Friday, November 17, 2017

包租代管

為了鼓勵房東釋出空屋,參加包租代管計畫的房東也可享有稅率優惠,房屋稅從1.5%降至1.2%,地價稅則從1%降至0.2%,還有修繕補助,且房東在同意包租代管的第一天,就可以開始收租。
檢討過去的「代租代管」政策失敗經驗,我們發現除了稅賦外,很多房東也擔心租屋糾紛,因此,這次全新的包租代管計畫,我們用制度化的管理與規範,房東不用直接面對房客,風險會由平台業者承擔。
我們很難讓每個人都買得起房子,但至少要讓大家租得起。公共住宅之外,我們希望用「包租代管」計畫,讓這些空屋發揮意義,成為更多人能夠落腳的「家」。

http://www.udd.gov.taipei/rentmatch/

Thursday, November 16, 2017

秩俸

秩為秩次
俸為俸額

漢制以若干"石"表示秩次
以多少"斛"表俸額

中國文官制度史 (上) 楊樹藩 著

四民: 士、農、工、商

四民是古代中國對平民職業的基本分工,指士、農、工、商,但其次序歷代有所不同。春秋穀梁傳按「士商農工」劃分:「古者有四民:有士民,有商民,有農民,有工民。」但有論者認為這個次序並無隱含社會高低之義。荀子王制篇有「農士工商」的排列。明末清初學者顧炎武日知錄曾說:「士農工商謂之四民,其說始於管子。」指春秋時期齊國宰相管仲最先訂下「士農工商」的次序,其言:「士農工商四民者,國之石,民也。」一直沿用至今。

雖然中國古代為農業社會,然而四民向來以「士」為首。由於漢武帝「獨尊儒術,罷黜百家」,並設立「五經博士」,加上其後科舉制度的推波助瀾,讀書應試成了提升社會地位的最佳途徑。士在朝可助帝王治天下,在野可為地方精英領導社會。士大夫階層遂成為舉足輕重的社會重心。這一點可從中國民間時常流傳的一些諺語或社會生活的實際景象中得到證明。如「耕讀傳家」及「半耕半讀」等諺語,便呈現出社會對子弟的一種普遍期望──只要讀書,就有求仕進的機會,而當官的正統途徑,便是讀書成為士人並參加科舉。故父親種地為業,以讓兒子有讀書成名的機會;若有兩個兒子,則哥哥便多做一些,讓弟弟多些時間唸書;若有三個兒子,他們更可設法讓么弟空出整個時間來讀書,這都是在中國社會中尋常可見的實際景況,因而有詩句云:「朝為田舍郎,暮登天子堂。」

Tig Notaro laughs through her darkest moments

大陸禁片《鏗鏘集 百年一願 (上集) 》 (1/4)

Wednesday, November 15, 2017

Chinese bureaucracy

我國官制, 溯及殷商時代 , 封建制度, 世襲制

我國歷史上的文官制度, 則自秦朝開始
秦朝統一六國, 廢宗周式的封建制度, 除天子世襲外, 宗室子孫不予封土, 丞相以下官吏, 皆選自間, --- 秦有天下, 廢除封建, 世官既已不存, 代之而有公開取士之制, 乃開考試之先河
recruit bureaucrats from the public through screening their qualifications
(楊樹藩,1976).

隋煬帝大業2年 (西元606), 設進士科策試諸士, 奠立了科舉取士的基礎
隋代開創科舉制度, 唐代則進一步完備了科舉制度
(部史, p4)

科舉制度始於隋, 而盛於唐

公元587年,隋文帝正式設立科舉制度,[1],在唐朝發展成型,並一直延續到清朝末年(光緒31年, 1905年),持續了1300多年。中國現代社會的公務員選拔制度亦是從科舉制度演變而來[3]。
https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD%E7%A7%91%E4%B8%BE%E5%88%B6%E5%BA%A6
(部史, p4)
任拓書, 張嘯世, & 范煥之. (1983). 中華民國考選制度.

-

Relationship Attachment Style Test

https://www.psychologytoday.com/tests/relationships/relationship-attachment-style-test

Tuesday, November 14, 2017

Dalai Lama: We need an education of the heart

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-dalai-lama-alt-we-need-an-education-of-the-heart-20171113-story.html

Emmanuel Kelly - Imagine

Emmanuel Kelly - Imagine

Monday, November 13, 2017

中華民國統計年鑑, 74年10月
http://stat.ncl.edu.tw/hypage.cgi?HYPAGE=search/guide.hpg&dtd_id=9&jid=97258686

http://stat.ncl.edu.tw/hypage.cgi?HYPAGE=search/jnameBrowse.hpg&brow=v&jid=01041913&jn=%E4%B8%AD%E8%8F%AF%E6%B0%91%E5%9C%8B%E7%B5%B1%E8%A8%88%E6%8F%90%E8%A6%81+%E3%80%90%E6%B0%9144+-+72%E5%B9%B4%E3%80%91

http://stat.ncl.edu.tw/hypage.cgi?HYPAGE=search/jnameBrowse.hpg&brow=t&jid=01041913&jn=%E4%B8%AD%E8%8F%AF%E6%B0%91%E5%9C%8B%E7%B5%B1%E8%A8%88%E6%8F%90%E8%A6%81+%E3%80%90%E6%B0%9144+-+72%E5%B9%B4%E3%80%91&vol=44100000_%E4%B8%AD%E8%8F%AF%E6%B0%91%E5%9C%8B44%E5%B9%B4%2844%2e10%29

中華民國統計提要 【民44 - 72年】old name
民73年起由中華民國統計提要改名為:中華民國統計年鑑
創刊年月: 44年10月

停刊年月: 73年10月
(1)本提要創刊於民國二十四年,原為不定期刊物,曾於民國二十九年、民國三十四年及民國三十六年相繼刊行各一次。迨民國四十四年以後,逐年編印未輟,遂成定期刊物。
(2)大陸撤守前各省動態性統計資料,俱載本提要四十七年版以前各期。
(3)民國五十年以前各統計資料亦載於七十一年版以前,各期內容均屬相同。
(4)63年12月出版62會計、學年度資料(62年7月1日至63年6月30日)

(5)64年10月出版63會計、學年度資料(63年8月1日至64年7月31日)

5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
45 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000044543

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
46 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000074708

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
47 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000075111

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
48 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000091246

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
52 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000101039

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
53 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000101373

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
54 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000101628

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
55 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000101819

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
56 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000102306

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
50 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000102738

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
44 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000300196

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
51 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000300510

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
57 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000306220

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
58 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000306499

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
59 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000321616

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
60 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000321617

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
61 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000321618

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
62 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000321619

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
63(a) 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000321620

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
63(b) 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000321621

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
64 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000322085

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
65 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000322571

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
66 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000323208

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
67 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000323381

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
68 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000323966

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
69 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000324548

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
70 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000325242

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
71 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000326505

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773
72 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000327123

詳細資料
5樓政府資訊室 政府中文書庫 R 514.33 8773

49 請洽專室/分館櫃檯 000339616

Sunday, November 12, 2017

普(抽)查資料, 行政院主計處

http://www.dgbas.gov.tw/lp.asp?ctNode=2361&CtUnit=456&BaseDSD=7&mp=1

臺灣省五十一年來統計提要, 1894-1945

http://twstudy.iis.sinica.edu.tw/twstatistic50/
戶籍法 立法於民國43年12月7日  中華民國人民之本籍,依左列之規定:
一、子女除別有本籍者外,以其父母之本籍為本籍,父母本籍不同者,以其父之本籍為本籍.
        父為贅夫者,以其母之本籍為本籍。
二、父無可考者,以其母之本籍為本籍。
三、棄兒父母無可考者,以發現人報告地為本籍。
四、陸上無住所而在船舶上居住者,以船舶之常泊地為本籍。
五、僧道或其他宗教徒無本籍,或本籍不明者,以所住寺院之所在地為本籍。
六、在救濟機關留養無本籍或本籍不明者,以救濟機關所在地為本籍。
七、僑居國外人民,以未出國時之本籍為本籍。
妻得以夫之本籍為本籍,贅夫得以妻之本籍為本籍。
 一人同時不得有兩本籍。

