寧語藍實習日誌07：農業部狗活動區（公園）會議

 農業部狗活動區（公園）會議

         今天，我陪同何宗勳秘書長往農業部參加一個會議。這次會議由農業部支持與台灣愛狗人士協會主辦、台灣動物保護行政監督聯盟協辦，該計畫希望評鑑與表揚全國寵物狗活動區，為動物友善和主人友善公共空間制定標準。他們還計劃舉辦競賽，為高品質的寵物公園頒獎。

        在閱讀了一篇關於何秘書長2023年的文章後，我發現大多數狗公園和無線遛狗區都集中在台灣北部，特別是台北市、新北市和桃園市；寵物公園在全國的分佈並不均衡。目前台灣還沒有全國性的寵物公園設計指南或標準。他們提議將公園分為「城市」和「社區」兩種類型，其中城市公園規模更大，是功能齊全的旗艦公園；「社區公園」規模較小，更便於步行到達（更方便），主要面向犬類。

        我還發現一個有趣的現象：在現有區域內建造狗公園比從零開始建造一個新公園要困難得多，因為許多人反對，他們認為這塊空間應該用於其他用途。例如，大安森林公園面積相當大，我個人很懷疑為什麼那裡沒有狗公園。然而，該公園顯然已被劃為生態保護區，環保組織強烈反對在那裡建造狗公園。

        會中提出了許多關於如何具體運作比賽的問題——如何確定不同狗公園的規模類別？應該設立幾個類別──兩個還是三個？每個狗公園的申請應該由誰提交？申請截止日期是什麼時候？參加這次會議我學到的一個重要教訓是，在實施公共政策措施時，必須確保成果不易被批評。同樣重要的是，要明確目標，並能夠正確評估現有舉措，以避免被指責不公平；同時，要盡可能簡化流程，避免公眾困惑和誤解。

        我也覺得很有意思，日本的公共政策倡議再次成為討論的焦點。例如，一位成員提到，日本採用的是一種為已植入晶片、接種疫苗並絕育的犬隻佩戴身份標籤的系統；因此，他們提議實施一套數位化系統，透過入口閘機掃描並驗證犬隻是否已登記、接種疫苗和絕育，從而控制出入。有人建議使用身分證來降低成本和實施難度，但如果人們試圖鑽空子，這種方法就會受阻。在日本，這套系統之所以行之有效，是因為公眾的遵守率極高，這也反映了文化對公共政策制定的影響。

        這讓我開始思考，在我的祖國，犬類公園的管理規定是什麼。在美國，犬隻公園也沒有統一的全國性標準；但大多數地方法規都要求犬隻持有有效的許可證/疫苗接種證明，而且許多地方都設有指定的雙重閘門系統，而這個組織正在提議在台灣實施類似的系統。

Ministry of Agriculture Dog Park/Animal Park Meeting

Today, I accompanied Secretary-General Ho Tsung-hsun to a meeting at the Ministry of Agriculture. This meeting, supported by the Ministry of Agriculture and hosted by the Taiwan Dog Lovers Association, with the Taiwan Animal Protection Administration Supervision Alliance as a co-organizer, aims to evaluate and commend dog parks nationwide, establishing standards for animal-friendly and owner-friendly public spaces. They also plan to hold a competition to award prizes to high-quality pet parks.

After reading an article about Secretary-General Ho's 2023 plan, I found that most dog parks and wireless dog-walking areas are concentrated in northern Taiwan, particularly Taipei, New Taipei, and Taoyuan; the distribution of pet parks across the country is uneven. Currently, Taiwan lacks nationwide pet park design guidelines or standards. They proposed dividing parks into two types: "urban" and "community." Urban parks are larger and fully functional flagship parks; "community parks" are smaller, more walkable (more convenient), and primarily cater to dogs.

I also observed an interesting phenomenon: building a dog park within an existing area is much more difficult than building a new park from scratch, because many people object, believing the space should be used for other purposes. For example, Da'an Forest Park is quite large, and I personally doubt why there isn't a dog park there. However, the park has clearly been designated as an ecological reserve, and environmental organizations strongly oppose building a dog park there.

Many questions were raised during the meeting regarding the specifics of how the competition would be conducted—how to determine the different sizes and categories of dog parks? How many categories should be established—two or three? Who should submit applications for each dog park? What is the application deadline? One important lesson I learned from this meeting is that when implementing public policy measures, it is crucial to ensure that the results are not easily criticized. Equally important is to have clear objectives and be able to properly evaluate existing initiatives to avoid accusations of unfairness; at the same time, to simplify processes as much as possible to avoid public confusion and misunderstanding.

I also found it interesting that Japanese public policy initiatives were once again a focus of discussion. For example, one member mentioned that Japan uses a system where microchipped, vaccinated, and spayed/neutered dogs wear identification tags; therefore, they proposed implementing a digital system that scans and verifies at entrance gates whether dogs are registered, vaccinated, and spayed/neutered, thereby controlling access. Some have suggested using ID cards to reduce costs and implementation difficulty, but this approach would be thwarted if people tried to circumvent the rules. In Japan, this system works because of extremely high public compliance, reflecting the influence of culture on public policy.

This made me think about the regulations for dog parks in my home country. In the United States, there are no uniform national standards for dog parks; however, most local regulations require dogs to have valid licenses/vaccination certificates, and many places have designated double-gate systems. This organization is proposing a similar system for Taiwan.

