貪污是社會科學中最受爭議的論題之一，亦是數千年來執政掌權者所關心的議題。近年來我國亦將肅貪列為重點工作，期建立廉能政府，其中尤以是否應設立一專責肅貪機構備受各界關注與討論。有鑑於肅貪績效卓越的香港、新加坡皆設有專責肅貪機構—「廉政公署」、「貪污調查局」，我國實有成立廉政專責機構以遏阻貪污之必要。 欲探討我國廉政組織如何設計可從不同觀點切入加以研究，本文所採取的為「結構功能觀點」，其內涵為：結構與功能可說是組織的二個最主要部分，為組織中靜態和動態的二個特性，在組織中，結構與功能是相互關聯、相互作用的。就結構功能觀點而言，在從事組織設計之工作前，需先清楚組織所欲達成的目標，瞭解組織欲發揮的功能，而後設計組織結構，使組織裡的每一個單位或部門可以協調運作，進而達成組織目標。 本研究遂以結構功能觀點為全文研究架構，擷取香港、新加坡肅貪制度與組織結構的成功經驗做為我國之借鏡，探討我國從事廉政工作的主要機關「法務部調查局」、「法務部政風司」之組織架構與職掌，並分析目前肅貪機制之缺失，進而論我國廉政專責機構須具備哪些功能、組織結構應如何設計，輔以「法務部廉政署組織條例草案」及其他立委所提出的各種不同版本草案的規劃內容，擬出適合我國國情及能充分發揮功能的廉政組織設計藍圖及配套措施，供有關單位做為參考。

隨著民主政治的發展，人民對政府的期望亦隨之提高，對政府的服務要求愈加殷切，政府施政是否清廉，成為人民對政府信賴的重要指標，清廉的政治風氣，尤能影響工商產業的投資意願，是影響經濟發展的非經濟因素。因此，無論是人民或政府無不大力倡導建立清廉的政府。 由於國人普遍的認為我國在廉明政府的工作上猶有改善的空間，因此我國的廉政機構組織與廉政相關法制經常見諸檢討，更有以香港、新加坡的廉政成功例子，質疑何以香港、新加坡能而我國為何不能，法務部遂參照香港、新加坡之廉政機構組織，籌組法務部廉政署，並將其組織條例草案提出於立法院，惟立法院委員亦提出多版的類似廉政機構組織條例草案，結果都未能獲立法院審議通過，廉政機構組織架構，應有更充份的檢討與評估，以建設符合政府再造，發揮廉政功能的廉政組織。 本論文首先探討政府如何建構廉政政策問題，檢討問題建構的正確性，其次探討現有廉政機構組織的運作方式與產生的問題，政府採取何種對策與工具解決廉政問題。第三再就政府對未來所採取的廉政政策規劃評估其適當性，可行性。第四提出幾個清廉度高的國家廉政機構組織，比較分析其運作方式及可能成功因素，是否能為我國借鏡，解決廉政問題，第五檢討廉政機構解決廉政問題的能力，提出解決我國廉政問題的設計方案，最後提出參採幾個國家的制度，研擬我國廉政機構組織設計方案的原則建議希望本論文研究，對廉政機構組織之設計能符合組織理論與政府再造的理念，早日完成廉政機構組織再造工程，以發揮廉政目標。

「廉潔」、「效能」與「透明」乃當前全球先進政府的重要施政價值，亞洲各國為防制貪污之腐蝕，近年來均積極加強反貪廉政機構的建立與強化。反腐倡廉亦為兩岸政府當前施政重點，雙邊領導人均一再宣誓打擊貪腐之重要性並實際嚴打貪官污吏，中國大陸於1995年在最高人民檢察院成立反貪污賄賂總局，2005年又於國務院下設國家反腐敗局；我國則歷經兩次政黨輪替，在各界殷盼下終於2011年7月20日成立第一個廉政專責機構-法務部廉政署，但兩岸貪腐問題並未隨著廉政專責機構成立而減少，社會矚目之重大貪污弊案仍時有所聞，涉案層級也越來越高，其原因為何？是環境使然，抑或是兩岸現行廉政肅貪機制尚有缺漏，無法有效遏止貪污發生。 本研究重點係針對貪腐問題類型、成因及趨勢發展之學術理論進行回顧，並就兩岸貪腐問題發生成因、現況，以及在廉政法制、廉政組織等反腐敗機制上所採措施及成效，盡可能做一探討比較，以瞭解問題癥結。 本研究結果發現兩岸廉政機制不論在法制面、組織面及實際執行面均有待研究改進之處，建議執政當局應努力找出問題所在，積極調整改善，以健全各項廉政監督機制與完善廉政組織、法制等肅貪反貪措施，俾回應民眾對廉能政治之期待，進而提升國家整體清廉度及施政效能。

自國際透明組織(Transparency International, TI)1993年創立以來，國內學者積極參與國際相關事務，引入國家廉政體系(National Integrity System)、推動聯合國反貪腐公約(United Nations Convention against Corruption, UNCAC)以及倡導清廉印象指數(Corruption Perception Index, CPI)等，我國於2011年7月20日成立廉政署(Agency Against Corruption, AAC)，目標定調為落實國家廉政政策，實務界並論述反貪、防貪及肅貪為「廉政範圍」，其中「防貪」是經常性且不分機關性質均須重視的業務，惟以往政風機構在執行此類業務時忽略「社會資本」(Social Capital)的重要性，造成只統計業務數量及參加人次等數據，而未了解標的團體對防貪業務的主觀感受，流於形式的現象難以讓公務員(包含政風人員)信任政風人員、無意願參加政風舉辦的活動以及不認同政風防貪業務的內容。 本研究之目的為「社會資本(自變項)對16類防貪業務(依變項)的影響」，以標的團體「臺北市政府公務員」為問卷調查對象，了解「公務員分別認為16類防貪業務是否有效」、「社會資本對16類防貪業務的影響力」以及「由社會資本的角度看防貪業務未來的方向」三項問題，在非常不同意(1)、不同意(2)、同意(3)及非常同意(4)四點尺度上的回答，以滾雪球方式發放1,228份結構式問卷，並回收1,071份(回收率87.21%)。 統計量部分，受試者(臺北市政府公務員)認為16項防貪業務的成效在四點尺度上，平均數最高排序前三名為為預警措施(3.16)、受理或調查利益衝突迴避案(3.06)以及清查採購弊端(3.04)，最低後三名為增加政風預算(2.35)、廉政指數(2.58)以及增加政風人數(2.64)；受試者對政風的社會資本構面的要素在4點尺度上，由高排序為認同政風很重要(3.02)、認同政風對機關有價值(3.00)、認同政風會維護機關的廉潔(2.99)、認同政風工作(2.90)、信任政風維護廉潔的功能(2.88)、信任政風人員是無私的(2.87)、信任政風(2.86)、認同政風(2.85)、知道提供意見給政風的管道(2.81)、認為政風會保護機關公務員(2.77)、認為政風工作是公開透明的(2.74)、知道如何取得政風舉辦活動的訊息(2.72)、認為政風人員容易親近(2.51)、會積極參與政風舉辦的活動(2.48)。 社會資本構面對防貪業務的解釋力部分，由高排序為倡導廉能(39.9%)、訂定廉政法規(38.6%)、增加政風預算(38.2%)、廉政會報(32.2%)、增加政風人數(31.7%)、公開透明措施(29.3%)、清查採購弊端(27.9%)、財產申報及利益衝突說明會(27.5%)、促進民眾參與公共事務(27.1%)、廉政研究(26.6%)、受理或調查利益衝突迴避案(26.1%)、專案稽核(24.2%)、預警措施(22.0%)、協助財產申報(20.9%)、防貪報告(20.9%)、廉政指數(4.7%)。 