本研究探討參與式預算(participatory budgeting，簡稱PB)的權力關係。PB是公民與政府互動合作改變傳統治理結構的方式，透過賦權(empowerment)使公民擁有權力及主動性治理所在的社區。本研究聚焦在大安區，以PB概念出發，透過本人提案「安全大安，美麗未來」，在國立臺北教育大學前設置Youbike站點，作為了解PB過程的個案，並以David Harvey都市治理的理論概念對賦權尺度及權力關係進行檢視，討論臺北市PB的問題與困境。資料蒐集透過文獻、深度訪談區公所、市政府取得以及本研究對於PB的提案人、桌長經驗，持續對大安區做參與觀察，透過權力理論的對話，了解脈絡下的權力關係。

研究發現：在最初臺北市政府參與時，已將民眾提案的框架限制住，陪伴學校、里長與市民之間理想目標並不一致，PB執行時僅能依照框架下的可及範圍操作。且權力掌握確實能將部分PB資源壟斷，賦權於民的治理方式備受侷限；其次，公民提案還是交由議員審議、政府審視公益性來達成，以專業理性判斷案件執行許可，公民僅掌握參與權力，PB最後僅是一種政府治理方式，以及政府的日常業務，而非權力下放或解決資源不均的問題；最後，政府之間資源相互獨立，造成預算執行緩慢，影響PB效益。結論指出，雖然部分市政預算給予民眾操作，在預算制度下資源、權力與資訊不平等，權力還是由政府掌握；加上程序較為冗長，民眾缺乏主動性，容易轉為政府主導、可預測性以及提案以鄰里發展為主的PB。

This study explores Participatory Budgeting (PB). PB is a way for citizens and government to interact and cooperate to change the traditional urban governance structure. Through Empowerment, citizens have the power and initiative to give the community in which they are located. Through my proposal, the research focus on Daan District,“Keep Daan District safe and have a more beautiful future.”Set up Ubike in front of National Taipei University of Education, a case to understand PB. Through David Harvey’s theoretical concept of urban governance to be acquainted with empowerment, and discussed the problems of Taipei city PB. Data about this thesis was collected through literature, in-depth interviews with district halls and Taipei City Hall, as well as the experience of the proponents and PB desk leaders of PB in the thesis, and continued participatory observation of Daan District,throught the dialogue of power theory,understanding the power relationship under the context.

The research result is, that when the Taipei City Government participated in the initial stage, it had limited the framework of public proposals, and the ideal goals of schools, the chiefs of village and citizens were not consistent, and the PB could only operate within the scope of the framework. Moreover, the power can monopolize some participatory bud
geting resources, and the governance method of empowering the people is limited; secondly, citizens’ proposals are still reached for public benefit, citizens only have the power of participation, and PB is only a form of urban governance, and the daily business of the government, rather than decentralization or solving the problem of uneven resources; finally, resources between other governments is not coordinated,resulting in the slow implementation of participatory budgeting and affecting PB benefit. The conclusion points out that although some municipal budgets are operated by the public, resources, power, and PB information are unequal under the budget system, and the power is still controlled by the government. In addition, the procedures are lengthy and the public lacks initiative, and Participatory budgeting is easy to become the government-led, predictable, and proposal，just focused on neighborhood units.

林祐聖, & 陳東升. (2018). 當社區營造遇到參與式預算：兩個社區的比較研究. [When Community Building Meets Participatory Budgeting: A Comparison between Two Communities]. 台灣社會學(35), 109-149. doi:10.6676/ts.201806_(35).04

傅凱若. (2019). 民主創新與公共價值創造的實踐－以臺灣都會區參與式預算為例. [The Practice of Democratic Innovation and Public Value Creation: The Case of Participatory Budgeting in Five Municipalities in Taiwan]. 臺灣民主季刊, 16(4), 93-141.

葉欣怡, & 林祐聖. (2017). 參與式預算的臺灣實踐經驗：以三峽區的身心障礙者就業促進方案試辦計畫為例. [Participatory Budgeting in Taiwan: Investigating Participatory Budgeting in Disability Employment Promotion in Sanxia]. 民主與治理, 4(1), 69-95. doi:10.3966/2311505x2017020401003

吳澤玫. (2014). 審議民主與多元社會的穩定. [Deliberative Democracy and the Stability of a Pluralist Society]. 政治與社會哲學評論(49), 1-58.

葉欣怡, 陳東升, 林國明, & 林祐聖. (2016). 參與式預算在社區－文化部推展公民審議及參與式預算實驗計畫. 國土及公共治理季刊, 4(4), 29-40.