寧語藍實習日誌06: 全國消防局會議

 消防局會議

        今天，我和粘主任（Jen Nien）一起去了位於新北市新店的內政部消防署總部。消防署負責管理台灣的緊急醫療服務、消防和防災工作。消防署由署長領導，現任署長為葉啟堂。雖然與會議內容沒有直接關係，但我發現消防署的標誌很有趣。根據新聞報道，賴清德總統曾表示，消防局標誌上的鳳凰象徵浴火重生、勇氣和韌性。

         此次會議有勞動部、數位產業管理局和經濟部標準局的代表參加。會議主要討論用於家庭烹飪、取暖和工業用途的液化石油氣鋼瓶（裝有丙烷和丁烷混合物的容器）的安全問題。在2025年全國非政府組織環境大會上，民間團體向賴清德總統提交了一份提案，建議立即在液化石油氣鋼瓶上安裝自動切斷裝置。

        為了進一步防範風險，他們還提議修改方案，增加地震感測器、洩漏感測器和超時功能。我發現特別有趣的是，他們聲稱目前遵循的標準是基於日本的相關法規，並提及日本強制要求將這些燃氣容器放置在室外。這讓我不禁思考，即使在今天，日本殖民主義對台灣的官僚體系和政府的影響究竟有多大。

        我初來台灣時，得知台灣儘管曾被日本殖民統治，卻依然對日本及其文化保持著友好親切的態度，這讓我感到非常欣慰。如今，所有新建建築都必須將液化石油氣容器放置在室外，並效法日本的做法。我還了解到，公共政策的一項重要功能是正確評估公共資源的使用是否能夠真正解決特定問題，以及公眾的接受度和反彈如何影響法律或政策的預期效果。

         一位代表表示，他認為他們不應該按照「最低安全標準」運行，而應該以最低標準來衡量人的生命，我對此表示贊同。此前，曾有一項決定強制要求全面採用自動關閉閥，儘管一位代表聲稱，這些閥門並非萬能，僅在特定情況下發揮作用，大多數情況下並無區別。然而，這項決定後來被推翻，允許傳統氣瓶繼續存在。

         業內人士最大的抱怨是性價比太低。這位代表聲稱，他們比任何人都更關心安全，並列舉瞭如果產品不安全將會引發的刑事案件、和解以及法律問題，他們不會故意拒絕更安全的解決方案。起初我對此持懷疑態度，因為在我的研究中，我遇到一些公司為了提高效率和利潤而忽略安全法規的情況。然而，他們的解釋很有道理。如果某些安全功能尚未被證明具有廣泛的有效性，則可以將其視為可選功能，供需要使用的用戶購買。這就是所謂的「雙軌制」折衷方案。在沒有正當理由的情況下利用法規限制消費者的選擇也會帶來問題。

         我還發現一個很有趣的事實：台灣擁有全球最大的液化石油氣閥門製造商之一，產量約佔全球供應量的70%。出口到歐洲和美國的液化石油氣閥門必須配備安全裝置，但台灣國內市場則沒有這項要求。因此，不強制要求安裝安全裝置的原因之一就是法規。我從這些討論中了解到，某些我從未想過、也從未在日常生活中特別重視的規章制度，很可能是經過反覆討論，由來自不同背景的人們共同決定實施的結果。

        我這輩子從未認真考慮過汽油罐，然而，這棟大樓裡的人們卻齊心協力，透過一種大多數人都不關注的機制來提高安全性。這些問題也並非輕易就能解決，因為他們已經就此話題討論了六年之久。即使是看似簡單易行的問題，最終也可能變得異常棘手。

Fire Department Meeting

Today, Director Jen Nien and I visited the headquarters of the National Fire Agency, Ministry of the Interior, located in Xindian, New Taipei City. The Fire Agency manages Taiwan's emergency medical services, fire fighting, and disaster prevention. The director of the fire department is headed by the Director, currently Ye Qitang; and the director of the fire department of the Ministry of the Interior is Mr. Xiao Huanzhang. While not directly related to the meeting's content, I found the Fire Agency's logo quite interesting. According to news reports, President Lai Ching-te stated that the phoenix on the logo symbolizes rebirth, courage, and resilience.

Representatives from the Ministry of Labor, the Digital Industry Administration, and the Bureau of Standards, Ministry of Economic Affairs participated in this meeting. The main discussion focused on the safety of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) cylinders (containers containing a mixture of propane and butane) used for domestic cooking, heating, and industrial purposes. At the 2025 National NGO Environmental Conference, NGOs submitted a proposal to President Lai Ching-te suggesting the immediate installation of automatic shut-off devices on LPG cylinders.

To further mitigate risks, they also proposed modifications to the design, adding earthquake sensors, leak sensors, and timeout functions. What I found particularly interesting was their claim that the current standards they follow are based on relevant Japanese regulations, mentioning that Japan mandates the outdoor placement of these gas containers. This made me reflect on the extent of the influence of Japanese colonialism on Taiwan's bureaucracy and government, even today.

When I first came to Taiwan, I was very pleased to learn that despite its history of Japanese colonial rule, Taiwan maintains a friendly and welcoming attitude towards Japan and its culture. Now, all new buildings are required to place LPG containers outdoors, following Japan's practice. I also learned that an important function of public policy is to properly assess whether the use of public resources truly solves a specific problem, and how public acceptance and backlash affect the intended effects of laws or policies.

One representative stated that he believed they should not operate according to the "minimum safety standard," but should measure human life according to the highest standard, a view I agree with. Previously, a decision mandated the full adoption of automatic shut-off valves, although one representative claimed that these valves were not foolproof, only functioning in specific situations and making no difference in most cases. However, this decision was later overturned, allowing traditional gas cylinders to continue.

The biggest complaint from industry insiders is the low cost-effectiveness. The representative claimed they cared about safety more than anyone else, citing the criminal cases, settlements, and legal issues that could result from unsafe products, and that they wouldn't intentionally reject safer solutions. Initially, I was skeptical, as my research had encountered companies that ignored safety regulations for efficiency and profit. However, their explanation made sense. If certain safety features haven't yet proven widely effective, they can be considered optional features, available for purchase by users who need them. This is the so-called "two-track" compromise. Using regulations to restrict consumer choice without a legitimate reason also creates problems.

I also discovered an interesting fact: Taiwan has one of the world's largest manufacturers of LPG valves, accounting for approximately 70% of global supply. LPG valves exported to Europe and the US are required to have safety devices, but this requirement doesn't apply to the Taiwanese domestic market. Therefore, one reason for not mandating safety devices is regulation. From these discussions, I learned that some regulations I had never considered or paid particular attention to in my daily life are likely the result of repeated discussions and decisions made collaboratively by people from diverse backgrounds.