受試者對政風的社會資本要素對防貪業務的個別影響力部分，分述如下： 1、對倡導廉能(宣導廉政倫理規範、獎勵廉潔事蹟或表揚廉潔楷模)具有正面影響力者為信任政風維護廉潔的功能(.268)、政風讓大家喜歡親近(.224)、政風會保護公務員(.175)及認同政風很重要(.146)，負面影響力為認同政風(-.285)； 2、對訂定廉政法規具有正面影響力者為信任政風維護廉潔的功能(.284)、積極參加政風活動(.211)及認同政風工作(.166)，負面影響力為信任政風(-.152)； 3、對增加政風預算具有正面影響力者為積極參與政風活動(.337)、相信政風維護廉潔的功能(.285)及具有政風人員身分(.110)，負面影響力為教育程度(-.118)； 4、對廉政會報具有正面影響力者為積極參與政風活動(.258)、政風會保護公務員(.193)、對機關很重要(.184)及大家喜歡親近(.136)，負面影響力為維護機關廉潔(-.146)、提供政風意見(-.137)及具有政風人員身分(-.112)； 5、對增加政風人數具有正面影響力者為積極參與政風活動(218)、信任政風維護廉潔的功能(163)及認同政風工作(150)，面影響力為教育程度(-.104)； 6、對公開透明措施具有正面影響力者為信任政風維護廉潔的功能(.363)及對機關有價值(.267)； 7、對清查採購弊端具有正面影響力者為保護公務員(.215)、對機關有價值(.207)、對機關很重要(.184)及認同政風工作(.163)，負面影響力為信任政風(-.170)及具備政風人員身分(-.114)； 8、對公職人員利益衝突迴避或財產申報說明會具有正面影響力者為對機關有價值(.184)、認同政風工作(.162)及保護公務員(.161)，負面影響力為具有政風人員身分(-.127)； 9、對促進民眾參加公共事務具有正面影響力者為認同政風工作(.317)、對機關很重要(.210)、讓大家喜歡親近(.156)及保護公務員(.146)，負面影響力是認為政風是無私的(-.164)及認同政風(-.159)； 10、對廉政研究具有正面影響力者為積極參加政風活動(.204)、信任政風維護廉潔的功能.192、認同政風工作(.141)及年齡(.107)； 11、對受理或調查利益衝突迴避案具有正面影響力者為信任政風維護廉潔的功能(.249)、對機關很重要(.200)、提供意見給政風(.193)及保護公務員(.138)，負面影響力為信任政風(-.165)及具備政風人員身分(-.113)； 12、對專案稽核具有正面影響力者為認同政風工作(.190)、對機關很重要(.178)及保護公務員(.169)； 13、對預警措施(對可能發生違法的事件或人員提早採取防範措施)具有正面影響力者為保護公務員(.193)、信任政風維護廉潔的功能(.190)及認同政風工作(.164)； 14、對協助公職人員財產財產具有正面影響力者為對機關有價值(.396)、保護公務員(.214)及積極參與政風活動(.151)；負面影響力為信任政風(-.161)、維護機關廉潔(-.159)及政風人員身分(-.131)； 15、對防貪報告(就社會矚目案件撰寫檢討報告的防貪成效)具有正面影響力者為認同政風工作(.244)、積極參與政風活動(.184)及年齡(.165)； 16、社會資本對廉政指數無具有影響力之要素。 / Since the foundation of Transparency International (TI) in 1993, the scholars in Taiwan have been playing an active role on the international stage, introducing the National Integrity System, promoting the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), and advocating the Corruption Perception Index (CPI). Taiwan founded the Agency Against Corruption (AAC) on 20 July 2011, aiming to implement the national policies of a clean government. In practicum, the dimensions of establishing a clean government include “Anti-Corruption,” “Corruption Prevention,” and “Malpractices Investigation.” Among the three, “Corruption Prevention” is a regular task crucial to all agencies and offices. However, when the Government Employee Ethics Units were executing the tasks, they overlooked the importance of social capital. They focused only on the sheer number of cases and participants without understanding the subjective perceptions of the target groups. Their formalities can hardly earn the trust of public servants, decreasing the willingness to participate in activities and challenging the identification with the tasks. This research aims to investigate the influences of social capital (independent variable) on the 16 tasks of Corruption Prevention. It surveys the public servants of the Taipei City Government to understand three aspects, including “wether the 16 tasks of Corruption Prevention are effective,” “the influence of social capital on the tasks of Corruption Prevention,” and “the future direction of the tasks of Corruption Prevention from the perspective of social capital.” The questionnaires are designed with a 4-level rating scale of “strongly disagree (1),” “disagree (2),” “agree (3),” and “strongly agree (4).” 