論文使用權限 Thesis access permission:校內校外完全公開 unrestricted
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus: 已公開 available
校外 Off-campus: 已公開 available
論文名稱 Title |
已開發國家基本收入試驗之比較 A Comparative Study of Basic Income Pilots in Advanced Countries |
||
系所名稱 Department |
|||
畢業學年期 Year, semester |
語文別 Language |
||
學位類別 Degree |
頁數 Number of pages |
158 |
|
研究生 Author |
|||
指導教授 Advisor |
|||
召集委員 Convenor |
|||
口試委員 Advisory Committee |
|||
口試日期 Date of Exam |
2021-07-22 |
繳交日期 Date of Submission |
2021-10-19 |
關鍵字 Keywords |
無條件基本收入、基本收入、社會福利、社會保障制度、福利改革、社會實驗、政策倡議 universal/ unconditional basic income, basic income, social welfare, social protection system, welfare reform, social experiment, policy advocacy |
||
統計 Statistics |
本論文已被瀏覽 299 次,被下載 267 次 The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 299 times, has been downloaded 267 times. |
中文摘要 |
當代新自由主義下的勞動市場,為了追求全球化下的競爭優勢,發展出一連串崇尚彈性的工作型態來應對瞬息萬變的全球趨勢。然而,這樣非典型的勞動型態卻缺乏過往工作的穩定經濟保障,從而擴大了原已存在的階級不平等,使我們的社會更難以處理貧窮帶來的複雜問題。這也鞭策各地的政府、學界與民間提出各式不同的解決之道,其中,不算新穎的「無條件基本收入」又再次被推到眾人眼前。 自16世紀開始出現基本收入的概念以來,不乏各式哲學討論與實證研究,但目前為止,國內卻少有研究探索各國倡議基本收入試驗的經驗。因此,本研究期望透過梳理曾嘗試基本收入試驗的已開發國家內的倡議經驗,更深入瞭解各國的倡議脈絡、實驗的成果與爭議。這些實驗包含1970年代美國與加拿大兩國最早的五次所得支撐實驗,與2017年芬蘭與加拿大兩次基本收入試點計畫的基進嘗試。 本研究發現,芬蘭、美、加的四次實驗,其實更接近「有條件的低收族群的補貼」計畫。儘管與嚴格意義上的無條件基本收入有所差距,但執行上已經相當接近。這四次實驗的數據表明,基本收入會減少受試者的工作時數,不過個人的身心狀況卻會更為健康與快樂,且多出來的空閒大多用來照顧家庭與進修學業,而非虛度光陰。 然而,1970年代兩次實驗導致離婚率提高,使得基本收入僅止步於實驗。雖然後續的分析對離婚率問題提出了不同的見解,但為時已晚,無法改變定局。此外,四次實驗的受眾幾乎都是中低收族群,導致很難將其數據推論至整體社會;且晚近的兩次實驗中,一次因為保守派半途取消,一次因為法規的革新中途更動規則,都使實驗的可信度打了折扣。 本研究也發現,各國的基本收入背後如果沒有強力的政治支持,是難以推動進行的,尤其是試驗要成功進入立法,需要各立法與行政部會的合作與財務上的支援才有機會順利推動。但是,過度貼近政府,反倒可能讓實驗承擔過度的政治責任,也容易讓人質疑其目的,從而模糊原先實驗倡議的初衷。 |
Abstract |
The labor market under contemporary Neo-liberalism is trying to maximize its competitive advantage in a globalized world. A series of flexible work patterns have been developed to face the unpredictable global situations. However, atypical employment not only is unable to meet the basic needs of the have nots, but it also widens the rich-poor divide. Therefore it has become more and more difficult for our society to deal with the complexity of poverty. The Struggles against poverty and social inequality have spawned various solutions, including Universal Basic Income (UBI). Since the 16th century UBI has been the target of social philosophers due to their interests in socialism, welfare and social equality. However, current research generally lacks discussions on the experiences of UBI across different countries. Hence, this thesis aims to delve into the UBI initiatives in advanced countries. Specifically, it attempts to bring to the fore the social and political contexts of UBI pilot studies in Finland, America and Canada. I find that the four pilot programs in three countries are closer to conditional assistance programs for low-income groups instead of UBIs. Statistics show that these experiments reduced labor support (working hours) slightly