    I've never seriously considered gasoline tanks in my life, yet the people in this building have worked together to improve safety through a mechanism most people don't even consider. These problems weren't easy to solve either, as they've been discussing them for six years. Even seemingly simple problems can ultimately prove surprisingly difficult.

寧語藍實習日誌05: 會見小城里關心動物保護里長

 會見小城里關心動物保護里長

         今天，我陪同政大研究生研究生周艾欣前往新北市小城里，旁聽她對一位動物保護負責人的訪問。他是所在區最早推行這種模式的負責人之一。我從未去過新北，所以看到那裡的景色和環境與台北截然不同，感到非常驚訝。關心動物保護里長非常忙碌，所以我們的談話時間有限。

        這次訪談是我上週旁聽他與研究生談話的延續。我從訪談中了解到的另一個有趣的事實是，如果能透過將社區辦公室與領養站結合，當領養數量已經達到了收容所的容量，從而減少了新建收容所的需求。

        然而，領養站的主要目的是展現社區願意推廣愛護動物的概念，並為領養者牽線搭橋，推廣領養計畫。與其說是動物實際居住的地方，不如說更像是聚會場所。

        他們從事動物保護工作已有十餘年，最初專注於為流浪貓絕育，甚至自掏腰包。他們還與新店的動物收容所建立了合作關係，幫助照顧小貓，作為交換，收容所會幫助他們為動物絕育。他們的工作很大程度上依賴志願者，他們透過培訓、閱讀貓科書籍、參加講座和研討會等方式，幫助志願者更全面地了解貓。

        他提供政治支持、協調和資源，而志工們則專注於他們熱衷的工作。儘管該計畫已取得良好成效，但他認為，由於大多數人仍然保留著傳統的觀念，只想把動物趕走，因此該計畫僅在少數里（1032多個里中僅有20個）實施。他還建議，提供更多激勵措施可以吸引更多人參與該項目，類似於環境保護項目為自願參與者提供獎勵的做法。

        他提到一項旨在鼓勵村長解決流浪狗問題的計劃，如果村長幫忙安置轄區內的流浪狗，就能獲得資金支持。然而，該計劃並未對已經表現良好的社區提供任何補貼。在情況介紹會上，大多數與會者都是來自表現優異地區的村長，而非來自表現欠佳地區的村長。這暴露了該計劃的一個關鍵政策缺陷。這讓我意識到，在製定政策倡議時，需要考慮目標受眾是誰，如何有效地與他們互動，以及如何獎勵那些已經為政策目標做出貢獻的人。

Meeting with the Animal Protection Chief of Xiaocheng Village, New Taipei City

Today, I accompanied Zhou Aixin, a graduate student from National Chengchi University, to Xiaocheng Village in New Taipei City to observe her interview with an animal protection leader. He is one of the earliest leaders to implement this model in his district. I've never been to New Taipei City, so I was quite surprised to see how different the scenery and environment are compared to Taipei. The animal protection chief is very busy, so our conversation was limited.

This interview was a continuation of my observation of his conversation with the graduate student last week. Another interesting fact I learned from the interview is that by combining community offices with adoption stations, the need to build new shelters is reduced when the number of adoptions reaches the capacity of the shelters.

However, the main purpose of the adoption stations is to demonstrate the community's willingness to promote animal welfare and to connect adopters with potential owners, promoting the adoption program. It's more like a gathering place than a place where animals actually live.

They have been working in animal protection for over ten years, initially focusing on sterilizing stray cats, even paying for it out of their own pockets. They also partnered with animal shelters in Xindian to help care for kittens, in exchange for the shelters helping them spay/neuter their animals. Their work relies heavily on volunteers, who gain a more comprehensive understanding of cats through training, reading feline books, and attending lectures and workshops.

He provided political support, coordination, and resources, while the volunteers focused on their passion. Although the program has been successful, he believes it has only been implemented in a few neighborhoods (only 20 out of over 1032) because most people still hold traditional views and only want to get rid of the animals. He also suggested that providing more incentives could attract more people to participate in the project, similar to how environmental protection projects reward volunteers.

He mentioned a program designed to encourage village chiefs to address stray dog ​​problems, offering financial support if they help relocate stray dogs in their jurisdictions. However, this program did not provide any subsidies to communities that had already performed well. At the briefing, most attendees were village chiefs from high-performing areas, not those from low-performing areas. This exposed a key policy flaw in the program. This made me realize that when developing policy initiatives, we need to consider who the target audience is, how to effectively engage with them, and how to reward those who have already contributed to the policy objectives.

寧語藍實習日誌04: 動物保護記者會

動物保護記者會

動物保護記者會

今天，我參加了台灣公民參與協會、關懷生命協會、台灣動物保護行政監督聯盟和習根台灣協會在立法院研究大樓舉行的聯合記者會。我也見到了台灣公民參與協會的主任，也是志工之一Jennifer。這是我第一次參加記者會，我覺得非常興奮。

我事先做了一些功課，了解立法院在台灣政府中的功能。立法院的功能類似美國國會，是台灣的立法機構（只是只有一個議院）。台灣的中央政府由行政院、立法院、司法院、考試院和監察院組成。在三月十日的一次記者會上，另一個組織（名為“蠻野心足生態協會”）攻擊並抹黑了其他組織。

在全國NGOs環境會會議舉辦前夕，身為合辦團體，他們卻另行召開記者會，對其他組織進行不實指控，原因是他們在預備會議上沒有使用正規的正式機制，所以提案被駁回。他們的行為顯然非常不理智。何先生表示，這個行動是首次發生，。即便在過去，不同組織之間意見不合，也都對內不會公開，。然而，這是他第一次在看到這種公開抹黑的現象。看到不同組織之間出現這種衝突，我感到有些驚訝，畢竟他們都致力於同一個目標：保護環境，促進台灣的動物福利。

當天下午，我們回到實習地點，與另一個同樣關注動物保護的小組志工會面，繼續討論新聞發布會上的內容。何先生告訴我，這個小組沒有正式的公共政策經驗，他們向監察院請願也思考後續能做什麼，所以來請教。