1,288 questionnaires have been sent out through snowball sampling and 1,071 have been collected (response rate at 87.21%). According to the means derived from the statistics, the surveyed subjects (public servants of the Taipei City Government) have shown their preferences with regard to the 16 tasks of Corruption Prevention. The top three are “precautionary measures (3.16),” “handling or investigating cases with conflict of interest (3.06),” and “investigating the malpractices in purchases (3.04).” The bottom three are “increasing the budget of ethic units (2.35),” “Corruption Perception Index (2.58),” and “increasing the number of ethics officers (2.64).” On the influences of social capital on the government ethics units, the surveyed subjects have also shown their preference on the 4-level scale. From top to bottom they are “recognizing that government ethics units are important (3.02),” “recognizing that government ethics units are valuable to agencies (3.00),” “believing that government ethics units will protect the honesty of agencies (2.99),” “identifying with the tasks of government ethics units (2.90),” “trusting the functions of government ethics units in keeping the government clean (2.88),” “believing that the officers of the government ethics units are not biased (2.87),” “trusting the government ethics units (2.86),” “identifying with the government ethics units (2.85),” “knowing the means to provide opinions for the government ethics units (2.81),” “thinking that the government ethics units will protect public servants of agencies (2.77),” “believing that the tasks of the government ethics are transparent (2.74),” “knowing how to acquire information about the activities held by the government ethics units (2.72),” “thinking that the officers of the government ethics are approachable (2.51),” “participating actively in the activities held by the government ethics units (2.48).” The coefficients of determination between the aspects of social capital and the tasks of corruption prevention are also ranked. From top to bottom they are “promoting ethics (39.9%),” “making ethical regulations (38.6%),” “increasing the budget for the government ethics units (38.2%),” “reports on ethical governance (32.2%),” “increasing the number of officers of the government ethics units (31/7%),” “making administration transparent (29.3%),” “investigating malpractices of purchases (27.9%),” “briefing on asset declaration and conflicts of interests (27.5%),” “encouraging the public to participate in public affairs (27.1%),” “research on clean governance (26.6%),” “handling or investigating cases that avoid conflicts of interests (26.1%),” “auditing projects (24.2%),” “precautionary