with better physical and mental health. The subjects in these experiments tended to use their free time to increase household production and continue their study instead of engaging in entertainment. The most controversial result, however, is about the family dissolution rates in the 1970s’ experiments. Even though further analysis rejected those results as a statistical error in the 1990s, it’s too late to change the mind of the government. In addition, the experimental subjects consisted of low-income families/individuals only, and two UBI pilots were not successfully completed in 2017. Those have also undermined the credibility and generalizability of UBI pilots. I also find that UBI pilots as a social experiment need strong political support to press ahead, especially various administrative, legislative and financial assistance. But the pilot also needs to maintain a critical distance from political mobilization so that the original goals of the experiment will not be sacrificed. |
目次 Table of Contents |
論文審定書 i 論文公開授權書 ii 謝辭 iii 中文摘要 iv 英文摘要 vi 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景 1 (一)陳放多年的基進思想 1 (二)上下懸殊的全球財富 5 (三)當前臺灣的貧富差距 7 第二節 研究動機 9 第三節 研究問題與目的 10 第四節 研究重要性 11 第二章 文獻回顧 14 第一節 基本收入提案的展演 14 (一)基進提案的緣起與訴求 14 (二)提案類別的差異與區分 17 第二節 後工業化國家的糾結 18 (一)工作與否的差異與歧視 18 (二)全球化下的競爭與損失 20 (三)工作薪資差距與貧窮陷阱 22 第三節 社會福利邏輯的蛻變 24 (一)福利國家的類別 24 (二)福利政策理念的轉變 25 第三章 研究方法與設計 28 第一節 研究途徑與架構 28 第二節 研究對象與範圍 29 第三節 研究限制 30 第四章 芬蘭的基本收入實驗 32 第一節 緣起 32 第二節 政府實驗文化的突破與妥協 33 第三節 逐步整合的政治理想 39 第四節 妥協下基進福利的揭示 44 第五節 小結 52 第五章 美、加二國的所得支撐實驗 55 第一節 緣起 55 第二節 美國 59 (一)非福利國家的基進福利 59 (二)朝向基進福利的動力 65 (三)領頭基進實驗的成果 70 第三節 加拿大 76 (一)邁向福利國家的基進背景 76 (二)由政治起手的改革嘗試 81 (三)再次踏回基進福利的嘗試 85 (四)緬尼托巴省基本年所得實驗 89 (五)安大略省基本收入試驗 91 第四節 小結 94 第六章 結論與討論 99 第一節 綜觀各實驗的一般性脈絡 101 第二節 各地實驗的簡易比較 104 (一)不同給付機制的優劣 105 (二)政府領頭的基進實驗 106 (三)基進實驗對於勞動的影響 107 (三)令人意外的離婚率難題 108 第三節 試點實驗的限制 110 (一)實驗缺乏中產階級以上的數據 111 (二)過於繁瑣的實驗形式 111 (三)長期影響依然難以論述 113 第四節 實驗外部環境的挑戰 114 (一)難以拿捏的政治關係 116 (二)被窄化的制度改革理念 117 (三)新興政策方向的考驗 118 未來研究方向與政策倡議的建議 119 第五節 119 (一)台灣政策倡議的建議 119 (二)未來研究方向 121 參考文獻 123 附錄 131 第一節 芬蘭基進詞彙意涵的變遷 131 第二節 芬蘭基本收入公眾辯論的背景 138 |
參考文獻 References |
Anderson, G. M. (1987). Welfare programs in the rent-seeking society. Southern Economic Journal, 377-386. Andersson, J. O., & Kangas, O. (2002, September). Popular support for basic income in Sweden and Finland. In 9th Congress of the BIEN. Banerjee, A., Niehaus, P., & Suri, T. (2019). Universal basic income in the developing world. Annual Review of Economics. Bashur, D.