看到一般民眾也能參與公共政策，我覺得很有意思。我他們已經到監察院的請願，請願內容是設立動物保護警察、提高刑事處罰力度，以及放寬強制沒收動物的門檻。具體來說，他們希望將最高刑期從兩年提高到三年，並將罰款上限從200萬新台幣（約6.3萬美元）提高到300萬新台幣（約9.4萬美元）。考慮到台灣的罰款額度在其他國家已經相對較高，我覺得這個請願很有意思。何宗勳秘書長告訴他們，他們的所有要求都涉及法律變更，而法律改革通常需要 5-10 年時間，即使紙面上的處罰力度加大，也不一定會導致執法力度加強。

他們也提到，他們認為虐待動物案件的增加是由於社會不穩定加劇，人們將不滿情緒發洩在包括動物在內的弱勢群體身上。 何宗勳秘書長建議他們將強制性教育納入訴求，就像酒駕司機必須參加課程一樣。他們最好將重點放在動物保護警察和教育上，而不是法律問題。此外，他們應該避免提交公共政策提案（需要5000個簽名），而是舉行全民公投（需要2800個簽名），迫使政府做出回應。他們的提議相當簡單，而且由於他們不隸屬於任何政黨，因此應該更具吸引力。他們的最終目標是保持勢頭，讓人們持續關注，以免公眾的注意力逐漸消退。

 Animal Protection Press Conference

    Today, I attended a joint press conference held at the Legislative Yuan Research Building by the Taiwan Citizen Participation Association, the Care for Life Association, the Taiwan Animal Protection Administrative Oversight Alliance, and the Siegen Taiwan Association. I also met Jennifer, the director of the Taiwan Citizen Participation Association, who is also one of its volunteers. This was my first time attending a press conference, and I was very excited.

    I did some research beforehand to understand the function of the Legislative Yuan in the Taiwanese government. The Legislative Yuan functions similarly to the US Congress; it is Taiwan's legislative body (although it only has one house). Taiwan's central government consists of the Executive Yuan, the Legislative Yuan, the Judicial Yuan, the Examination Yuan, and the Control Yuan. At a press conference on March 10th, another organization, called the "Wild Hearts Ecological Association" attacked and smeared other organizations.

    On the eve of the National NGOs Environmental Conference, as a co-organizer, they held a separate press conference to make false accusations against other organizations because their proposals were rejected at the preparatory meeting due to their failure to use formal mechanisms. Their behavior was clearly very irrational. Mr. He stated that this action was the first of its kind. Even in the past, disagreements between different organizations were kept private. However, this was the first time he had witnessed such public smear campaigning. I was somewhat surprised to see this conflict between different organizations, given their shared goal: environmental protection and promoting animal welfare in Taiwan.

    That afternoon, we returned to our internship location and met with volunteers from another group also focused on animal protection to continue discussing the press conference. Mr. He told me that this group lacked formal public policy experience; they had petitioned the Control Yuan and were considering what could be done next, hence their consultation.

    I found it very interesting to see ordinary citizens participating in public policy. Their petition to the Control Yuan calls for the establishment of animal protection police, increased criminal penalties, and a relaxation of the threshold for forced animal confiscation. Specifically, they hope to increase the maximum sentence from two to three years and the maximum fine from NT$2 million (approximately US$63,000) to NT$3 million (approximately US$94,000). Considering that Taiwan's fines are already relatively high compared to other countries, I found this petition very interesting. Secretary General Ho Chung-hsun told them that all their demands involved legal changes, and legal reforms typically take 5-10 years. Even if penalties were increased on paper, it wouldn't necessarily lead to stronger enforcement.

    They also mentioned that they believed the increase in animal cruelty cases was due to heightened social instability, with people venting their frustrations on vulnerable groups, including animals. Secretary General Ho suggested they include mandatory education in their demands, similar to the requirement for drunk drivers to attend rehabilitation courses. They should focus on animal protection police and education rather than legal issues. Furthermore, they should avoid submitting public policy proposals (requiring 5,000 signatures) and instead hold a referendum (requiring 2,800 signatures) to force a government response. Their proposal was quite simple, and since they were not affiliated with any political party, it should be more appealing. Their ultimate goal was to maintain momentum and keep public attention focused on their cause.

寧語藍實習日誌03: 旁聽文化部教育會議

 旁聽文化部教育會議

    今天，我前往文化部旁聽了何宗勳秘書長參與的一個會議。會議主題是公民運動史料收集～教育改革座談會」。這次會議讓我意識到何先生的工作範圍之廣——就在本週早些時候，我們還在討論動物保護倡議，現在卻在討論教育改革和政策！會前我做了一些背景調查，試著比較台灣和美國的教育體系。台灣的義務教育只有九年，但大多數人會完成十二年的高中或職業學校教育。我了解到，台灣非常重視高中和大學的入學考試，競爭異常激烈。台灣的家長參與度似乎也很高，他們積極參與孩子的日常學習，並資助孩子參加課外輔導和補習班。與美國的教育部類似，台灣的教育部負責制定教育政策、管理公立學校、監督教育行政機構。台灣有一些影響教育的關鍵立法，例如《教師教育法》，它規範教師資格認證，確保教師素質高；以及《大學法》，它為大學自治奠定了法律框架，保障大學享有學術自由和自治權。台灣也高度重視教育機會均等。

    他們花了很多時間討論教育改革的社會背景，並將這個主題分為三個層面：更廣泛的社會背景、國家層面以及他們在基隆的本地情況。我發現特別有趣的一點是，他們提到他們的宏觀願景常常受到美國和歐洲關於教育運作方式的概念的影響。他們也著重強調了家長在教育中的作用，並認為家長會發揮著一種「社會監督」的作用。在美國，我通常認為家長的角色比較表面化，因為家長教師協會（PTA）的成員通常只是一些全職媽媽，負責組織節日聚會、體育宴會、郊遊和其他課外活動。據我所知，他們很少參與教育改革，也不與教育部進行討論。此外，他們提出的台灣教育改革應置於更廣泛的民主化背景下理解的觀點令我印象深刻，因為如果沒有政治自由化，這些社會運動（包括教育改革）就不可能出現。 2000年，台灣史上首次政權更迭，也是50年來教育部首次由非國民黨政府執掌。未來，我希望對黨外時期以及台灣解除戒嚴令的過程進行更深入的研究。