measures (22.0%),” “assisting with asset declaration (20.9%),” “reports on anti-corruption (20.9%),” “Corruption Perception Index (4.7%).” The subjects are also asked to evaluate the individual impact of the social capital of government ethics on the tasks of corruption prevention. Their views are surveyed as the following: 1.The positive influences on ethical governance (promoting the regulations of ethical governance, rewarding ethical behaviors, or awarding ethical models) are “trusting the functions of government ethics units in keeping the government clean (.268),” “thinking that the officers of the government ethics units are approachable (.224),” “believing that government ethics units will protect the honesty of agencies (.224),” and “recognizing that government ethics units are important (.146).” The negative influence aspect is “identifying with the government ethics units (-.285).” 2.The positive influences on making ethical regulations are “trusting the functions of government ethics units in keeping the government clean (.284),” “participating actively in the activities held by the government ethics units (.211),” and “identifying with the tasks of government ethics units (.166).” The negative influence is “trusting the government ethics units (-.152).” 3.The positive influences on increasing the budget for ethic units are “participating actively in the activities held by the government ethics units (.337),” “trusting the functions of government ethics units in keeping the government clean (.285),” and “possessing the membership of the government ethics units (.110).” The negative influence is “level of education (-.118).” 4.The positive influences on the reports on ethical governance are “participating actively in the activities held by the government ethics units (.258),” “the government ethics will protect public servants (.193),” “important to the agencies (.184),” and “people enjoy drawing near (.136).” The negative influences are “keeping the agencies ethical (-.146),” “providing opinions for the government ethics units (-.137),” and “possessing the membership of the government ethics units (-.112).” 5.The positive influences on increasing the number of officers of the government ethics units are “participating actively in the activities held by the government ethics units (.218),” “trusting the functions of government ethics units in keeping the government clean (.163),” and “identifying with the tasks of government ethics units (.150).” The negative influence is “level of education (-.104).” 6.The positive influences on administrative transparency are “trusting the functions of government ethics units in keeping the government clean (.363)” and “valuable to agencies (.267). 7.The positive influences on investigating the malpractices in purchases are “protecting public servants (.215),” “valuable to the agencies (.207),” “important to the agencies (.184),” and “identifying with the tasks of government ethics units (.163).” The negative influences are “trusting the government ethics units (-.170)” and “possessing the membership of the government ethics units (-.114).” 