(2019). The Applicability of Universal Basic Income in Post-Conflict Scenarios: The Syria Case. Basic Income Studies, 14(1). Bastagli, F., Hagen-Zanker, J., Harman, L., Barca, V., Sturge, G., Schmidt, T., & Pellerano, L. (2016). Cash transfers: what does the evidence say. A rigorous review of programme impact and the role of design and implementation features. London: Overseas Development Institute. Bielby, W. T., & Baron, J. N. (1986). Men and women at work: Sex segregation and statistical discrimination. American journal of sociology, 91(4), 759-799. Bonoli, G. (2007). Time matters: Postindustrialization, new social risks, and welfare state adaptation in advanced industrial democracies. Comparative political studies, 40(5), 495-520. Calnitsky, D. (2016). “More normal than welfare”: the Mincome experiment, stigma, and community experience. Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie, 53(1), 26-71. Calnitsky, D., & Latner, J. P. (2017). Basic income in a small town: Understanding the elusive effects on work. Social Problems, 64(3), 373-397. De Wispelaere, J., Halmetoja, A., & Pulkka, V. V. (2018). The rise (and fall) of the basic income experiment in Finland. In CESifo Forum (Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 15-19). München: ifo Institut–Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung an der Universität München. De Wispelaere, J., Halmetoja, A., & Pulkka, V. V. (2019). The Finnish Basic Income Experiment: A Primer. In The Palgrave International Handbook of Basic Income (pp. 389-406). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. Drover, G. (1988). Free trade and social policy. Canadian Council on Social. Egger, D., Haushofer, J., Miguel, E., Niehaus, P., & Walker, M. W. (2019). General equilibrium effects of cash transfers: experimental evidence from Kenya (No. w26600). National Bureau of Economic Research. Elesh, D., & Lefcowitz, M. J. (1977). The effects of the New Jersey-Pennsylvania Negative Income Tax Experiment on health and health care utilization. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 391-405. Esping-Andersen, G. (1996). After the golden age? Welfare state dilemmas in a global economy. Welfare states in transition: National adaptations in global economies, 1-31. Ferdosi, M., & McDowell, T. (2020). More than Welfare: The Experiences of Employed and Unemployed Ontario Basic Income Recipients. Basic Income Studies, 15(2). Ferdosi, M., McDowell, T., Lewchuk, W., Ross, S. (2020). Southern Ontario’s Basic Income Experience. McMaster University, Canada. Forget, E. L. (2008). The town with no poverty: A history of the North American guaranteed annual income social experiments. University of Manitoba, Canada. Forget, E. L. (2011). The town with no poverty: The health effects of a Canadian guaranteed annual income field experiment. Canadian Public Policy, 37(3), 283-305. Forget, E. L. (2012). Canada: The case for basic income. In Basic Income Worldwide (pp. 81-101). Palgrave Macmillan, London. Foti, A. (2009). EuroMayDay. The International Encyclopedia of Revolution and Protest, 1-2. Foti, A. (2017). The precariat for itself: Euro May Day and precarious workers' movements. In Mapping Precariousness, Labour Insecurity and Uncertain Livelihoods (pp. 149-156). Routledge. Frankman, M. J. (2010). Making the Difference! The BIG in