Attending a Ministry of Culture Education Conference

    Today, I attended a meeting at the Ministry of Culture attended by Secretary-General Ho Tsung-hsun. The meeting's theme was "Collection of Historical Materials on Civic Movements – A Symposium on Educational Reform." This meeting made me realize the breadth of Mr. Ho's work—just earlier this week, we were discussing animal protection initiatives, and now we're discussing education reform and policy! Before the meeting, I did some background research, trying to compare the education systems of Taiwan and the United States. Taiwan's compulsory education is only nine years, but most people complete twelve years of high school or vocational school education. I learned that Taiwan places great emphasis on high school and university entrance examinations, making the competition extremely fierce. Parental involvement in Taiwan also seems very high; they actively participate in their children's daily learning and fund their children's extracurricular tutoring and cram schools. Similar to the U.S. Department of Education, Taiwan's Ministry of Education is responsible for formulating education policies, managing public schools, and supervising educational administrative agencies. Taiwan has some key legislation affecting education, such as the Teacher Education Act, which regulates teacher certification to ensure high teacher quality; and the University Act, which lays the legal framework for university autonomy, guaranteeing universities' academic freedom and autonomy. Taiwan also highly values ​​equal educational opportunities.

    They spent considerable time discussing the social context of education reform, dividing the topic into three levels: the broader social context, the national level, and their local situation in Keelung. I found it particularly interesting that they mentioned their vision was often influenced by American and European concepts of how education works. They also emphasized the role of parents in education, viewing parent associations as acting as a form of "social oversight." In the US, I generally perceive the role of parents as more superficial, as PTA members are often simply stay-at-home mothers organizing holiday parties, sports banquets, outings, and other extracurricular activities. To my knowledge, they are rarely involved in education reform or engage in discussions with the Department of Education. Furthermore, I was impressed by their view that Taiwanese education reform should be understood within a broader context of democratization, as these social movements (including education reform) wouldn’t be impossible without political liberalization. In 2000, Taiwan experienced its first change of government, and for the first time in 50 years, the Ministry of Education was controlled by a non-Kuomintang government. In the future, I hope to conduct more in-depth research on the period of opposition parties and the process of lifting martial law in Taiwan.

寧語藍實習日誌02: 動物保護聯盟訪談

 動物保護聯盟訪談

今天，一位政治大學研究生來採訪何秘書長，了解動物保護組織的情況，這是她論文的研究主題。她說，她的研究重點是從社會創新的角度探討動物福利問題，以及如何透過社會創新改變現狀，解決流浪動物等問題。我有幸旁聽了他們的正式討論，並使用錄音和人工智慧輔助翻譯。

 

在會議面前，我做了一些簡單的調查，發現台灣公民參與協會（TCPA）和動物保護聯盟有一些相似之處。它們的核心支柱都包括透明度、公民參與和問責機制。一個問題是，很多人認為動物收容所雜亂、骯髒，而且距離太遠，這降低了他們領養動物的意願。 「社區負責人」模式讓人們可以在本地領養動物。我了解到，「動物福利社區負責人」也發揮政策工具的作用。這些社區領養點是與新北市政府動物處合作設立的。

 

何秘書長也談到，動物保護措施通常在政府體系中被邊緣化，沒有得到應有的重視。過去，動物收容所條件非常惡劣，大多數動物在12天後就被安樂死，因此沒有動力投資改善設施；但《動物保護法》修法的通過，終止無差別安樂死。

 

他們今年也會與農業部合作，如何讓社區負責人能夠更積極處理動物福利問題。透過培訓期間，他們會獲得證書，並與當地的動物保護機構建立聯繫。

 

但其中也存在一些困難——倡議轉化為實際行動通常需要5到10年的時間。我發現何秘書長的公共政策理念非常有趣——他說，他們的重點是製定政策和製度，而不是陷入執行的泥潭，因為他們相信政府最適合負責這項工作。

 

例如，台灣以前很少有狗公園，但在2018年他們開始大力倡導建造狗公園後，現在已經有超過160個狗公園，因為一旦制度建立起來，它就會自然而然地發展壯大。他將該組織描述為「政策導向型」組織，他們扮演基層倡議與政策機構之間的橋樑角色，而非直接提供服務。他們所關注的大部分議題也相對小眾。將社區發展與動物福利結合更是極為小眾。

關注的大部分議題也相對小眾。將社區發展與動物福利結合更是極為小眾。

Animal Protection Alliance Interview 

Today, a graduate student from National Chengchi University interviewed Secretary-General Ho to learn about animal protection organizations, which is the subject of her dissertation. She said her research focuses on exploring animal welfare issues from the perspective of social innovation, and how to change the status quo and solve problems like stray animals through social innovation. I was fortunate enough to sit in on their formal discussion and used recording and AI-assisted translation to help me understand.

Before the meeting, I did some simple research and found some similarities between the Taiwan Citizen Participation Association (TCPA) and the Animal Protection Alliance. Their core pillars include transparency, citizen participation, and accountability mechanisms. One issue is that many people perceive animal shelters as chaotic, dirty, and too far away, which reduces their willingness to adopt animals. The "community leader" model allows people to adopt animals locally. I learned that "animal welfare community leaders" also play a policy tool role. These community adoption sites are established in cooperation with the New Taipei City Government Animal Affairs Department.

Secretary-General Ho also mentioned that animal protection measures are often marginalized within the government system and do not receive the attention they deserve. In the past, animal shelters suffered from appalling conditions, with most animals euthanized after 12 days, thus lacking the incentive to invest in improving facilities. However, the passage of the amended Animal Protection Act ended indiscriminate euthanasia.