非本籍

(city/town hall) is not the registered domicile

the registered domicile 本籍

Saturday, November 11, 2017

戶口普查

1931 -- 戶籍法, 明定本籍
籍別以省及其所屬的縣為依據
子女以父母之本籍為本籍, 父母本籍不同者, 以其父之本籍為本籍

5次戶口普查, 二次抽樣調查

1956 (第一次戶口普查):台灣省籍人士在福建省的金馬地區, 被歸類為外省籍

1966 (第二次戶口普杳)
1970 (抽取5%樣本之抽樣戶口普查)
1975 (抽取5%樣本之抽樣戶口普查)
1980: 第三次全面戶口普查
1990
2000

1956-2000
每10年舉辦一次戶口普查
1956
1966
1970
1975
1980
1990

1992戶籍法修正案, 將個人本籍登記由"父親之本籍"改為"本人出生地"

Thursday, November 09, 2017

如何製作Gmail超實用小工具『罐頭回應』?

https://agirls.aotter.net/post/14503

用Gmail寄出大量客製化信件,營造每一封都是親自打的誠懇感

https://agirls.aotter.net/post/51871

重要的信件不小心寫錯了怎麼辦?!Gmail給你一點緩衝時間攔下它

第一步先打開Gmail,拉開右邊的齒輪icon,找到設定

然後在一般設定裡面找到取消傳送!!取消傳送的期限最少五秒、最多三十秒,開啟這項設定之後,寄信之後會有5~30秒的緩衝時間可以把信給緊急撤回來!!我通常設定10秒

寄信之後上方會出現系統通知,會多一個「復原」,取消傳送的時間如果設定10秒,就表示你有十秒的時間可以按下復原,讓這封信不要寄出去

按下「復原」的話,就會取消傳送

超過十秒都取消傳送的話,那個「復原」就會消失,信件會正常寄出去!

https://www.msn.com/zh-tw/lifestyle/lifestyleshoppingtech/%E6%95%99%E5%AD%B8-%E9%87%8D%E8%A6%81%E7%9A%84%E4%BF%A1%E4%BB%B6%E4%B8%8D%E5%B0%8F%E5%BF%83%E5%AF%AB%E9%8C%AF%E4%BA%86%E6%80%8E%E9%BA%BC%E8%BE%A6gmail%E7%B5%A6%E4%BD%A0%E4%B8%80%E9%BB%9E%E7%B7%A9%E8%A1%9D%E6%99%82%E9%96%93%E6%94%94%E4%B8%8B%E5%AE%83/ar-AAuxnhd?li=BBqiNIb

Wednesday, November 08, 2017

Legal Citation

https://www.law.cornell.edu/citation/

How to Cite Articles and Other Law Journal Writing
https://www.law.cornell.edu/citation/2-800

Tuesday, November 07, 2017

35 Chinese Cities With Economies as Big as Countries

http://www.visualcapitalist.com/31-chinese-cities-economies-big-countries/?utm_source=linkedIn_utm_medium%3Dsocial_utm_campaign%3DSocialWarfare

Monday, November 06, 2017

Giving What We Can

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giving_What_We_Can

Open Philanthropy Project, GiveWell

 GiveWell focuses primarily on the cost-effectiveness of the organizations that it evaluates, rather than traditional metrics such as the percentage of the organization's budget that is spent on overhead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GiveWell

Anita Hill on Weinstein, Trump, and a Watershed Moment for Sexual-Harassment Accusations

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/anita-hill-on-weinstein-trump-and-a-watershed-moment-for-sexual-harassment-accusations

William MacAskill, Effective altruism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_MacAskill

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_altruism

book: Doing good better : effective altruism and a radical new way to make a difference
    MacAskill, William

How a young Syrian girl’s plea for peace drew worldwide attention

Saturday, November 04, 2017

gender, queen bee syndrome

women
in positions of authority tend to endorse gender stereotypes and
express negative attitudes toward female co-workers (e.g., Ellemers
et al. 2004; Garcia-Retamero and López-Zafra 2006) and that they
also avoid nurturing, mentoring, or promoting female subordinates
(Blau and DeVaro 2007; Chiu and Ng 2001; Keeton 1996).
Th e term “queen bee syndrome” has been coined to describe
this phenomenon (Staines, Tavris, and Jayaratne 1974).

Several
explanations have been off ered for queen bee behavior. First, from
a social identity perspective (Tajfel and Turner 1986), women who
have succeeded in male-dominated circles attempt to diff erentiate
themselves from other women and assume the stereotypes and
prejudices toward women that are held by their male counterparts
(Ellemers et al. 2004).

Second, women who rise to leadership
positions in male-dominated organizations are inclined to preserve
the organizational culture that is perceived to have served them
well and allowed them to thrive in the organization (Gibson and
Cordova 2009).

Th ird, when the share of leadership positions held
by women is few, women in those positions are likely to see other women as competitors for scarce resources and exhibit a reluctance to train, mentor, and support women below them in the hierarchy
(Keeton 1996)

compared to men, women may
be less committed to collective activism aimed at promoting the
interests of their gender group (Reinharz 1984). Given the importance
of collective action for achieving social change, this becomes
an obstacle to achieving social justice for women. According to the
logic, individuals are motivated to act in ways that improve their
position, which is done by making comparisons and demonstrating
distinctiveness with out-groups. Kelly and Breinlinger (1995) identifi
ed two basic responses of women occupying a low-status position
compared to men. In one type of response, women emphasize their
unique abilities. In this response, women downplay their identifi -
cation with other women, in eff ect psychologically disassociating
themselves from their gender group (Williams and Giles 1978). Th e
individual response strategy is more likely when women only weakly
identify with other women (Kawakami and Dion 1993). In another
type of response, women view collective action and solidarity as the
means to remedy perceived injustices. Th e collective action response
is considered more likely when women identify strongly with other
women (Condor 1986).7

# Race, Gender, and Government Contracting: Diff erent Explanations or New Prospects for Th eory?

政府採購法

第 22 條
機關辦理公告金額以上之採購,符合下列情形之一者,得採限制性招標:

購買身心障礙者、原住民或受刑人個人、身心障礙福利機構、政府立案之原住民團體、監獄工場、慈善機構所提供之非營利產品或勞務。

sexual orientation, representative bureaucracy

Thielemann, Gregory S., and Joseph Stewart, Jr. 1996. A Demand Side Perspective on the Importance of Representative Bureaucracy. Public Administration Review 56(2): 168–73.

@@
Thielemann and Stewart (1996) found that people living with AIDS prefer service providers of their own sexual orientation, suggesting that LGBs per- ceive services they receive from other LGBs to be of higher quality. LGB elected officials appear to shift policy in favor of LGB citizens (Haider-Markel 2007; Haider-Markel et al. 2000; Smith and Haider-Markel 2002), suggesting that LGB bureaucrats with policy dis- cretion will do the same.