Namibia; Basic Income Grant Pilot Project Assessment Report, April 2009. Canadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d'études du développement, 29(3-4), 526-529. Gaffney, A. (2015). The neoliberal turn in American health care. International Journal of Health Services, 45(1), 33-52. Goldsmith, S. (2002, September). The Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend: an experiment in wealth distribution. In 9th International Congress, BIEN, Geneva. Government of Ontario. (2019). Ontario Basic Income Pilot. Retrieved from https://www.ontario.ca/page/ontario-basic-income-pilot#:~:text=Following%20a%20tax%20credit%20model,50%25%20of%20any%20earned%20income Greenberg, D. H., & Robins, P. K. (1986). The changing role of social experiments in policy analysis. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 5(2), 340-362. Greenberg, D., Shroder, M., & Onstott, M. (1999). The social experiment market. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 13(3), 157-172. Halmetoja, A., De Wispelaere, J., & Perkiö, J. (2019). A policy comet in Moominland? Basic Income in the Finnish welfare state. Social Policy and Society, 18(2), 319-330. Hamilton, L., & Mulvale, J. P. (2019). “Human again”: the (unrealized) promise of basic income in ontario. Journal of Poverty, 23(7), 576-599. Handa, S., Natali, L., Seidenfeld, D., Tembo, G., & Davis, B. (2016). Can unconditional cash transfers lead to sustainable poverty reduction? Evidence from two government-led programmes in Zambia. Zambia CGP and MCP Evaluation Study Teams. Hausman, J. A., & Wise, D. A. (1979). Attrition bias in experimental and panel data: the Gary income maintenance experiment. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 455-473. Heller, H. (2018). A Marxist History of Capitalism. Routledge. Hum, D., & Simpson, W. (1993a). Economic response to a guaranteed annual income: Experience from Canada and the United States. Journal of Labor Economics, 11(1, Part 2), S263-S296. Hum, D., & Simpson, W. (1993b). Whatever happened to Canada's guaranteed income project?. Canadian Public Administration, 36(3), 442-450. Hum, D., & Simpson, W. (2001). A guaranteed annual income: from Mincome to the millennium. POLICY OPTIONS-MONTREAL-, 22(1), 78-82. Ikkala, M. (2012). Finland: Institutional resistance of the welfare state against a basic income. In Basic Income Guarantee and Politics (pp. 63-81). Palgrave Macmillan, New York. Jokipalo, V. A. (2019). Basic Income, Wages, and Productivity: A Laboratory Experiment. Basic Income Studies, 14(2). Kangas, O., Jauhiainen, S., Simanainen, M., & Ylikännö, M. (2019). The basic income experiment 2017–2018 in Finland: Preliminary results. Kangas, O., Simanainen, M., & Honkanen, P. (2017). Basic income in the Finnish context. Intereconomics, 52(2), 87-91. Katz, A. J. (1973). Four income maintenance experiments. Social Work, 4-113. Koistinen, P., & Perkiö, J. (2014). Good and bad