This year, they will also collaborate with the Ministry of Agriculture on how to empower community leaders to more proactively address animal welfare issues. Through training, they will receive certification and establish connections with local animal protection organizations.

However, there are challenges – translating initiatives into action typically takes 5 to 10 years. I found Secretary-General Ho's public policy philosophy very interesting – he said their focus is on policy and institutional development, rather than getting bogged down in implementation, because they believe the government is best suited to handle this work.

For example, Taiwan previously had very few dog parks, but after they began advocating for their construction in 2018, there are now over 160 dog parks, because once the system is established, it naturally grows. He described the organization as a "policy-oriented" organization, acting as a bridge between grassroots initiatives and policy agencies, rather than directly providing services. Most of the issues they address are relatively niche. Combining community development with animal welfare is even more niche.

I learned that most of the issues they address are relatively niche, and that combining community development with animal welfare is even more niche.

寧語藍實習日誌01：迎新日

 

日期：2026年3月26日

今天是我實習計畫的第一天。我和專案協調員Jean一起去見了台灣公民參與協會創會理事長何宗勳。他帶我參觀了辦公室，並簡要介紹了在這裡工作的兩個組織——台灣公民參與協會（TCPA）和台灣動物保護監督聯盟成立的宗旨。

 

TCPA是一個非政府組織，開展公民教育項目，旨在將選民轉化為公民，並幫助公民學習如何參與政治。他們的工作直接影響台灣的民主制度，確保更多人的聲音被聽到，並且能夠影響政府決策。

 

我發現很有趣的一點是，何先生指出，現任執政黨——民進黨的總部就在這棟大樓旁。透過我的調查，我發現他們做了大量工作，旨在提高公眾對政府及其在關鍵問題上進展的認識和關注度，並起到監督作用。

 

基於此，他們的組織高度重視政府開放、公眾參與和公共價值創造，目標是讓台灣成為更宜居的城市。他們舉辦的會議涵蓋社區發展、環境保護和文化項目等諸多議題。就在幾個月前，他們與台灣環境部和舉行會議，討論市民對環境法規、擬議的碳排放費以及台灣氣候目標的意見。

 

他們主要透過公開聽證會、線上會議以及他們稱之為「市民咖啡館」的活動來收集市民意見。我想做一些調查，看看美國是否有類似的全國性組織，以及它們的功能是什麼。

 

 我發現他們做了大量工作，旨在提高公眾對政府及其在關鍵問題上進展的認識和關注度，並起到監督作用。基於此，他們的組織高度重視政府開放、公眾參與和公共價值創造，目標是讓台北成為更宜居的城市。他們舉辦的會議涵蓋城市規劃、社區發展和文化項目等諸多議題。就在幾個月前，他們與台灣環境部和國家環境研究所舉行會議，討論市民對環境法規、擬議的碳排放費以及台灣氣候目標的意見。他們主要透過公開聽證會、線上會議以及他們稱之為「市民咖啡館」的活動來收集市民意見。我想做一些調查，看看美國是否有類似的全國性組織，以及它們的功能是什麼。

Orientation

Today was my first day of my internship program. Project coordinator Jean and I met with Ho Tsung-hsun, the founding chairman of the Taiwan Citizen Participation Association (TCPA). He showed me around the office and briefly introduced the missions of the two organizations working there—the Taiwan Citizen Participation Association (TCPA) and the Taiwan Animal Protection Watch Alliance.

TCPA is a non-governmental organization that conducts civic education programs aimed at converting voters into citizens and helping them learn how to participate in politics. Their work directly impacts Taiwan's democratic system, ensuring that more people's voices are heard and can influence government decision-making.

One interesting point I found was that Mr. Ho pointed out that the headquarters of the current ruling party—the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)—is located right next to this building. Through my research, I discovered that they do a great deal of work to increase public awareness and attention to the government and its progress on key issues, and to act as a watchdog.

Based on this, their organization highly values ​​government openness, public participation, and the creation of public value, with the goal of making Taiwan a more livable city. Their conferences cover a wide range of topics, including community development, environmental protection, and cultural projects. Just a few months ago, they met with Taiwan's Ministry of Environment to discuss public opinion on environmental regulations, proposed carbon emission fees, and Taiwan's climate goals.

They primarily gather public opinion through public hearings, online meetings, and events they call "citizen cafés." I wanted to do some research to see if there are similar national organizations in the United States, and what their functions are.

【環境會議】公民會向賴總統建言 從海洋國家到地方減碳責任額

2026年4月21日，第23屆全國NGOs環境會議於總統府舉行「總統與環團有約」對話。這場延續二十餘年的制度性交流，不僅是倡議場域，更是政策修正與國家治理方向的重要交會點。

今年，臺灣公民參與協會由理事長葉國樑代表出席，提出五大面向的結構性建言，涵蓋海洋治理、公民參與制度深化、氣候治理責任下放、跨境海洋廢棄物處理，以及公共安全制度改革等議題，層層指向國家治理能力的再升級。

以海立國：倡議成立「海洋部」

葉國樑理事長指出，台灣作為擁至少一百九十餘座島嶼的海洋國家，海洋資源、戰略位置與國際角色極為重要。然而，現行僅設「海洋委員會」，仍難以形成完整的國家級政策架構與戰略布局。

因此，協會建議升格成立「海洋部」，統合海洋保育、產業發展、航運管理、海域安全與國際海洋事務，強化跨部會協調，真正讓台灣以海洋國家之姿面對國際局勢。

總統賴清德回應表示，目前將先逐步強化海洋委員會功能，未來再視整體行政體制發展，進一步評估成立海洋部的可行性，只要時機氛圍成熟，有機會水到渠成。

公民參與不是形式，而是治理核心

第二項建言，葉理事長直指民主深化的根本——公民參與制度的全面盤點與擴張。葉理事長表示：去年環境部已率先盤點各司署的公民參與機制，成果完成，已呈送總統。協會建議在此基礎上，將盤點範圍擴大至其他部會，讓公民意見真正進入政策形成過程，而非停留在形式性諮詢。