# Representation of Lesbians and Gay Men in Federal, State, and Local Bureaucracies
Gregory B. Lewis and David W. Pitts
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, Vol. 21, No. 1(January 2011), pp. 159-180

Friday, November 03, 2017

mechanism, passive to active representative bureaucracy

Prior research has identified three potential mechanisms through
which representative bureaucracy can benefit minority groups. First,
some have argued that a representative bureaucracy is generally
more effective at achieving its goals (Andrews, Ashworth, and Meier
2014 ; Meier, Wrinkle, and Polinard 1999 ) because its members do
not discriminate against minorities during recruitment and therefore
hire the best employees (Meier, Wrinkle, and Polinard 1999 ). In
addition, representative bureaucracies can solicit ideas from a more
diverse pool of perspectives, yielding access to a wider range of
problem-solving resources (Cox 1994 ).

Second, some scholars have asserted that representative and diverse
public organizations are more sensitive to the needs of their clients
because the two parties have common values and experiences
(Bradbury and Kellough 2008 ). In addition, clients may be more
inclined to contribute to the production of public services for
representative public organizations (Gade and Wilkins 2013 ;
Riccucci, Van Ryzin, and Lavena 2014 ; Theobald and Haider-Markel
2009 ). This argument assumes that minority public administrators
have attitudes on policy issues that are similar to those of minority
citizens; this similarity in attitude can result in policy decisions that
are favorable toward minorities (Bradbury and Kellough 2008 ).

a third group of scholars has discussed the symbolic effect of
bureaucratic representation. Passive representation can revolutionize
citizens’ perceptions and attitudes toward bureaucrats, despite no
change in the latter ’ s actions (Gade and Wilkins 2013 ; Riccucci,
Van Ryzin, and Li 2016 ; Theobald and Haider-Markel 2009 ).
This group of scholars has argued that symbolic representation
can produce increased trust in public organizations or a greater
willingness to coproduce public services, regardless of bureaucratic
actions (Riccucci, Van Ryzin, and Li 2016 ).

# Hong, S. (2017). Does Increasing Ethnic Representativeness Reduce Police Misconduct? Public Administration Review, 77(2), 195-205
@@

The link between passive and active representation is premised on research showing that people from similar backgrounds—race, for example—will have similar values and beliefs (Meier 1976; Mosher 1968; Pitkin 1967; Selden 1997).
representative bureaucracy at its simplest suggests that, based on shared values and beliefs, a black bureaucrat will be more likely than a white bureaucrat to represent the policy preferences of black citizens. This notion was an early basis for affirmative action in the public sector (Selden and Selden 2001).
for representative bureaucracy to make sense, bureaucrats must be afforded discretion in their jobs vis-a`-vis policymaking or implementation, and the policy issue must be salient to the specific group being represented (Keiser et al. 2002; Meier 1993a; Selden 1997; Sowa and Selden 2003). Even if these criteria are met, passive representation does not always result in active representation, and ongoing research has attempted to identify factors that result in a link between the two (Keiser et al. 2002; Meier 1993b; Selden 1997). This line of research has shown the benefits of representation in the public education policy setting (Keiser et al. 2002; Meier and O’Toole 2001; Meier, Wrinkle, and Polinard 1999; but see Nielsen and Wolf 2001), as well as in federal agencies (Dolan 2000; Hindera 1993).
representative bureaucracy as it relates to agency performance

#Pitts, D. W. (2005). Diversity, Representation

@@

Early scholars assumed that passive representation
would naturally translate into active representation,
but recent work has identifi ed a couple of necessary
conditions for the link to occur ( Keiser et al. 2002 ;
Meier 1993 ). First, bureaucrats must have discretion
in order to act on a given policy. In bureaucracies in
which most decisions are dictated by rules, bureaucrats
have few opportunities to shape outputs to reward
a particular group within their clientele ( Meier
1993 ). Police offi cers are the quintessential street-level
bureaucrats and clearly exercise a necessary amount of
discretion ( Lipsky 1980 ). Th ere are numerous ways
that minority police offi cers could infl uence outcomes
for minority drivers, either through their own actions
or by infl uencing the organization. Th e second necessary
condition is that the policy area must be salient
to the demographic group in question ( Keiser et al.
2002 ; Meier 1993 ; Selden 1997 ). As discussed earlier,
racial profi ling is a highly salient issue in black communities.

Wilkins, V. M., & Williams, B. N. (2008). Black or Blue: Racial Profiling and Representative Bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 68(4), 654-664.
@@
organizational role demographic variables such as race and gender can affect bureaucratic attitudes and behaviors
indirectly through the mediating influence of the organizational role set.
#Brudney, J. L., Hebert, F. T., & Wright, D. S. (2000). From Organizational Values to Organizational Roles: Examining Representative Bureaucracy in State Administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(3), 491-512
@@
Normative Values
The active aspect of representative bureaucracy concerns
whether bureaucrats share the values and attitudes
of their clients and let these values affect their decisions
(Meier and Nigro 1976; Mosher 1968). The active component
has primarily been studied by analyzing how
women and racial minorities benefit from being serviced
by bureaucracies that share their background (e.g., Dee
2004; Keiser et al. 2002; Meier 1993; Nicholson-Crotty
et al. 2016; Selden 1997; Selden, Brudney, and Kellough
1998; Pitts 2005; Wilkins and Keiser 2006; see though

Wilkins and Williams 2008, 2009).
As early as 1976, Meier and Nigro emphasized
that “the fundamental axiom/proposition underlying
the concept of representative bureaucracy is: if the
attitudes of administrators are similar to the attitudes
held by the general public, the decisions administrators
make will in general be responsive to the desires
of the public” (emphasis in original, Meier and Nigro

1976, 458)
relationship
between bureaucrats’ background and outcomes by
demonstrating positive associations between share of
Latino teachers and Latino students’ achievements
(Meier 1993), between African-American, Hispanic,
and Asian American representation and the share of
program resources allocated to those groups (Selden
1997), between bureaucrats’ race and loan decisions
favoring minority farmers’ applications (Selden,
Brudney, and Kellough 1998), and between female
math teachers and percentage of girls passing math
tests (Keiser et al. 2002). Meier, Wrinkle, and Polinard
(1999) find that both minority and majority students
benefit from a higher share of black and Latino teachers
(for discussion of this result, see Meier et al. 2001;
Nielsen and Wolf 2001). On the other hand, Wilkins
and Williams (2008, 2009) find that both black and
Latino police officers increase the level of racial profiling,
which may be a result of strong socialization
within these organizations. A few studies examine the
relationship between teacher background and student
outcomes at the individual level. For instance, Dee
(2004) uses Tennessee’s Project STAR class-size experiment,
which randomly matched students and teachers
within participating schools. He found that assignment
to an own-race teacher significantly increased the math
and reading achievements of both black and white students.
In a recent study, Nicholson-Crotty et al. (2016)
find that black students are more likely to be in the
school’s gifted program if they have a black teacher.

