Establishment and organization of the system of land use review organization: analysis of the new institutional economics

政府基於國家政策考量，為確保公共利益，並透過分散權力來減少（甚至是避免）主管機關因資訊不完全等因素產生政府失靈的現象，而於主管機關內部設置審議組織以為因應。此等政府內部審議組織之制度建立是否健全、是否能提供公平審議環境？均將嚴重影響主管機關後續行政處分。 本論文研究目的為：一、探討審議組織運作是否存在非正式規則？而此非正式規則是否影響正式規則運作？如有，則應如何評估檢討以避免扭曲正式規則運作。二、探討審議組織透過不同屬性組織成員的個體行為，如何完成組織運作？以使修正得獨立自主審議。三、探討政府內部審議組織之集體行動方式為何？使其行動之決議公平與避免黑箱作業。四、思考審議制度與民眾參與之關係，而聽證制度應如何與審議制度相互妥適安排，以建立公私合作、公開透明的行政審查制度。 考量研究者具有本論文所討論之審議組織客體身份（幕僚人員、申請人），係屬於探討審議組織運作之涉入者，有助於透過個人接觸進行深度訪談，並可現場參與觀察審議組織之運作情形，故在研究方法上係採取多重方法，兼採質性分析與量化分析，先以質性方法進行文獻分析，據以研擬訪談大綱依深度訪談法瞭解審議委員與幕僚人員對於審議組織運作之見解，再設計問卷進行調查以量化分析受訪者之態度異同，最後以質性之參與觀察法實地觀察確認相關議題，並進行歸納分析。 歸納出成功的審議制度建立應包含下列四項因素：一、提供公平、並能兼顧效率的審議制度。二、提供參與者均能獨立自主表達意見的審議組織運作環境。三、審議決議獲得大多數人支持，能影響主管機關決策且據以執行。四、能涵括多元意見，充分論辯、衡平衝突。 結論為：一、審議組織運作之非正式規則應適時檢討。二、提供審議委員獨立自主之審議環境。三、明確審議組織之決策模式，以提升審議公平與兼顧效率。四、集體規模擴大，健全多元參與、廣徵民意。 並提出建議：一、制度方面：（一）土地使用的評估是生活價值的判斷而非僅專業技術的規劃。（二）土地使用的民眾參與越早越好、越廣越好。（三）土地使用審議的公平應優先於效率。（四）不同角色多面向目的分析。二、組織方面：修正相關制度安排，並將政府內部審議組織定位為「公益型委託代理關係」。The government is based on the political policy, the public interest, and through the decentralization of power to reduce (or avoid) the factors that lead to government failure. Are the systems for the establishment of such internal government deliberations sound and can they provide a fair environment for consideration? Will they seriously affect the follow-up administrative sanctions of the competent authorities? The purpose of this paper is as follows: First, to discuss whether there are informal rules in the operation of the organization, and if so, do these informal rules affect the formal rules? How should the review be assessed to avoid distorting the formal rules? Second, to explore the organization through different members of the organization of individual behavior, how does one complete the operation of the organization so that the amendment is subject to independent consideration? Third, what are the collective actions of the government's internal deliberations that make the resolution of its action fair and avoid black box operations? Fourth, to consider the relationship between the system and public participation as to how the hearing system should be arranged with the review system to establish public and private cooperation and insure an open and transparent administrative review system? Consider how the investigators who have discussed the objectivity of the organization in this paper (staff members and applicants) and are involved in the discussion of the operation of the organization facilitate in-depth interviews through personal contact, and can participate in observing the organization. There is use of multiple methods, and the nature of the analysis and quantitative analysis, the first qualitative method of literature analysis, to understand the members and staff members and their review of the organization. The questionnaires were then used to quantitatively analyze the similarities and differences of the interviewees. Finally, the relevant topics were confirmed by qualitative observation and the results were summarized and analyzed. The establishment of a successful review system should include the following four factors: (i) a fair and balanced system of consideration. (ii) participants who can independently express their views on the organization of the operating environment. (iii) resolutions supported by the majority of people that can influence the implementation decisions of the competent authorities. (iv) multiple opinions and full arguments to balance the conflict. Summary of conclusions: First, consider that the organizing process of the informal rules should be timely reviewed. Second, provide consideration of members of the independent review of the environment. Third, clearly review the organization's decision-making model to enhance the consideration of fairness and efficiency. Fourth, collectively expand and improve the diversity of participation through wide public opinion. Recommendations: First, the institutional aspects: (a) the assessment of land use values life judgments rather than only professional and technical planning. (b) it is better for more people to participate and the sooner the better. (c) the fairness of land use consideration should prevail over efficiency. (d) include different roles for the purpose of multi-oriented analysis. Second, the organization should amend the relevant institutional arrangements, and the internal government should consider the organization as a "public agent" type agency. Keywords: deliberative organization, system establishment, organization of operation, consideration of democracy, informal rule