總統回應指出，未來將在環境部成果基礎上進一步擴大至其他部會，持續落實「主權在民」的治理精神。這意味著，公民參與制度化，有機會從單一部會經驗走向跨部會標準化。

氣候韌性：建立地方減碳責任額制度

氣候變遷議題，是本次建言中最具體且最具制度性的改革提案。葉理事長指出，雖然總統已在府內成立「氣候變遷對策委員會」，但減碳行動真正的落實關鍵在地方治理。因此，協會建議中央在既定國家自主貢獻（NDC）目標下，建立「地方減碳責任額制度」，依建築、交通、產業、廢棄物等部門訂定可量化、可監督指標，使國家承諾在地方層級具體化。

總統回應表示認同地方治理的重要性，並支持建立地方層級減碳責任額制度，同時請環團持續倡議與宣傳，促使地方政府與中央充分合作。這是少數獲得明確正面回應的制度改革方向，也顯示氣候治理正逐步從中央宣示走向地方問責。

馬祖海漂垃圾：從地方困境到國際連結

針對去年列管的連江（馬祖）海漂垃圾議題，葉理事長指出，在海洋委員會積極溝通下已有進展，建議政府進一步結合國際資源，提升議題國際能見度。

海委會回應，海洋委員會已於3月16日至18日在金門大學舉辦「印太海洋廢棄物治理國際論壇」，邀請印太區域產官學、美國在台協會、日本台灣交流協會及各界專家學者參與交流，成效良好，未來將持續強化國際合作。這項回應顯示，海漂垃圾已從地方環境問題，轉為區域治理與外交層級議題。

液化石油氣自閉裝置：公共安全與「全社會防衛韌性」

最具火藥味的議題，來自液化石油氣容器自閉裝置的推動爭議。

葉理事長指出，去年列管議題的溝通會議遭消防署與業者強烈抵制，甚至否認自閉裝置的安全價值，並公開表示僅依「最低安全標準」管理瓦斯安全。若不改善，夜市攤販與火鍋店將成為不定時炸彈，與總統強調的「全社會防衛韌性」理念背道而馳。

總統府回應表示，此案已交由內政部政務次長董建宏處理，協助協會與消防署有效溝通，加速研擬具體可行方案，以落實全社會防衛韌性的政策宣示。這意味著，議題已從部門層級拉升至政務協調層級，未來能否形成制度突破，將成為觀察指標。

一場對話的真正意義

今年的建言並非單點倡議，而是從海洋國家定位、民主制度深化、氣候治理問責，到公共安全韌性建構，呈現出一套完整的國家治理升級框架。

總統的回應多屬方向肯認與逐步推進，並未全面承諾立即改革，但至少已將議題納入政策軌道。

這場「總統與環團有約」，真正的價值不在於一句承諾，而在於把制度問題帶進最高層級對話，並留下政策追蹤的座標。

接下來，關鍵不在倡議是否說得夠大聲，而在行政體系是否能把這些建言，轉化為真正可量化、可監督、可落實的制度成果。

如果公民參與不是口號，那麼制度改革就必須開始動起來。

2026全國NGOs環境會議主辦團體重申共識決精神，釐清外界誤解與提案爭議

 

針對本屆全國NGOs環境會議共同主辦團體之一蠻野心足生態協會與其關心遊蕩犬貓議題的團體及與會者，所提出的質疑，引發社會關注，並造成其他共同主辦團體受到誤解。經內部籌備會議釐清多項爭議點後，逐一說明，期盼能促進社會大眾了解NGOs會議的目的、運作流程與本屆歷經超過半年討論的過程，以及累積的成果。

一、會議性質與決策機制說明

全國NGOs環境會議是由多個環保、保育與動保團體共同籌辦的公共政策溝通平台，我們期望藉由這個平台，彙整跨領域的環境議題，透過對話與協商機制來形成具體建言，並向政府提出，以形成政策規範。

本會議運作強調民主與共識，大會議程提案的審查，皆採取分組初審與籌備委員會複審的兩階段程序，並以「共識決」作為重要原則。亦即，提案需經相關團體充分討論並形成共識，方能納入年度建言。此一機制旨在促進不同立場之間的溝通與整合，而非以多數決或單一團體意見作為最終依據。

二、關於「遊蕩犬議題被打壓三年」說法之釐清

針對外界所稱本會議「長期打壓遊蕩犬提案三年」之說法，我們進行歷年紀錄查核如下：

● 2023年：蠻野心足生態協會所提相關議題提出3項提案，皆達成共識納入年度建言。

● 2024年：因總統改選，NGOs環境會議接受府方建議，解除過往所有列管案件，重新提案，蠻野心足生態協會有針對其他提案重提，未就遊蕩動物議題重提，因而沒有保留在當年共識提案中。

● 2025年：該年度僅台灣動物保護行政監督聯盟提出遊蕩動物管理相關提案。

● 2026年：本年度有4項關於遊蕩犬提案進入分組討論，3案未達共識；1案，達成共識通過。

綜合上述，不同年度之提案狀況，並未有3年、長期打壓遊蕩犬議題的狀況。多位關心遊蕩犬的與會人士，於會中提到遊蕩犬議題被「打壓三年」一事，與事實並不相符。

三、本屆提案討論歷程之說明

本屆會議中，確實有4項涉及遊蕩犬貓管理之提案提出，並已依既有程序進入分組討論與籌備會議審議。

在大會前之兩次複審籌備會議（2026年1月16日及2月4日）中，分組主責團體均依程序主動向大會報告初審結果，就尚未形成共識之提案由其餘共同主辦團體進行討論與審查。惟兩次會議中，蠻野心足生態協會出席代表均以對自身組織提案內容不熟悉、或提案窗口未出席為由，未於複審會議對其提案自行提出說明，因而難以進行實質討論。故蠻野心足生態協會之提案未在既有時程內深化對話並促成共識，致使大會於複審會議中作出「未形成共識」之決議，未納入本年度建言提案。