Theoretically, the link between passive and active representation has two components. First, bureaucrats share attitudes and values with citizens with their own demographic background. For instance, female bureaucrats
share values with women in the population, and
black bureaucrats share values with black citizens.
Second, values and attitudes shape bureaucratic behavior.
For instance, attitudes toward specific policies
shape the way bureaucrats implement those policies
or programs (Bradbury and Kellough 2011; Meier and
Nigro 1976; Mosher 1968; Saltzstein 1979). Empirical
studies confirm the first component: African American
administrators are more positive toward affirmative
action than white administrators are. African
Americans believe that a workforce that reflects the
diversity of the country is more productive and agree
that administrators should adopt an African American
representative role. In this way, they are more in line
with African American citizens’ attitudes than white
administrators are (Bradbury and Kellough 2008; see
also Wilkins 2007). Similarly, studies on diversity management
have found that employees with same cultural
background tend to share experiences that shape the
way they see the world (Cox 1994; Foldy 2004).
link from passive
to active representation, that is, the relationship
between bureaucrats’ values and policy implementation,
is a core finding in public administration. A line
of research runs from the seminal work by Kaufman
(1960) to more recent analyses showing how policy
implementation is influenced by bureaucrats’ ideology
(Stensöta 2012), institutionalized values (Keiser and
Soss 1998; Lipsky 1980), and attitudes toward organizational
goals (Brehm and Gates 1997) or specific policies
(May and Winter 2009). Empirical research has
shown that general values (e.g., regarding environmental
protection) are weakly correlated with specific
behaviors (such as paper recycling). However, more
specific attitudes toward a behavior are found to predict
actual behavior very well. Of course, other factors
such as beliefs about the presence of factors that
may further or hinder performance of the behavior are
also expected to influence the link from attitudes to
behavior, but all else being equal the more favorable
the attitude, the more likely the person is to perform

the behavior (Ajzen and Fishbein 2000).
The notion that the link from passive to active representation
is mediated by bureaucrats’ values and
attitudes also receives some indirect support from
studies showing that the relationship between female
bureaucrats and female clients is stronger in a bureaucracy
with a low level of hierarchy. This provides the
street-level workers with more discretion to let their
attitudes influence their work (Keiser et al. 2002; see
also Meier and Bohte 2001). In addition, the fact that
the link between passive and active representation only
exists when the distributional consequences of the policy 
directly benefit the represented clients may indicate
that bureaucrats’ policy preferences influence the way 
they administer the rules (Wilkins and Keiser 2006).
#Andersen, S. C. (2017). From Passive to Active Representation

@@
A central tenet of representative bureaucracy
theory is that in order for a passively representative bureaucracy
to produce broadly representative policy outputs,
administrators must have sufficient discretion to influence 
government decisions (Meier 1993b; Thompson 1976).
#Dolan, J. (2004). Gender Equity: Illusion or Reality for Women in the Federal Executive Service

@@
understanding the translation of passive representation
into active representation for gender by examining aggregate-level data (Keiser et al.
2002; Kelly and Newman 2000; Nicholson-Crotty and Meier 2002; Wilkins and Keiser 2006).
Exploring the Causal Story: Gender, Active Representation, and Bureaucratic Priorities

@@
policy outcomes for represented groups do improve with representation
in public agencies (England, Meier, and Fraga 1988; Hindera 1993; Hindera and
Young 1998; Lim 2006; Meier and Nicholson-Crotty 2006; Meier and Stewart 1991;

Meier, Stewart, and England 1989; Selden 1997; Wilkins and Keiser 2001).

descriptive representation by minorities or females in public agencies leads to
improved outcomes for represented groups (England, Meier, and Fraga 1988; Hindera
1993; Hindera and Young 1998; Meier and Stewart 1991; Meier, Stewart, and England
1989; Selden 1997; Wilkins and Keiser 2001). These studies attribute improved outcomes

for represented groups to active representation,

Many studies have clearly demonstrated that descriptive representation in public agencies
leads to improved outcomes for represented groups (England, Meier, and Fraga 1988;
Hindera 1993; Hindera and Young 1998; Meier and Stewart 1991; Meier, Stewart, and

England 1989; Selden 1997; Wilkins and Keiser 2001).

# Race, Bureaucracy, and Symbolic Representation: Interactions between Citizens and Police

@@
Meier and
Stewart (1992) outline a set of conditions
whereby this transformation is most likely to occur, suggesting
that the defi nition of the issue as one of importance to a particular
demographic group and control by the bureaucrat of outputs that
can directly benefi t that group are both important factors. Given
the existence of those conditions, shared values should be translated
into programs, policies, and decisions by bureaucrats that
benefi t those with similar demographic origins (Meier 1993b).
Empirical research has confi rmed that minority bureaucrats use
their discretion to benefi t minority clients in a host of settings,
including the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Hindera
1993), education organizations (Meier, Stewart, and England
1989; Meier, Wrinkle, and Polinard 1999), and the Farmers Home

Administration (Selden 1997).

representation is
enhanced when institutional structures provide opportunities for
minority bureaucrats at both the street and administrative levels
(Keiser et al. 2002) and encourage greater discretion among minority
bureaucrats (Meier and Bothe 2001). Other work has emphasized
the importance of attitudes and perceptions and determined that the
degree to which minority bureaucrats perceive of themselves as racial
representatives (Selden 1997; Selden, Brudney, and Kellough 1998)
and the amount of discretion that they believe they have (Sowa and

Selden 2003) both moderate representation.

ideological orientation and values of individual bureaucrats,
as well as the demands placed on their agencies by citizens
and political principals, vary substantially from state to state, and
that this variation is a signifi cant predictor of the manner in which
bureaucrats exercise their discretion (Keiser 1999, 2006; Keiser and

Soss 1998; Soss and Keiser 2006).

# Race, Region, and Representative Bureaucracy
@@
link
passive representation directly to policy outputs (Meier,
Stewart, and England 1989; Meier and Stewart 1991;
Hindera 1993a, 1993b; Selden 1997). Recent work on this
link within the bureaucracy has been tied to important questions
in organization theory. Selden (1997) introduced the
concept of “role” and how roles can facilitate representation.
Keiser et al. (2002) link representative bureaucracy to
questions of organizational stratification and hierarchy and
demonstrate how these factors interact with the representation
process. Meier and Bohte (2001) operationalize the key
concept of discretion in structural terms and show how discretion
affects the represented activities. This article extends
this approach by investigating the role of environmental
change in structuring the representation process using the

case of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
#Race, Sex, and Clarence Thomas

@@
Mosher (1968) advanced the concept of active representation whereby bureaucrats
can push for the needs and interests of their counterparts in the general population.
The underlying theory is that passive representation is linked to active representation.
That is to say, the values associated with the social origins of a bureaucrat will
translate into public policies or programs that benefit citizens with those same social
origins. A number of studies have found a linkage between passive and active representation
for women and people of color (Meier and Nigro 1976; Meier, Wrinkle, and
Polinard 1999; Sowa and Selden 2003; Wilkins 2007). Importantly, Meier and Stewart
(1992) and Keiser et al. (2002) advanced certain conditions for active representation.
For example, bureaucrats must possess the discretion necessary to engage in policy
making and implementation. Moreover, the bureaucrats must be working in a policy
area that provides benefits to the group they represent. Keiser et al. (2002) argued that
for women, the policy area must be “gendered,” whereby the policy issues are more
relevant and salient to the goals and interests of women. Finally, shared experiences
between women clients and bureaucrats can also foster active representativeness. As
Meier and Nicholson-Crotty (2006, 852) observe, this is important in the area of sexual

assault, where over 90% of the victims are women and 99% of the perpetrators are
men. This is also important in the closely related area of domestic violence, where 85%

of the victims are women (BJS 2003) and 75% of the perpetrators are men (BJS 2005).

# Riccucci, N. M., Van Ryzin, G. G., & Lavena, C. F. (2014). Representative Bureaucracy in Policing: Does It Increase Perceived Legitimacy? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(3), 537-551.

