執政能力，如果執政政府未能對政策理念進行有效的論述建構，政策將無法獲得成功的實踐。Schmidt 提出論述制度論後受到學界廣泛的注意，尤其對於民主國家政策制訂過程在政策溝通、民意表徵與公民參與的重要性甚具啟發性。

Vivien Schmidt has posited a discursive institutionalism as the forth new institutionalism. It claims the epoch of “ideational turn”, and integrate cognitive psychology into her analytic frameworks as an independent variable for explanation. Schmidt takes ideas as operationalized and verified variable to remedy the tendential structuralism and positivism in three new institutionalism approaches. In so doing, ideational variable or ideas are brought back into new institutionalism as a reflection of autonomous agent. This paper aims to provide a clear image on Schmidt's interpretation of what is ideas and discourse, and anatomize the analytic framework in discursive institutionalism. The importance of the content of ideas and discourse, the discursive interaction and deliberative discourse for policy making process are emphasized.