臺灣的新自由主義時刻：危機、典範競逐與新古典經濟學者的進擊

Taiwan's Neoliberal Moment: Crisis, Paradigm Competition and the Ascent of Neoclassical Economists

在臺灣，新自由主義為何能突破發展型國家的價值與世界觀而崛起？本文聚焦過去文獻皆忽略的角色：新古典經濟學者，是他們抓住了1970年代二次石油危機以及1980年代初期總體經濟失衡所賦予的機會，透過辯論、遊說與宣傳，帶來一套新的認知框架與理解危機的因果故事，翻轉了國家與市場之間的價值階序，促成1985年全面自由化政策，也讓他們從決策邊緣邁向核心。本文主要問題意識在於探討：新自由主義理念在什麼樣的社會條件下出現、透過什麼管道散佈，又如何被接受並影響政策？從歷史制度論出發，我論證在1980年代政治經濟結構變遷的挑戰下，舊的發展型國家典範失靈，而新自由主義通過了「經濟可行性」、「政治可行性」的考驗，才為當局採納作為務實解決問題的手段。但由於落實階段缺乏「行政可行性」，並受到舊發展型國家官僚的制衡，以致於臺灣的新自由主義化路徑呈現溫和且務實的特色，發展型國家傳統只是逐漸撤退。最後，本文也針對主流詮釋提出一項方法論反省：新自由主義化既是政商結盟與階級利益分配的政治過程，也是政策認知框架與意義系統的轉換，涉及利益、理念與制度變遷之間相互糾結的互動及多重因果關係，不宜做片面、抽離的理解。

This article focuses on the neglected role of neoclassical economists who used opportunities created by two oil crises in the 1970s and macroeconomic imbalances in the 1980s to successfully promote a new interpretive framework. The framework facilitated a comprehensive liberalization policy that dictated government policymaking from the periphery. A historical institutionalist perspective is used to argue that political leaders adopted neoliberalism as a practical problem-solving tool in response to the failure of the developmental paradigm to cope with political and economic crises in the 1980s, since neoliberalism exhibited both economic and political viability. However, a lack of administrative viability resulted in neoliberal ideas being compromised and their implementation being checked by nationalist and conservative factions. Neoliberalization is not only about political-business alliances (as mainstream arguments suggest), but also about cognitive framework changes involving a complex interplay of interests, ideas, and institutional change.