@@

Thursday, November 02, 2017

中華民國人口統計年刊
原刊名, 中華民國臺閩地區人口統計

考選制度演進

孫中山東京同盟會--設立獨立機關專掌考選權

孫中山讓位於袁世凱, 袁建都北京, 北京政府
1916, 北京政府頒行文官高等考試令及文官普通考試令
1916年6月, 在北京舉行第一次文官高等考試, 194人錄取
1917年4月, 舉行第一次文官普通考試, 295人錄取
中華民國建國以來首次舉辦之文官考試
1916,袁世凱逝世, 軍閥割據接踵而至, 未能順利實施文官考試
1917年9月至1925年7月國民政府成立, 前後8年, 因政局不穩, 考銓法規有頒行, 但難以實施

1918, 上海發表孫文學說--提出中央政府組織型態為五院制
1924, 發表建國大綱, 明示中央政府設立五院

1925, 改革命政府名稱為"國民政府", 在南京成立革命政府
1928, 10月8日,公布中華民國組織法, 分訂五權職掌,確定五權分立, 由考試院獨立行使考試權
1928, 10月20日, 公布考試院組織法
1929, 8月1日, 公布考試法; 1930, 公布考試法施行細則---高考於首都或考試院指定區域, 普考於各省區或考試院指定區域, 每年或間年舉行一次
民國18年制定之考試法, 明定高考原則上在首都舉行, 普考則分在各省舉行, 但考試院亦可指定區域舉行高考或普考; 高考或普考應每年或間年舉行一次

1930, 1月6日,考試院正式成立於南京, 由考選委員會職掌全國考試事宜

考試法雖於1930年4月1日開始實施, 但由於各種相關法規未能逐一訂定發布, 以致依考試法舉行之公務人員考試未立即實施

1931, 7月15日, 在首都南京舉行第一屆高等考試, 報名 2185人, 錄取101(或100)人--任拓書, 張嘯世, & 范煥之. (1983).100人 (p66)
22, 24, 25年有舉辦高等考試
抗戰開始後, 雖處戰爭時期, 然而高普未曾停辦, 唯只能在非淪陷區辦理考試

1931年3月3日, 國民政府通令1931年全國分6區舉辦普通考試
考試於1931年, 6月20日, 公告第一屆普考在首都南京及各省會或其他相當地點舉行, 暫不分區; 考試期日為自1931年9月15日起6個月內, 分別舉行完竣
唯因日本入侵東北 (918事變), 且夏季多數省分為水災所困, 未能如期舉行(高)普考
自1932年8月起, 國民政府陸續核准山西, 河北等各省陸續舉行普考, 唯僅山西省於1932年12月26 日在陽曲舉行普考
故1933年, 12月27日考試院重行公告, 改於1934年4月21日在首都舉行首屆普通考試, 報名794人, 錄取118人(或92人, 任拓書, 張嘯世, & 范煥之,1983)---依考試法舉行的第一次普考
1934年4月 21日, 在首都一地,舉行第一屆普通考試, 報名794人, 錄取298/118人(final面試)(任拓書, 張嘯世, & 范煥之,1983, 71)

其後幾乎每年定期於首都或各省舉辦高普考

1933, 高考分在首都及北平舉行, 京平二地共錄取及格101人

1935年, 高考分在首都, 廣州, 北平, 西安等4 區域舉行, 共計251人及格

1937對日抗戰爆發, 因戰局激烈, 全國性高普考一度中斷 (1937, 1938年未舉辦), 且僅能在陪都重慶等少數地區舉行, 為解決戰時國家用人困難, 1936年後經常舉行特種考試, 1945年8月抗戰結束, 適用非常時期法規的正當性降低, 特種考試舉辦次數趨於減少

1931至1947, 高普考及格人數為10,256人

1936年, 原未計劃舉行高考, 經過磋商, 改舉辦臨時高考, 及格121人

民26年, 1937, 全面對日抗戰, 無法依常規舉行高普考, 延至民國27年舉行
為因應戰時特殊環境, 繼續維持考試選才之大計, 乃擬定"非常時期考試暫行條例草案"---各種考試因應事實上的需要, 得隨時舉行

民國28年, 1939年, 高考分在重慶等七處舉行, 及格143人

民國29年, 1940年, 高考及格193人

1947年1月1日公布憲法

1947年12月25日施行之憲法85條規定,  公務人員之選拔, 應實行公開競爭之考試制度, 並應按省區分別規定名額, 分區舉行考試

1947, 行憲後, 考選委員會改為考選部
1948, 修正考試法 (於憲法公布施行後, 配合憲法之施行) -- 增訂各省區之公務人員考試分別在各該省區舉行,應考人以本籍為限; 全國性之公務人員考試應按省區分定錄取名額; 全國性之公務人員高普考, 應分區或聯合數省區舉行, 並應按省區分定錄取名額
1948年, 高普考即採分區舉行, 及分區定額錄取

民國37年5月11日, 第一次高考, 錄取218人, 再試錄取130人

民國37年, 公告於37年12月11日, 舉行當年第二次全國性公務人員高普考, 當年所公告之各省區錄取定額比率標準, 係依照內政部民國37年, 上半年全國戶口統計總表所列各省人口數為規定各省錄取之定額標準,全國36省區---任拓書, 張嘯世, & 范煥之. (1983). p, 79

民37年, 高普考試公告後, 因戡亂戰局逆轉, 試務難按預定進度執行, 少數地區舉行考試後, 即將試卷集中南京, 未及評閱, 轉徒廣州辦理, 匆促榜示, 播遷急迫, 檔卷散失, 難作正確統計

民38年, 國事日非, 未舉行考試

行憲後之高普考, 以民國39年在台北所舉行者為始, 任拓書, 張嘯世, & 范煥之. (1983).  p.79

1949年5月, 陳誠宣布台灣實施戒嚴
1949, 12月, 大陸淪陷, 中央政府播遷來台, 國民黨政權以軍事整備, 反攻大陸為首要目標, 軍人主政, 以黨領政, 文官體系僅扮演軍事統治的工具性角色, 對忠貞與服從之強調, 遠重於專業取向與身分保障

1950在台北恢復舉辦公務人員高普考試
1950開始舉行台灣省公務人員高普考試

1951全國性公務人員高普考試

1986立法院將原考試法廢止, 並制定公務人員考試法, 專門職業及技術人員考試法各一種, 自此公務人員與專技人員考試分流

(考試院,考銓叢書指導委員會)

-------
現代考選制度
1905, 日本同盟會
同盟會時期確立考試權獨立---憲法之治: 確立行政, 議政, 審判, 考試, 監察五部門

中華革命黨時間籌備考試院建制
民國2年

大元帥同時公布考試院組織條例 (民國13年)及考試條例(及施行細則) (民國13年)

國民政府時期確立考試權獨立建制--建國大綱

試行五權之治
民國14年公布"國民政府組織法", 國民政府成立於廣州----國民政府屬軍政府體制, 一切制度悉隸軍政府之下, 故中央政府組織, 力求簡單, 未遑顧及五院制中央政府的組織

民國17年, 改組國民政府, 公布"中華民國國民政府組織法"--- 國民政府以行政, 立法, 司法, 考試, 監察五院組織之; 所有公務員均須依法律經考試院考選銓敘方得任用, 確立了考試院的職掌

民39年, 舉行全國性公務人員高普, --- 鑑於政府準備反攻大陸需要各種人才,

(部史)
-----

南京臨時政府於國父讓位於袁世凱後結束
袁在北平建都, 為北京政府之始
南京政府規劃的考試, 雖未實施, 但對其後北京政府考試用人之建制, 有啟導作用

民國2年1月9日, 北京政府公布" 文官考試法草案", "典試委員會編制法草案"
草案公布後, 因政府不穩定, 未立即舉行考試
直至民國5年4月30日改頒"文官高考試令"及"文官普通考試令"
民國5年6月,在北京舉行第一次文官高等考試
民國6年4月舉行第一次文官考試普通考試
此二項考試均以男子為對象
民國初期的文官考試, 雖設有典試委員會掌理, 但附屬於行政, 未能獨立行使其職權


(任拓書, 張嘯世, & 范煥之. (1983). 中華民國考選制度. 台北: 正中書局.)
We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.
Through the unknown, unremembered gate
When the last of earth left to discover
Is that which was the beginning;
At the source of the longest river
The voice of the hidden waterfall
And the children in the apple-tree
Not known, because not looked for
But heard, half-heard, in the stillness
Between two waves of the sea.
Quick now, here, now, always--
A condition of complete simplicity
(Costing not less than everything)
And all shall be well and
All manner of thing shall be well
When the tongues of flames are in-folded
Into the crowned knot of fire
And the fire and the rose are one.

