國家、公民社會與審議民主：公民會議在台灣的發展經驗

State, Civil Society, and Deliberative Democracy: The Practices of Consensus Conferences in Taiwan

本文試圖回答什麼因素影響「國家贊助的公民會議」在台灣的發展及其運作特質。本文採取「政治制度結構」的觀點，從國家與公民社會的互動關係、代議制度的特質，和國家組織的決策結構這三組制度要素的聚合作用，來分析公民會議在台灣的發展與整體特性。本文的分析指出，現有代議民主體制的弊病所滋生的公眾不滿，使得公民會議所要體現的審議民主理念具有一定程度的公共接受度。政府決策結構對學界的相對開放性，使得創新性理念可以傳導到政府機構。民進黨執政菁英，由於無法掌握國會多數，又必須面對社會團體的抗爭和要求擴大參與的壓力，於是策略性推動公民會議，來協助解決民主治理的問題。在公民會議理念的擴散網絡中，社會團體和學界，也透過參與政府決策或政策諮詢的途徑，要求或建議政府辦理公民會議。這些條件的聚合促成「國家贊助的公民會議」的顯著發展。本文也指出，國家組織決策結構的特質，導致公民會議的規範架構和程序原則無法鑲嵌在法規、機構和例行化操作，使得有些政府發動的公民會議並沒有嚴守程序規則。缺乏制度規範損及公民會議的正當性和政策影響力。本文也分析政治結構所型塑公民社會團體對國家贊助的公民會議的態度。一方面，代議體制的弊病使得一些社會團體受到審議民主理念的吸引；另一方面，某些公民社會團體的組織特性，以及和威權國家對抗的歷史所形成的政治性格，也使他們對國家和一般公民的能力不太信任，也傾向於採取衝突性的對抗策略。這種性格使某些社會團體對政府發動的公民會議保持戒心。社會團體對公民會議的矛盾態度，影響了公民會議在台灣的運作特質與後續發展。

The consensus conference is an innovative model of citizen participation that embodies the idea of deliberative democracy. Beginning in 2004, state-sponsored consensus conferences flourished in Taiwan. This paper analyzes the developmental trend and characteristics of Taiwan's state-sponsored consensus conferences. Adopting a political structure perspective, it investigates how the institutional configuration of state-society relations, representative institutions, and governmental decision-making structures helped shape the development and operation of consensus conferences in Taiwan. It is argued that several institutional factors combined to create favorable conditions for developing state-sponsored conferences in Taiwan. Popular discontent with the functioning of representative institutions made the appeals for deliberative democracy attractive, while the relative openness to academic consultation rendered possible the flow of consensus conferences' innovative ideas from the scholarly community to governmental officials. Facing legislative battles from opposition parties and increasing pressures of protests and participation from social groups, the minority government of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) strategically used state-sponsored consensus conferences to solve problems of governance. This paper also points out the institutional drawbacks that inhibited the sustainable development of statesponsored consensus conferences in Taiwan. Constrained by some features of state decision-making structures, the normative framework and procedural rules of consensus conferences could not be embedded in laws, institutions, and routinized practices. As a result, operational rules were not strictly followed and procedural neutrality was violated in some cases of the state-sponsored consensus conferences, which hurt the legitimacy and policy effects of this innovative model of citizen participation. The political structure perspective helps account for civic groups' attitudes toward state-sponsored consensus conferences. On the one hand, amid the popular discontents caused by adversarial politics, some civic groups attempted to promote consensus conferences to improve the quality of representative democracy; on the other hand, some social groups' undemocratic organizing and confrontational approach led certain leaders of civic groups to have little trust in government and civic competence, thus making them wary of state-sponsored consensus conferences. The ambivalent attitudes of civic society groups influenced the development and operation of consensus conferences in Taiwan.