times of social innovations: The case of universal basic income in Finland. Basic Income Studies, 9(1-2), 25-57. Lampman, R. J. (1969). Nixon's Family Assistance Plan. Institute for Research on Poverty, University of Wisconsin. Levine, R. A., Watts, H., Hollister, R., Williams, W., O’Connor, A., & Widerquist, K. (2005). A retrospective on the negative income tax experiments: Looking back at the most innovative field studies in social policy. The ethics and economics of the basic income guarantee, 95-108. Mashaw, J. L. (1971). Welfare Reform and Local Administration of Aid to Families with Dependent Children in Virginia. Virginia Law Review, 818-839. Maynard, R. A. (1977). The effects of the rural income maintenance experiment on the school performance of children. The American Economic Review, 67(1), 370-375. McDonald, J. F., & Stephenson, S. P. (1979). The effect of income maintenance on the school-enrollment and labor-supply decisions of teenagers. The Journal of Human Resources, 14(4), 488-495. Munnell, A. H. (Ed.). (1986). Lessons from the Income Maintenance Experiments: Conference: Papers and Discussions. Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. Osberg, L. (2001). Poverty among Senior Citizens: A Canadian Success Story in International Perspective. Parth, A. M., & Nyby, J. (2020). Welfare experiments as tools for evidence-based policy making? The political debate on Twitter about the basic income trial in Finland. Policy Studies, 1-19. Pasma, C., & Regehr, S. (2020). Basic Income: Some Policy Options for Canada. Pedersen, A. W., & Kuhnle, S. (2017). The Nordic welfare state model. The Nordic models in political science. Challenged, but still viable?. Perkiö, J. (2012, September). The Struggle over interpretation: Basic income in the Finnish public discussion in 2006-2012. In A paper presented in the 14th BIEN Congress in Munich. http://www. bien2012. org/sites/default/files/paper_162_en. pdf. Perkiö, J. (2019). From rights to activation: The evolution of the idea of basic income in the Finnish political debate, 1980–2016. Journal of Social Policy, 49(1), 103-124. Robins, P. K. (1985). A comparison of the labor supply findings from the four negative income tax experiments. Journal of human Resources, 567-582. Sachs, J. D. (2006). The end of poverty: Economic possibilities for our time. Penguin. Segal, H. D. (2016). Finding a Better Way: A Basic Income Pilot Project for. Retrieved from https://files.ontario.ca/discussionpaper_nov3_english_final.pdf Sheahen, A. (2011, February). The history of the basic income guarantee in the United States. In 10th Annual North American Basic Income Guarantee Congress. New York City. Simpson, W., Mason, G., & Godwin, R. (2017). The Manitoba basic annual income experiment: Lessons learned 40 years later. Canadian Public Policy, 43(1), 85-104. Smith-Carrier, T. A., & Green, S. (2017). Another low road to basic income? Mapping a