8.The positive influences on avoiding conflicts of interests among public servants or the asset declaration of public servants are “valuable to the agencies (.184),” “identifying with the tasks of government ethics units (.162) and “protecting public servants (.161).” The negative influence is “possessing the membership of the government ethics units (.127).” 9.The positive influences on encouraging citizens to participate in public affairs are “identifying with the tasks of government ethics units (.317),” “important to the agencies (.210),” “making everyone like to draw near (.156),” and “protecting public servants (.146).” The negative aspect is “believing the officers of the government ethics units are not biased (-.164)” and “identifying with government ethics units (-.159).” 10.The positive influences on the research on clean governance is “participating actively in the activities held by the government ethics units (.204),” “trusting the functions of government ethics units in keeping the government clean (.192),” “identifying with the tasks of government ethics units (.141),” and “age (.107).” 11.The positive influences on handling or investigating cases that avoid conflicts of interests are “trusting the functions of government ethics units in keeping the government clean (.249,” “important to the agencies (.200),” “providing opinions for the government ethics units (.193),” and “protecting public servants (.138).” The negative influences are “trusting the government ethics units (-.165) and “possessing the membership of the government ethics units (-.113).” 12.The positive influences on auditing projects are “identifying with the tasks of government ethics units (.190), “important to the agencies (.178)” and “protecting public servants. (.169).” 13.The positive influences on precautionary measures are “protecting public servants. (.193),” “trusting the functions of government ethics units in keeping the government clean (.190), and “identifying with the tasks of government ethics units (.164).” 14.The positive influences on assisting with asset declaration are “valuable to the agencies (.396), “protecting public servants (.214)” and “participating actively in the activities held by the government ethics units (.151).” The negative influences are “trusting the government ethics units (-.161), “keeping the agencies clean (-.159),” and “the membership of the government ethics units (-.131).” 15.The positive influences on reports on anti-corruption are “identifying with the tasks of government ethics unit (.244)” “participating actively in the activities held by the government ethics units (.184) and “age (.165).” 16.There is no significance positive influence of social capital on Corruption Perception Index.