T S Eliot
I would like to be the air that inhabits you for a moment only. I would like to be that unnoticed and that necessary.

― Margaret Atwood

Wednesday, November 01, 2017

省區定額, 分區定額

轉型正義與去中國化

大中國的主權意識,台灣僅為中國之一省 (Lee 2008)

考試中按省區分配名額,是中國歷史文化之產物
國家地大物博,各省區教育文化水準未盡一致,如完全依成績擇優錄取,就會導致部分偏遠省分無人錄取
保障邊疆地區人民服公職的機會
顧慮到文化較低的省分, 其考生無法在考試競爭中勝出, 故須予以保護, 擇優錄取

分區定額錄取制度建置,有其歷史發展背景與當時立憲時空環境需要,是以保障偏遠地區省份之國民服公職權利角度出發,並非是政府有意設計要對特定省區國民給予優惠

遠在東漢和帝時,邊郡及內郡即按人口比例分配孝廉,邊郡「十萬以上歲舉孝廉一人,不滿十萬二歲舉一人,五萬以下三歲舉一人」,內郡「二十萬口歲舉孝廉一人,四十萬二人,六十萬三人,八十萬四人,百萬五人;不滿二十萬二歲一人,不滿十萬三歲一人」

我國科舉制度自宋代採司馬光「逐路取人」建議,科舉取士依地區平均分配原則,以達到平衡各地人才流通

我國科舉制度自宋代採司馬光「逐路取士」建議,確立了各路名額保障之取士制度,這項原則一直延續到明代之「南、北、中」卷,清康熙後採取之「分省錄取」,乃至36 年12 月25 日施行之中華民國憲法第85 條及37 年7 月21日修正之考試法第20 條有關「按省區分定錄取名額」之規定,均係以平衡各地人才為考量,此一制度設計具有使地方人才流通之重要政治意涵

我國古代科舉,自宋代以降,均有按地域分配名額之設計

宋代州縣之解試,按國子監、開封府及各路(如河北、京東、梓州、利州、河東、陝西等路),採分路取人之方式,將其名額作政治上之分配

元代鄉試依十一個行中書省、二個宣慰司及直隸省部四處所在地,為鄉試場所,共錄取三百人,其中蒙古、色目、漢人、南人各錄取七十五人,七十五人之名額又分配在各鄉試地區

明代仁宗以後就全國區域劃分為南、北、中卷分定取士之額,其中江、浙、湖、廣為南卷,順天、山東、山西、河南為北卷,四川、廣西、雲貴為中卷。

清代原亦採南、北、中卷,其後中卷屢分屢併,或將南、北、中卷分為左右;康熙五十一年,以各省取中人數多少不均,邊省或致遺漏,乃廢舊制,改為分省錄取,按應試人數多寡,臨期奏請欽定錄取名額。會試歷年多者三百數十名,少者百數十名,而以雍正庚戊四百六名最多,乾隆己酉九十六名最少(楊樹藩,1976)

名史學家錢穆盛讚自漢代以來直至清代,無論選舉或考試,都採取分區定額制度,使全國各地優秀人才得以均衡的參加政府;每次科舉考試是全國各地人才的大結合,不僅政府與社會常聲氣相通,全國各區域均有相接觸之機會,故在政治及文化上益增其向心力(錢穆,1984)

國民政府成立初始,並無因省籍不同而給予優待之規定

國民政府遷臺後,在臺舉辦之全國性公務人員高普考,仍沿用針對在中國設計的分區定額錄取辦法,依內政部人口局1948 年公布的38 省(區)人口數目,訂出錄取比例,分配錄取應考人,做為39 年起臺灣高普考試錄取制度的依據。該錄取定額數一直沿用至1992 年隨著憲法增修條文, 停止適用;另因修正戶籍法廢除本籍制度,該限制臺籍考生錄取的不合理歧視制度,才正式走入歷史

1929公布的考試法, 原無省區定額的規定

民國23 年11 月考試院召開全國考銓會議,其中考試院交議「在首都或考試院指定區域舉行高等考試,或在首都舉行普通考試時,對於受教育人數較少省分之應考人,另訂從寬錄取辦法案。」綏遠省政府、甘肅省政府、河北省政府亦有類似提案,故合併討論。
本案最後決議:在首都或考試院指定區域舉行高等考試,或在首都舉行普通考試時,對於受教育人數較少省分之應考人,另訂從寬錄取辦法。此為國民政府時代對分區定額擇優錄取作法之濫觴。

對於受教育人數較少省分之應考人,另訂從寬錄取辦法; 受教育人數較少省分之應考人得從寬錄取

1935年8月6日考試法施行細則修正公布,受教育人數較少之邊遠省區應考人參加高等考試或首都普通考試時,其平均及格分數,得由考試院從寬另定
甘肅、察哈爾、綏遠、熱河、青海、新疆、寧夏、西康、蒙古、西藏為受高等及中等教育人數較少之邊遠地區。各該省區應考人參加考試,其到考人數在5人以上,而無1人及格者,得於總成績審查時,擇優從寬錄取1人 (考試院考銓叢書指導委員會,1983

1936年5月5日公布之五五憲法草案,考試一章中並無分區定額規定

抗戰勝利以後,政治協商會議完成政協憲草,並由國民政府向制憲國大提出,其第90條規定
「公務人員之選拔,應實行公開競爭之考試制度,非經考試及格不得任用,必要時得分區定額。

國民大會制憲時,關於本條之提案多達十一件,討論過程中究採彈性或剛性規定各有立論主張,審查會最後將草案「必要時得…」彈性條件,改為「應…」強制規定,大會遂照審查意見通過,此即現行憲法第85條規定之由來(國民大會實錄,1946)

1947年憲法公布施行, 第85條規定, 公務人員之選拔, 應實行公開競爭之考試制度, 並應按省區分別規定名額,分區舉行考試, 非經考試及格者不得任用
36 年12 月25日施行之中華民國憲法第85 條明定:「公務人員之選拔,應實行公開競爭之
考試制度,並應按省區分別規定名額,分區舉行考試。非經考試及格者,不得任用。」

考試法於37 年7 月21 日修正時,第20 條乃配合規定:「( 第1 項) 各省區之公務人員考試,分別在各該省區舉行,應考人以本籍為限。( 第2 項) 全國性之公務人員考試,應分省區或聯合
數省區舉行,並應按省區分定錄取名額,由考試院於考期前三個月公告之,其定額比例標準,為該省區人口在三百萬以下者五人,人口超過三百萬者,每滿一百萬人增加一人。」
1948, 考試法第3次修正, 增列全國性公務人員高普考試應按省區分定錄取名額條文 (第21條), 以資配合憲法第85條規定
考試法施行細則規定---全國性公務人員高普考,應分省區或聯合數省區舉行, 並應按省區分定錄取名額, 由考試院於考試前3個月公告之, 其定額標準為省區人口在3百萬以下者5人, 人口超過3百萬者, 每滿一百萬人增加一人
1948年7月21日總統修正公布之考試法第21條第2項,將其適用範圍縮小為「全國性之公務人員高等考試普通考試,應分省區或聯合數省區舉行,並應按省區分定錄取名額,由考試院於考期前三個月公告之。其定額標準為省區人口在三百萬以下者五人,人口超過三百萬者,每滿一百萬人,增加一人。」此所謂按省區分定錄取名額,係由考試院在1948年依據當時內政部人口局所公布各省區人口數目為計算標準,訂出全國性公務人員考試各省區錄取定額比例標準表--- Lee p. 60 check table

