台灣遊民社會福利體制的運作及效果：從基層官僚治理取徑切入

The Operation and Consequences of the Social Welfare System for the Homeless in Taiwan: The Approach of Street-level Bureaucrat Governance

台灣遊民政策經歷了威權政府犯罪化對待無家者、民主化政府以社會福利處遇無家者的階段。如今公民社會進一步督促政府重視無家者人權與居住需求，但政府回應消極。相應地，國家社福體制的一線工作者接觸無家者的實務現場中，出現了供需落差。本文用兼做遊民社工與無家者的民族誌，透過「基層官僚治理」的取徑，探討這種落差如何及為何出現，並探詢現今遊民社會福利體制造就何種非預期效果。首先，說明現行遊民社福政策及體制預設的三條「脫離遊民無家可居狀態」路徑：協助返家、協助就業、安置至機構，如何且為何未被無家者視為有用，而無家者最迫切的需求—居住，卻被忽視。接著，解釋一線社工在實作上藉由三項策略，包括：橫向攤付、向下收編及向上校準，治理著無家者在不違反其主觀意願前提達成「假性脫遊」，並鞏固社工專業。結果，在個案管理以及收編策略的作用下，無家者團結將更形脆弱。在結論中，我從本文發現中指出，遊民問題絕非仰賴社會福利即可解決的貧窮問題，政府應將之定位為居住問題，更積極保障其相關權益。

"Through democratization, the Taiwanese government has managed to de-criminalize the homeless, taking them as a minority to be helped and included in the social welfare system since the 1990s. A complete, progressive social-welfare system with various services and resources for the homeless has been established. However, many homeless people still think the welfare is useless to them. Why does this gap between policy and reality exist? In this study, I conduct an ethnography of both social workers and the homeless, adopting the approach of street-level bureaucrat governance to explain the operation and consequences of the system. The analysis starts by illustrating how despite the three trajectories—assistance for job search, returning home, and accommodation into facilities—the welfare policy expectation for the homeless to “exit from being homeless” has failed. Then, I display how fi rst-line workers govern the homeless on site through three tactful strategies—horizontally shuffling the burden, downwardly coopting, and upwardly realigning. The professional practice of case management along with the governing strategy of coopting further weaken the vulnerable social network among the homeless, which not only drives the homeless to misrecognize the factors of their social suffering but also make it difficult to maintain the solidarity of the economically disadvantaged. This article not only discusses the role of the state in managing the homeless, but contends that the two major but unrelated issues in poverty studies, state governance and ties among the poor, are indeed related. In conclusion, implications of the findings for homeless policy and intellectual development in Taiwan are discussed."