pragmatic model for adopting a basic income in Canada. Basic Income Studies, 12(2). Smith-Carrier, T., & Benbow, S. (2019). Access to a basic income: Exploring a matricentric feminist approach to poverty alleviation for mothers in Ontario. Journal of the Motherhood Initiative for Research and Community Involvement, 10(1/2). Špeciánová, J. (2018). Unconditional Basic Income in the Czech Republic: What Type of Taxes Could Fund It? A Theoretical Tax Analysis. Basic Income Studies, 13(1) Statistics Finland. 110 -- Parliamentary elections 1983-2019, data on voting. Retrieved June 22, 2016, from URL https://pxnet2.stat.fi/PXWeb/pxweb/en/StatFin/StatFin__vaa__evaa__evaa_as/010_evaa_2019_tau_110.px/ Statistics Finland. 11pr -- Employees and self-employed persons aged 15-74 by sex, 1989-2020. Retrieved June 22, 2016, from URL https://pxnet2.stat.fi/PXWeb/pxweb/en/StatFin/StatFin__tym__tyti__vv/statfin_tyti_pxt_11pr.px Stephens, J. D. (1996). The Scandinavian welfare states. Welfare States in Transition Sage, London. Stiglitz, J. (2019). People, power, and profits: Progressive capitalism for an age of discontent. Penguin UK. Tedds, L. M., & Crisan, D. (2021). Recent political manifesto commitments to basic income in Canada. Available at SSRN 3781842. Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Penguin. Tobin, J., Pechman, J. A., & Mieszkowski, P. M. (1967). Is a negative income tax practical?. The Yale Law Journal, 77(1), 1-27. van der Veen, R. (2019). Basic Income Experiments in the Netherlands?. Basic Income Studies, 14(1). Venti, S. F. (1984). The effects of income maintenance on work, schooling, and non-market activities of youth. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 16-25. Widerquist, K., & Sheahen, A. (2012). The United States: The Basic Income Guarantee—Past Experience, Current Proposals. In Basic Income Worldwide (pp. 11-32). Palgrave Macmillan, London. 丁曼(譯)(2020)。格差社會(原作者:橘木俊詔)。 臺北市:商周出版。(原著出版年:2018) 方瑜(譯)(2016)。社會為何對年輕人冷酷無情:青貧浪潮與家庭崩壞,向下流動的社會來臨!なぜ日本は若者に冷酷なのか:そして下降移動社会が到来する(原作者:山田昌弘)。 新北市:立緒出版。(原著出版年:2013) 王永慈. (2007). “積極促進”(activation) 概念的解析. 東吳社會工作學報, (16), 151-173. 古允文(譯)(1999)。福利資本主義的三個世界(原作者:Gosta Espinh-Andetrsen)。臺北市:巨流圖書。(原著出版年:1990) 古允文. (2001). 平等與凝聚: 台灣社會福利發展的思考. 社會政策與社會工作學刊, 5(1), 145-169. 江千綺(譯)(2013)。消費場所 Consuming Places(原作者:John Urry)。 臺北市:書林出版。(原著出版年:1995) 行政院主計總處,107 年家庭收支調查報告,2019/10。 行政院主計總處,107 年薪資與生產力統計年報,2019。 吳國卿, 王柏鴻(譯)(2015)。震撼主義:災難經濟的興起 The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism(原作者:Naomi klein)。臺北市:時報出版。(原著出版年:2007) 吳國卿、鄧伯宸(譯)(2013)。國家為什麼會失敗:權力、富裕與貧困的根源 Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty(原作者:Daron Acemoglu、James A. Robinson)。 新北市:衛城出版。(原著出版年:2012) 李易駿, & 古允文. (2003). 另一個福利世界? 東亞發展型福利體制初探. 臺灣社會學刊, (31), 189-241. 李健鴻. (2010). [積極促進] 治理下就業保險失業給付制度的實踐困境. 臺灣民主季刊, 7(2), 125-176. 李憲榮(2010)。芬蘭國會選制下的策略性投票。臺灣國際研究季刊,6(1),75-94。 周怡君(2009)。社會政策與社會立法新論。台北市:洪葉文化事業有限公司。 林宗弘(2017)。台灣民眾如何看待全民基本收入制度?。思想,(34),127-146。 