考試院依照此一規定,於37 年全國性公務人員高等考試、普通考試公告中載明:依照考試法
第20 條之規定,及內政部 37 年全國戶口統計總表所列各省區人口數,規定各省區錄取定額比例標準, check table, ---但錄取名額仍應依考試成績及實際需要,之總名額,按分區錄取定額比例增減,如有關考試法規另有補充規定者,並依其規定
----依37 年之考試公告,分區定額錄取雖然定有比例標準,但錄取名額仍應依考試成績及實際需要之總名額,按分區錄取定額原則比例增減,並不是定額多少即錄取多少

依37 年7 月21 日修正公布之考試法第20 條第1 項:「各省區之公務人員考試,分別在各該省區舉行,應考人以本籍為限。」規定,以本省籍國民為應考對象,且不受全國性公務人員高普考試分區定額錄取之限制

中央政府暫遷台灣以後,各省人民隨同政府來台者人口數不一,而按省區分別規定名額,卻仍依照1941年內政部人口局所統計各省區人口數而訂之比例標準表,未免失之不公,其中尤以佔報考人數最多之台灣省籍應考人權益影響最大。
但是中央政府暫遷臺灣以後,各省人民隨同政府來臺者人口數不一,而按省區分別規定名額,卻仍依照內政部人口局37 年所統計各省區人口數而訂之比例標準表,未免失之不公

政府遷臺後,自39 年起恢復定期舉辦全國性公務人員高普考試
自1950至1968, 每年均定期舉行全國性公務人員高普考

台灣省公務人員高普考, 以本省籍為應考對象, 屬任用考試

全國性公務人員高普考自1962年起漸次恢發分發任用制度, 自1968年起, 其及格人員會被分發任用, 故實際上已無另行舉辦台灣省公務人員高普考之必要, 台灣省公務人員高普考自1969年起停辦

39 年全國性公務人員高普考試公告開始,雖然定有各省區定額比例,但錄取名額仍依考試成績及實際需要之總名額,按分區錄取定額原則比例增減。

政府遷臺後,一方面對大陸各省人口無法掌握,二方面應考人數中以臺灣籍人口比例最高,為使臺灣省籍優秀青年參加高普考試達到錄取標準者均可錄取,自40 年至45 年之間,均按定額加1 倍錄取;自46 年起,每年加倍錄取之倍數均超過2 倍,臺灣省籍錄取人數之比例開始提高。

在57 年以前,同時舉辦臺灣省公務人員高等暨普通考試
58 年以後,臺灣省公務人員高等暨普通考試停辦,剩下全國性公務人員高等暨普通考試

39 年至50 年的全國性公務人員高普考試,係為反攻大陸預為儲備人才,考試之性質為資格考試,考試及格人員並不分發任用。
反之,臺灣省公務人員高普考試錄取之後,分發臺灣省政府分派實習期滿依法任用,故係任用考試

51 年及57 年先後修正考試法,恢復全國性公務人員高普考試分發任用制度,56 年並設立行政
院人事行政局,實際上已無另行舉辦臺灣省公務人員高普考試之必要,故自58年起不再舉辦

政府於39 年遷臺後,第一次在臺北市舉行全國性公務人員高普考試,亦明定應按省區分定錄取名額。39 個省區中,除臺灣省及華僑之比例數以實際人口曾作多次調整外,其他各省區之比例數,均以37 年之人口數為準。

政府遷台後, 台灣省依1948年內政部人口統計,錄取名額為8名(嗣因人口增加, 調為22人), 省區定額對台籍應考人權益衝擊頗大, 故考試院除辦理全國性公務人員高普考外, 自1950至1968, 另行舉辦台灣省公務人員高普考試, 以增加台籍人士錄取機會

嗣為符合台灣實際需要, 1962年將考試法21條增列---"但仍得依考試成績按定額標準比例,增減錄取之; 對於無人達到錄取標準之省區得降低錄取標準, 擇優錄取一人, 但降低錄取標準10分,仍無人可資錄取時, 任其缺額"之但書規定

台灣地區從1950年起至1968年止,依考試法第21條第1項規定,辦理 (1) 台灣省公務人員高等暨普通考試(應考人以台灣省籍為限,且不受定額比例限制),和 (2) 全國性公務人員高普考試同時合併舉行,以增加台灣省籍應考人之錄取機會
從1952年起,全國性公務人員高普考試按各省區錄取定額比例標準一律加倍錄取,以減低對台灣省籍應考人之不利(王雲五,1967)。

1952至1968年間, 除了全國高考, 另有台灣省高考 (專為台籍人士所舉辦的台灣省高考)
台灣高考之產生,乃因台籍考生自1952年後及格人數大增,但礙於全國高考以分省/區定額錄取, 相對於在台人數少, 定額多的外省籍考生, 台灣當時只有9個錄取名額, 產生不公平的現象, 擔心引起各界疑慮, 所實施的補救性考試
為何在1952年開始台灣省高考--因全國高考有缺失, 乃由台省高考的錄取來減低台籍人士在高考錄取上的不公平
全國性高考只是資格考, 無法即時任用, 且台籍者之人際網路較窄, 能在中央任職者有限
另設台灣省高考, 台省高考及格者往往在省政府較易得到任用
分區定額下, 台灣定額少, 應考人數多, 乃另設台灣省高考

1962年全國高考尚未修法進行"加倍錄取"前, 台籍考生在台灣省高考與全國高考錄取比為1156:404,可見台灣省高考及格即錄取的吸引力相當大

1962年, 全國高考以台籍考生及格即錄取

1968為台灣省高考的最後一年

1962年8月29日考試法修正時,第21條第2項增列「但仍得依考試成績按定額標準比例增減錄取之。對於無人達到錄取標準之省區降低錄取標準,擇優錄取一人,但降低錄取標準十分仍無人可資錄取時,任其缺額。」但書規定。-- 擇優錄取制度,則對偏遠省區之應考人形成相當優惠。

51 年8 月29 日修正考試法,於第21 條第2 項原條文「全國性之公務人員高等考試、普通考試應分省區或聯合數省區舉行,並應按省區分定錄取名額,由考試院於考期前三個月公告之,
其定額標準為省區人口在三百萬以下者五人,人口超過三百萬者,每滿一百萬人增加一人」之後,增列「但仍得依考試成績按定額標準比例增減錄取之。對於無人達到錄取標準之省區,得降低錄取標準,擇優錄取一人,但降低錄取標準十分,仍無人可資錄取時,任其缺
額。」但書規定

就考選部實際作業情形而言,確實已經發現因婚姻關係而冠夫之本籍,或因收養關係而變更為養父本籍遂降低標準獲致錄取情形,這些漏洞發生已經使得本項制度運作蒙上一層陰影。

1986立法院將原考試法廢止, 並制定公務人員考試法, 專門職業及技術人員考試法各一種, 自此公務人員與專技人員考試分流---公務人員考試制度因新制公務人員考試法實施出現重大變革,