需要說明的是，上述結果係「未形成共識」，而非「拒絕討論」或「排除議題」。分組主責團體皆依大會作業要點將相關議符合程序提出且並未阻礙討論。

四、關於生態議題被漠視之釐清

本屆會議共收集39項提案，其中31項達成共識並列入建言，涵蓋棲地保育、海洋政策、原住民議題、國土相關政策、資源循環、綠能及動物保護等多元面向。其中亦包含多項涉及生態風險與生物多樣性保育之提案約有10~15個，顯示本平台並未忽視相關議題。

五、促成動保與野保團體達成遊蕩犬議題之共識與合作基礎

本屆通過一項與遊蕩犬管理直接相關之重要共識提案：「守護瀕危野生動物：推動『國土綠網區域』落實犬隻巡迴絕育與管理計畫」。

此一提案係不同立場團體依大會程序溝通討論，最終凝聚出兼顧生態保育與動物管理的可行建言之具體成果，充分體現共識決在實踐中的樣貌。此亦為本會議作為跨團體協作平台之重要價值所在。

六、後續溝通與制度精進

本次事件提醒我們，在維持共識決精神的同時，仍有持續優化溝通方式與資訊透明度之空間。

未來，主辦團體間將持續檢討提案審查與溝通機制，使不同專業觀點能在更充分的討論條件下進行交流，降低誤解，並提升共識形成之可能性。大會也會針對新參與的團體和與會代表，加強說明與溝通，提高會議溝通效能與品質。

然為維護本平台議事秩序及各主辦團體之正當權益，未來對於違反議事規則、未依既有機制處理爭議而擅自以公開方式散布單方面偏頗資訊、造成其他共同主辦團體聲譽受損之團體，大會亦將依《全國NGOs環境會議運作要點》相關規定，提出正式懲戒程序。

七、結語

全國NGOs環境會議是一個建立在信任與合作基礎上的公共平台，出發點在於集結與會的主辦團體，凝聚出具有共識的議題，藉此提高和政府對話的效率。我們珍視各團體長期投入環境與動物議題的努力，也理解在面對複雜議題時，意見分歧難以避免。所以，NGOs環境會議歷年來發生多次議題上的爭論，都採取尊重各別團體有針對各自關切的議題與價值的優先順序，尊重各別團體自行遊說、運作，並在不同政策會議現場各自表達不同意見。

本次說明，係希望將會議過程與事實予以釐清，讓關心相關議題的各界夥伴能更完整理解實際情況。

我們期待，各團體仍能在既有機制下持續對話，透過實質討論逐步累積共識，共同推動台灣環境與生物多樣性之永續發展。

本聲明由全國NGOs環境會議主辦團體(按筆畫順序排序)：公民監督國會聯盟、台灣水資源保育聯盟、台灣公民參與協會、台灣生態學會、台灣動物保護行政監督聯盟、台灣環境保護聯盟、自然保育與環境資訊基金會、荒野保護協會、惜根台灣協會、關懷生命協會共同發佈。

環境部分享公民參與案例 民間肯定制度累積、期待深化參與能量

 

環境部2026年1月21日針對本會於環境會議提案，盤點近年來環境部公民參與機制與活動舉辦「公民參與情形案例分享座談會」，邀集各司署分享近年推動公民參與的實務經驗與制度成果，並與民間團體進行交流。會議由環境保護司司長徐淑芷主持，現場出席單位涵蓋環境部各業務司署、國家環境研究院，以及多個長期參與環境治理的民間團體。

本次民間團體出席代表包括台灣公民參與協會秘書長何宗勳、理事許慧盈、粘麗玉，以及愛鼠協會理事長張勝鬘等人，共同聽取環境部各單位針對公民參與制度的案例簡報。

多元工具並行　公民參與逐步制度化

根據環境部簡報內容，近年各司署已依不同政策性質，發展出多元的公民參與工具，包括公民咖啡館、公聽會、公開說明會、研商會議、專家諮詢會議，以及透過公共政策網路參與平台蒐集意見等。

例如，環保司透過「環評公民咖啡館」，在北中南東巡迴舉辦實體與線上同步活動，吸引超過 300 人次參與，並將討論成果彙整為制度檢討報告；氣候署在碳費制度、階段管制目標等重大政策上，舉辦多場公聽會與利害關係人溝通，累積近千人次參與；循環署、化學署、環管署與國環院，則在法規修訂與技術規範制定過程中，建立固定的研商與對話機制。

整體來看，環境部已逐步將公民參與納入政策形成、法規修正與執行回饋的制度流程，而非僅停留在單一活動或象徵性諮詢。

民間肯定透明度　也點出下一步挑戰

會後，台灣公民參與協會秘書長何宗勳表示，實際檢視各項案例後，仍要給予環境部高度肯定與鼓勵。在中央部會中，環境部長期以來是資訊相對最公開、透明度最高的部會之一，這並非偶然，而是因環境治理本身即需承受高度公共監督，長年在環保團體與公民社會的高標準要求下，逐步累積制度與行政文化。

何宗勳指出，這樣的制度成果，也與歷任首長與部長對環境議題的重視密切相關，使得資訊揭露與公民溝通不只是口號，而能在實務中落地。

不過，他也強調，肯定不代表滿足。從報告中仍可看出，多數參與管道仍偏向專家學者、專業團體或資源相對充足的利害關係人，一般民眾即便關心公共議題，仍常感到「不知道如何進入」。

公民參與不是口號　而是長期工程

何宗勳認為，公民參與的核心精神，在於讓關心公共事務的公民，能透過制度化管道參與、學習並累積經驗，使公共政策不再只在少數人之間討論，而能逐步擴大社會理解與共識。這是一條困難、卻極其重要的道路。

他也指出，本次案例盤點歷時一年多完成，本身即是一項不容易的工程，期待環境部能在未來地球日前，提出一份更具體、可操作的階段成果，作為中央各部會推動公民參與的重要參考。

「公民參與不是一次性的活動，而是一條需要耐心、制度與信任慢慢累積的路。」何宗勳總結表示，環境部已經走在前面，接下來，社會也期待這條路能走得更深、更穩。