林信廷(2014)。可實現的烏托邦?基本收入在當代的美麗與哀愁。臺灣社會福利學刊,11(2),185-196。doi:10.6265/TJSW.2014.11(2)5 林家瑄(譯)(2010)。我在底層的生活:當專欄作家化身為女服務生Nickel and Dimed:On (Not) Getting By in America(原作者:Barbara Ehrenreich)。臺北縣:左岸文化。(原著出版年:2001) 倪世傑(2017)。全民基本收入:希望還是幻影?。思想,(34),173-197。 徐詩思(譯)(2015)。NO LOGO:顛覆品牌統治的反抗運動聖經NO LOGO : No Space, No Choice, No Jobs(原作者:Naomi klein)。臺北市:時報出版。(原著出版年:2009) 張美惠(譯)(2017)。二十一世紀工作論: 勞工被人工智慧取代, 我們的工作、生活與社會將往哪裡去? 會變得更糟或是更好? The Wealth of Humans: Work, Power, and Status in the Twenty-first Century (原作者:Ryan Avent)。 臺北市:商業週刊。(原著出版年:2016) 許景理(前言-第三章), 簡秀如(第五章-第八章), 邱琬珺(第四章、第九章到後記)(譯)(2018)。無條件基本收入 Give People Money(原作者:Annie Lowrey)。 香港:中和出版。(原著出版年:2006) 許雅淑、李宗義(譯)(2016)。窮人的經濟學:如何終結貧窮? Poor Economics: A Radical Rethinking of the Way to Fight Global Poverty(原作者:Abhijit V. Banerjee, Esther Duflo)。新北市:群學出版。(原著出版年:2016) 許瑞宋(譯)(2017)。基本收入: 建設自由社會與健全經濟的基進方案 Basic Income: A Radical Proposal for a Free Society and a Sane Economy(原作者:Philippe Van Parijs)。 新北市:衛城出版。(原著出版年:2017) 郭秋慶. (2009). 芬蘭半總統制到議會民主的變遷. 臺灣國際研究季刊, 5(4), 1-23. 陳儀(譯)(2018)。寫給每個人的基本收入讀本: 從基本收入出發, 反思個人工作與生活的意義, 以及如何讓社會邁向擁有實質正義、自由與安全感的未來(原作者:Guy Standing)。 臺北市:臉譜出版。(原著出版年:2017) 黃志隆(2009)。充分就業困境下的基本收入保障理念及其實踐。臺灣社會福利學刊,8(1),213-218。doi:10.6265/TJSW.2009.8(1), 213-218. 黃志隆(2017)。臺灣年金改革基礎的重構:新社會公民地位之社會平等觀點。社會政策與社會工作學刊,21(1),197-236。doi:10.6785/SPSW.201706_21(1).0005 黃志隆. (2014). 社會投資國家的青年轉銜與生命歷程政策: 以瑞典和英國相關社會政策改革為例. 社會政策與社會工作學刊, 18(2), 121-161. 黃志隆. (2017). 臺灣年金改革基礎的重構: 新社會公民地位之社會平等觀點. 社會政策與社會工作學刊, 21(1), 197-236. 黃佳瑜(譯)(2019)。社會不平等:為何國家越富裕,社會問題越多?(原作者:Richard Wilkinson & Kate Pickett)。臺北市:時報出版。(原著作年:2010) 葉崇揚, & 古允文. (2017). 從生產性福利體制到社會投資福利國家: 臺灣與韓國的比較. Social Policy, 21(1). 詹文碩(譯)(2015)。富稅時代:為何課不到他們的稅?揭露藏匿192兆的避稅天堂,21世紀貧富與權力分配之戰! La richesse cach藏匿 Kate Picket(原作者:Gabriel Zucman)。臺北市:寫樂文化。(原著出版年:2013) 詹文碩、陳以禮(譯)(2014)。二十一世紀資本論Le Capital au XXIe siècle(原作者:Thomas Piketty)。新北市:衛城出版。(原著出版年:2014) 廖美(2017)。全民基本收入是一種補償。思想,(34),159-172。 劉毓玲(譯)(1993)。新政府運動(原作者:David E. Osborne & Gaebler Ted)。臺北市:天下文化出版。(原著作年:1993) 劉道捷(譯)(2018)。世界不平等報告2018 World Inequality Report 2018(原作者:Facundo Alvaredo, Lucas Chancel, Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, Gabriel Zucman)。新北市:衛城出版。(原著出版年:2018) 劉維人(譯)(2019)。不穩定無產階級:一個因全球化而生的當代新危險階級,他們為何產生,造成什麼問題,社會又該如何因應?(原作者:Guy Standing)。臺北市:臉譜出版。(原著作年:2011 ) 劉維人(譯)(2019)。不穩定無產階級:一個因全球化而生的當代新危險階級,他們為何產生,造成什麼問題,社會又該如何因應?(原作者:Guy Standing)。臺北市:臉譜出版。(原著作年:2011 ) 鄭麗嬌. (1994). 美國各州 [失依兒童家庭補助](AFDC) 社會福利方案之評估研究. 鄭麗嬌. (1999). 美國社會福利政策發展之研究: 回顧與展望. 中國行政評論, 9(1), 103-134. 謝世民(2017)。全民基本收入與正義。思想,(34),147-158。 簡建忠, 黃良志, 楊通軒, & 馬財專. (2007). 各國非典型勞動政策形成及運作機制之比較研究. 台北: 行政院研究發展考核委員會. |
電子全文 Fulltext |
本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。 論文使用權限 Thesis access permission:校內校外完全公開 unrestricted 開放時間 Available: 校內 Campus: 已公開 available 校外 Off-campus: 已公開 available |
紙本論文 Printed copies |
紙本論文的公開資訊在102學年度以後相對較為完整。如果需要查詢101學年度以前的紙本論文公開資訊,請聯繫圖資處紙本論文服務櫃台。如有不便之處敬請見諒。 開放時間 available 已公開 available |
QR Code |