本研究以Easton政治支持理論架構，探討不同人口背景與政治態度的政策利害關係人之政策順服影響因素，並就政策執行監測觀點，將順服變數，分從政策認知、政策環境、執行成效滿意度、利害關係人之行為配合度等面向加以剖析，再檢視不同個人對政策順服的差異與其政治信任感有無關連，以獲得理論上驗證。 廉政政策的執行評估或評價，廠商較一般民眾認知更為成熟，對「廉政倫理規範」相關事務的理解能力相對熟悉，故選擇以廠商（即本文政策利害關係人）為研究對象。依照首揭研究目的，假設「認知」與「環境壓力」兩個因素為影響個人對於廉政政策滿意度與行為傾向的主要因素，即個人對於廉政政策所持為正向認知，其所處政策環境會迫使自己遵守廉政政策規範，有助於廉政政策滿意度的提升與行為上的順服。反之，個人對於廉政政策所持為負向認知，且所處政策環境會促使自己規避廉政政策規範者，將使個人不滿意現行政策施行的效果，致滿意度降低與行為上的不順服。 研究結果發現，政策利害關係人的政黨認同對廉政政策順服有影響，其原因可能由於個人的背景不同，使得生活經驗就有所不同，所以形塑每個人的政策認知深度、支持態度、政策滿意度及行動參與意向等表現不同，因此使政策利害關係人在「廉政政策順服」量表的表現強弱也有所差異。此外，在政治信任感方面，與以往的研究結果對照，可以發現政治信任感也是呈現低度水準，並與性別、教育程度、業務類別、政黨認同、所得收入等變項顯著相關。若從廉政政策順服與政治信任感之關聯性探討，發現廉政政策順服與政治信任感呈顯著相關，其中廉政政策順服構面之「環境壓力」、「滿意度」、「行為傾向」等變項的相關程度較高。 最後，本文探求廉政政策執行及成效評估等有關廉政政策推動策略的建議，期能提供作為政策執行的重要參考。 關鍵字：政策利害關係人、政策順服、政策執行、政治信任感、廉政倫理規範 / Based on David Easton's framework of political-system support theory, this study discussed the factors that influence policy compliance of policy stakeholders with different background and political attitudes. From the point of view of policy monitoring , it analyzed the variables affecting compliance from the aspects of policy cognition, policy environment, satisfaction of implementation effectiveness, and cooperation degree of policy stakeholders. Furthermore, it examined the correlations between policy compliance and political trust of each individual in order to get the verification of theory. When it comes to the evaluation and appraisal of the implementation of the anticorruption policy, vendors are ,compared to the general public, more familiar to the affairs concerning Ethics Direction for Civil Servants. This study has selected vendors (i.e. the policy stakeholders) as the research objects. According to the study goal, the "cognition" and the "environmental pressure" were assumed to be two main factors affecting individual satisfaction and behavioral orientation toward the anticorruption policy. When an individual holds a positive cognition toward the anticorruption policy, the policy environment will force the individual to comply with the policy. The satisfaction toward the policy and the behavioral compliance will be fostered. On the contrary, if an individual holds a negative cognition toward the policy, and the policy environment will discourage the individual to comply with the provisions of the anticorruption policy. The individual will not satisfy with the implementing results of the current policy. It will impede the satisfaction and lower the behavioral compliance. The study found that the party identification of the policy stakeholders would influence their compliance to the anticorruption policy. The reason might be that different backgrounds make different life experiences. This molds individual into different level of policy cognition, attitude of support, policy satisfaction and participation orientation, and in turn makes different representation on scale of compliance of the anticorruption policy. In addition, the political trust, when compared