劉正山. (2009). 當前審議式民主的困境及可能的出路. [The Challenges of Practicing Deliberative Democracy in Taiwan and a Possible Solution]. 中國行政評論, 17(2), 109-132. doi:10.6635/cpar.2009.17(2).03

莊國銘. (2005). 論漢娜•鄂蘭的制憲權理念. [On Hannah Arendt's Theory of Pouvoir Constituant]. 思與言：人文與社會科學期刊, 43(4), 173-203. doi:10.6431/twjhss.200512.0173
孫煒. (2020). 臺灣地方基層官僚推動參與式預算的治理模式：桃園市案例研究. [Governance of the Participatory Budgeting of Local Street-level Bureaucracy: A Case Study of Taoyuan City in Taiwan]. 政治科學論叢(85), 139-177. doi:10.6166/tjps.202009_(85).0004

莫大華. (1999). 漢娜·鄂蘭政治思想研究之回顧與展望. [A Retrospective of Hannah Arendt's Political Thought]. 哲學與文化, 26(6), 537-555. doi:10.7065/mrpc.199906.0537

柯于璋. (2009). 從公民治理的觀點論台灣參與式社區規劃之課題與展望. [Issues and Prospects of Participatory Community Planning in Taiwan from the Viewpoint of Citizen Governance]. 臺灣土地研究, 12(1), 125-151. doi:10.6677/jtlr.200905_12(1).0005

許源派、許文西、Hsu, Yuan-pai、Hsu, Wen-his (民103)，從國家與社會論證第三部門的運作機制：以中國大陸與臺灣第三部門現況分析，展望與探索，頁81-103。

徐吉志, & 周蕙蘋. (2006). 都市治理之基本意含與發展-治理網絡的觀點. 中國地方自治, 59(9), 11-43.

林金定, 嚴嘉楓, & 陳美花. (2005). 質性研究方法: 訪談模式與實施步驟分析. 身心障礙研究季刊, 3(2), 122-136.

萬毓澤. (2015). 巴西愉港的參與式預算: 神話與現實. 參與式預算: 咱的預算咱來決定》, 臺北: 財團法人青平台基金會, 頁, 29-73.

萬毓澤. (2016). 台灣當前的參與式預算概況: 反省與前瞻. 巷子口社會學﹕ http://twstreetcorner. org/2016/03/01/wanyuze-2/, 檢索日期: 2016 年, 5.
徐燕興. (2020). 都市更新體制的誕生:發展型治理術與生命政治. 國立臺灣大學, Available from Airiti AiritiLibrary database. (2020年)
Angrosino, M. (2007). Doing ethnographic and observational research: Sage.
Angrosino, M. V.(2005). Recontextualizing Observation: Ethnography, Pedagogy, and the Prospects for a Progressive Political Agenda.
Page, N., & Czuba, C. E. (1999). Empowerment: What is it. Journal of extension, 37(5), 1-4.
Wampler, B. (2009). Expanding Accountability Through Participatory Institutions: Mayors, Citizens, and Budgeting in Three Brazilian Municipalities. Latin American
Sintomer, Y., Herzberg, C., & Röcke, A. (2008). Participatory budgeting in Europe: potentials and challenges. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 32(1), 164-178.
Zimmerman, M. A. (2000). Empowerment theory. In Handbook of community psychology (pp. 43-63): Springer.
Abers, R., King, R., Votto, D., & Brandão, I. (2018). Porto Alegre: Participatory budgeting and the challenge of sustaining transformative change.
Chavez, D. (2008). The watering down of participatory budgeting and people power in Porto Alegre, Brazil. Participatory Learning and Action, 58(1), 57-60.
Chohan, U. W. (2017). The decentralized autonomous organization and governance issues. Available at SSRN 3082055.
Bateman Jr, G. R. (2019). The Transformative potential of Participatory Budgeting: creating an ideal democracy: Routledge.
Gonçalves, S. (2014). The effects of participatory budgeting on municipal expenditures and infant mortality in Brazil. World development, 53, 94-110.
Aziz, H., & Shah, N. (2021). Participatory budgeting: Models and approaches. In Pathways Between Social Science and Computational Social Science (pp. 215-236): Springer.
Nuno F. da Cruz, Philipp Rode & Michael McQuarrie (2019) New urban governance: A review of current themes and future priorities, Journal of Urban Affairs, 41:1, 1-19, DOI: 10.1080/07352166.2018.1499416
Harvey, D. (1989). From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: the transformation in urban governance in late capitalism. Geografiska Annaler: series B, human geography, 71(1), 3-17.
da Cruz, N. F., Rode, P., & McQuarrie, M. (2019). New urban governance: A review of current themes and future priorities. Journal of Urban Affairs, 41(1), 1-19.
Blumer, H. (1986). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method: Univ of California Press.
Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of planners, 35(4), 216-224.