1986新制公務人員考試法仍將省區定額明定於第13條條文中, 但賦予省區定額較大彈性, 故台灣省籍應考人成績達錄取標準者均增加倍數予以全部錄取, 並未受省區定額限制而有遺珠之憾;
另一但書規定降低錄取標準10分, 仍無人可資錄取時, 任其缺額, 係指某一省區各類科應考人無人達錄取標準時, 可降低錄取標準10分, 俾錄取1人, 如仍無人可資錄取時,該一省區當年高普考就無人錄取---降低錄取標準違反考試公平之原則

民國78 年為最後一次按省區分定錄取名額

各省區定額數, 依據內政部於1948年公布之各省人口計算得, 這一組定額一直沿月至1992年, 隨隨著戶籍法的修正, 取消戶籍資料中關於本籍的記載, 此一分區定額制度正式廢除為止 (1994憲法增修條文第5條)

1990年立法院審查考試院預算時, 要求暫時凍結省區定額之適用, 以免造成考試不公並加深省籍隔閡, 故

考選部即報請考試院於 1990 年 5 月 3 日第 7 屆第 273 次會議通過,自 1990 年起暫停適用「公務人員考試法」第 13 條末段: 對於無人達到錄取標準之省區,不降低錄取標準擇優錄取

1990起才決定暫停適用分區定額
1994憲法增修條文明定憲法第85條有關省區定額之規定停止適用
1996年修正公務人員考試法時, 配合刪除

80 年12 月經由選舉產生具有充分民意基礎的第2 屆國民大會代表,於81年5 月27 日召開第一次臨時會,議決通過中華民國憲法增修條文18 條,其中增修條文第14 條第3 項規定:「憲法第八十五條有關按省區分別規定名額,分區舉行考試之規定,停止適用。」,於同年月28 日公布施行


國民黨政權採用分區定額擇優錄取制度,大量提供外省人保障名額,讓外省人在公務體系占有極高比例,直到1991年戶籍法修正才正式告終

1991國大修憲, 以中華民國政權有效統治範圍並未及於大陸各省, 乃於增修條文中明定"憲法第85條有關按省區分別規定名額, 分區舉行考試之規定, 停止適用"

1996年, 修正公務人員考試法也配合刪除此項規定

就事實而言, 台灣省籍應考人並未因省區定額規定被限制錄取機會

1992年5月28日總統公布之中華民國憲法增修條文第14條(現已改為6條)第3項明定,憲法第85條有關按省區分別規定名額,分區舉行考試之規定,停止適用。

1996年1月17日總統修正公布之公務人員考試法修正條文,原第13條分區定額擇優錄取規定,配合前述憲法增修條文修正而予以刪除,至此法制上有關分區定額之法源,因時勢變遷而完全走入歷史(林嘉誠,2006)

配合憲法增修條文停止適用按省分定名額規定,考試院乃於82 年7 月16 日函送公務人員考試法修正草案報立法院審議,嗣於85 年1 月17 日修正公布,即刪除原第13 條按省區分定錄取名額及降低錄取標準之條文,至此,法制上有關分區定額之法源,完全走入歷史。

只是隨著時局逆轉中央政府在民國38 年播遷來臺以後,這一套原適用在三十五省的憲政架構,基於維護大中國法統意識下,無法隨著現實環境改變而適時修正調整,導致小孩玩大車的無奈與困窘。既然憲法層次不能碰觸,考試院只能在法律層面進行局部調節,雖然有效解決「分區定額」之不平,但是對無人錄取省區降低標準「擇優錄取」一人作法,畢竟與公平正義原則不盡相符;最後在多數民意壓力之下,先暫停適用(民國79 年),後修憲修法完全加以取消(81 年),這也是臺灣民主轉型的一部分。

考試院考銓叢書指導委員會(1984),《中華民國高普考試制度》。台北:正中書局。

Tuesday, October 31, 2017

Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543-571

Economy, bureaucracy

Stearns and Coleman (1990) assert that economic prosperity can serve to benefit women
and minorities because their advancement is less likely to be viewed as coming at the
expense of white males. Similarly, Saltzstein (1986) points out that it is much easier to
provide increased public sector employment opportunities to any particular group when the
‘‘size of the pie’’ is expanded (156). Using gross state product (GSP) per capita as an
explanatory variable of bureaucratic representation, Brewer and Selden (2003) found it to
be positively related to the representation of women and African-Americans in state
government but negatively related to the representation of Latinos. To test the impact of
this variable on female and minority representation in our data set, we utilize GSP as
a measure of overall economic prosperity within the states. We predict that GSP will be
positively related to the representation of women and minorities in state civil service
employment.

It has also been asserted that the individual wealth of a state’s citizenry may be linked
to minority representation. Mladenka (1989) hypothesized that wealthier, better educated
populations tend to be more open and tolerant and, as a result, should tend to hire more
minorities in all employment categories, including the public sector. Mladenka constructs
an education, income, and housing index to test his hypothesis and finds that variable to be
significantly and positively related to African-American and Latino public sector employment.
We examine one element of his index. As a measure of the wealth of state populations,
we use state per capita income to test whether or not states with populations that are
better off financially tend to possess more representative bureaucracies. This measure is
not highly correlated with the previous measure, GSP, and we predict that state per capita
income will be positively related to state bureaucratic representation rates for women and
minorities.7

Total Unemployment Rate
It is an empirical regularity that during economic downturns, women and minorities are
disproportionately unemployed. Given the public sector’s relative insulation from economic
downturns, we might expect women and minorities to be even more attracted to
public sector employment in those states with higher total unemployment rates. However,
empirical evidence in support of this expected impact is mixed. In their analysis of state
government representation, Brewer and Selden (2003) found state unemployment rates to
have a positive effect on the representation of women but no statistically significant effect
on the representation of African-Americans and Latinos. Alternatively, Stein (1986) finds
evidence of local unemployment rates having a negative effect on minority representation
in local government. We examine the impact of state-level unemployment rates on the
employment of minorities and women in state bureaucracies to determine whether it has
a positive or negative effect

Llorens, J. J., Wenger, J. B., & Kellough, J. E. (2008). Choosing Public Sector Employment: The Impact of Wages on the Representation of Women and Minorities in State Bureaucracies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(3), 397-413.

symbolic representation

Gade, Daniel M., and Vicky M. Wilkins. 2012. Where did you serve? Veteran identity, representative
bureaucracy, and vocational rehabilitation. Journal of Public Administration Research and
Theory. doi:10.1093/jopart/mus030

Theobald, Nick A., and Donald P. Haider-Markel. 2008. Race, bureaucracy, and symbolic representation: Interactions between citizens and police. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 19:409–26.

Riccucci, N. M., Van Ryzin, G. G., & Lavena, C. F. (2014). Representative Bureaucracy in Policing: Does It Increase Perceived Legitimacy? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(3), 537-551

Monday, October 30, 2017

age, representative bureaucracy

A 1976 study, for instance, reported evidence that older bureaucrats were less supportive of policies aimed at improving the conditions of mi- norities (Meier and Nigro 1976). Similar research published the following year found that younger minority managers felt a stronger responsibility to help other minorities (Rosenbloom and Kinnard 1977). In the 1980s, how- ever, Daley (1984) reported that older administrators were more supportive of a representative bureaucracy and of increasing efforts to achieve this goal.

Coleman, S., Brudney, J. L., & Kellough, J. E. (1998). Bureaucracy as a Representative Institution: Toward a Reconciliation of Bureaucratic Government and Democratic Theory. American Journal of Political Science, 42(3), 717-744.