to previous studies, was found to be at a low level, and significantly related to gender, education level, job category, party identification and income level. When exploring from the correlation between the anticorruption policy and the political trust, the study found a significant correlation between them. Among variables of anticorruption policy dimension, "environmental pressure," "degree of satisfaction" and "behavioral orientation" have high levels of correlation with political trust. Lastly, this study has explored suggestions to the implementation and evaluation of strategies related to the promotion of anticorruption policy in hope to serve as an important reference to the policy implementation. Key word：policy stakeholder, policy compliance, policy implementation, Political Trust, Ethics Direction for Civil Servants

法治國原則作為當代政府治理所不可或缺之憲法規範，其之精義涵括了課予政府依法行政、恪守現行法律規範及法律原則等義務；承上所述，倘一國公部門行政為諸多貪腐情事所囿，其不僅意謂著違法行政與牴觸法治國原則之狀態，其猶與國家制度發展的健全性與否相涉。 再者，學界為求分析前開指涉的不利情狀，業已有繁多的相關文獻證實貪腐對經濟及社會環境造成的損害；於此，本研究對貪腐所進行之研究的動機，蓋可歸因於國際透明組織所釋出的貪腐印象指數報告；詳言之，除探索部分後共國家為何特別易於為貪腐所囿乃係本研究之所由外，此等國家的公部門於千囍年後的發展亦為所欲考查之部分。 總此，有鑑於對前述的後共貪腐情形為審慎評估之必要性，本研究應用了文獻分析、個案分析及法律分析方法進行諸多探討；又本研究作為和政府廉政與否具關聯性之議題，不僅政府與社會關係乃係觀察重點，公部門貪腐現象、警察制度發展、抑或是政府肅貪辭令及現實，亦為本研究就後共俄羅斯與喬治亞於斯範疇所欲分析之課題。 / The principle of rule of law acts as a crucial constitutional element in contemporary governance, it requires the government to exercise its power in accordance with well-established and clearly written rules, regulations, and legal principles, hence if a state's public sector has been affected by entrenched corruption, it not only means equally to the illegal status of administration, the breach of rule of law, but also correlates with the quality of a state's institutional development. In view of those aforementioned detrimental conditions, since lots of research effort had already verified the disastrous economic and social consequences of corruption, this study’s research motive was inspired by corruption perceptions index released by transparency international; in other words, why some post-communist states had been bothered with various corruptions after dissolution of the Soviet Union, and how do their public sectors evolve after Millennium. In order to make proper assessment on those illegal phenomena above, this study was constructed by document Analysis, case study analysis and legal analysis. As a study relates with government’s integrity issues, this case study surveys on the relationship between government and society. And by means of exploring corruption phenomena in public sector, the development of police institutions, as well as anti-corruption rhetoric and its realities in Russia and Georgia during the post-communist period. Keywords: Corruption; Anti-corruption; Integrity; Post-communist transition; police institution

近年來法務部提出「貪腐零容忍」（zero tolerance on corruption）的概念，期望可以型塑不容忍貪腐的社會文化，鼓勵全民踴躍參與廉政事務和勇於檢舉貪瀆，以建構廉能政府。紐西蘭在2016年全球清廉印象指數的評比中排名第一，其法務部長在接受媒體訪問時表示，可以榮獲第一的關鍵是：「推動貪腐零容忍政策。」可見在實務界，貪腐零容忍是一個跨越國界廣受使用的概念。然而，何謂貪腐零容忍？針對這個重要概念，過去雖有少數文獻提及，卻未直接說明何謂貪腐零容忍，也較少有文獻去討論民眾對於貪腐容忍的認知，若能了解民眾對於貪腐容忍的認知，便能制定相對應的政策，提高我國的競爭力。 故本研究想探究民眾對於貪腐容忍的認知、貪腐容忍對於貪腐情境的判斷及舉發意願的影響。本研究採取次級資料分析及深度訪談兩種研究方法，次級資料分析，採用於余致力、莊文忠（2016）年的在電訪調查，以臺北市的成年民眾為調查母體，採分層隨機抽樣方法調查1,069個有效樣本，調查資料經樣本代表性檢定與加權處理後進行分析，分為「貪腐零容忍」的民眾與「貪腐能容忍」的民眾，並探討受訪者對於各種具體貪腐情境在判斷上的差異及對於貪腐的舉發意願。在深度訪談中，訪談了一般民眾及公務人員，共27位受訪者，期望可以藉此彌補量化統計無法了解的問題。 本研究發現，不同的人口變項對於貪腐容忍程度有差異，貪腐零容忍者與貪能容忍者對於具體貪腐情境的判斷也有不同，貪腐零容忍者較貪腐能容忍者更願意舉發貪腐。大部分民眾對於貪腐情境的判斷受到個人經驗、風俗文化及法律規範影響，大多數的民眾表示願意舉發貪腐事件但卻擔心受到報復。本研究建議可以跳脫台北市的疆界，並檢視目前不合宜的立法。 / In recent years, the Ministry of Justice has been promoting “Zero Tolerance on Corruption”, in order to create a corruption-free society, and encourage all citizens to partake in anti-corruption affairs and report corruption. In 2016, New Zealand has reclaimed top spot in global anti-corruption rankings, as a result of its zero-tolerance on bribery and corruption. Therefore, zero tolerance on corruption is a widely used notion in many countries, but it has not been fully discussed in previous academic literature. Accordingly, this study aims to explore people’s tolerance on corruption, and how they evaluate some specific situations of corruption when they self-reported that they have zero tolerance on corruption. Moreover, this study examines whether tolerance on corruption will affect people’s willingness to report corruption. This study adopted two research methods, secondary data analysis and in-depth interview. The secondary data from Yu and Juang (2016) were collected through telephone survey on 1,069 subjects, based on the stratified random sampling of adult population in Taipei City. In-depth interviews were conducted on 27 people, including government officials and general public who live in Taipei. This study finds that the demographic variables will affect tolerance on corruption. In most cases, people who self-reported they have zero tolerance on corruption have a significantly different evaluation of specific situations of corruption as compared to people who self-reported they are somewhat tolerant to corruption. People that have high willingness to report the corruption have zero tolerance on corruption. Most people are willing to report the corruption, but they worry about being retaliated.

根據近幾年來瑞士洛桑國際管理發展學院發表之「全球競爭力」調查報告與國際透明組織公佈之「全球貪腐印象指數」的排名結果，發現國家競爭力越高者，清廉度亦相對較高，二者間存有強烈的正相關。而歷次調查結果，均顯示臺灣僅為中度廉潔的國家，因此在推動防貪的過程裡，仍存有許多改善的空間。 晚近公部門貪瀆案件、政商掛勾的弊端層出不窮；為遏止公職人員貪污腐化，政府提擬出一系列陽光法案，而公職人員財產申報法就在民國82年匆匆立法通過，成為第一道陽光法案。該法開宗明義即揭示，「爲端正政風、確立公職人員清廉作為，建立公職人員利害關係之規範，特訂定本法」，足徵防制貪瀆係該法所積極追求的目標。但迄今為止，申報不實之公職人員仍然眾多，亦未見任何觸法者因此去職或終結政治生命，可見財產申報法尚無法完全發揮遏制貪瀆弊端的力量，故有修法之迫切需要。 本研究係從文獻資料探析財產申報法的立法歷程與規範重點，並針對法務部95年版修正草案加以檢討，同時擷取美國、新加坡的財產申報制度的優點以供我國修法參考。另外，則藉由深度訪談的過程，了解我國財產申報制度在法規面與執行面的優缺點，進而提出改善建言，以期達成建構廉能政府的施政目標。 經綜合文獻分析與深度訪談的研究結果，發現整體申報制度之缺失有申報對象界定失衡、防堵脫產未克其功、公開透明猶有不足、裁處罰則難以懾人、執行審核確有困境等。依據前述研究發現，本文提出下列建議包括：建置整體陽光法案、法令體系的結合運作、其他配套措施、追查資金流向、建立弊端揭發人保護制度、鼓勵民眾監督公部門、強化公務人員倫理教育、簡化行政作業流程、研議高薪養廉政策等，以期完善整體申報法制。