資訊科技的日新月異，讓政府與民眾之間的關係有了改變，在Web 2.0的網路應用模式興起之下，不但讓社會互動的內涵拓展到網路世界當中，也改變了日常生活、媒體環境，甚至進入了民主政治運作的機制當中，扮演重要的角色。順應這股潮流，各國政府無不積極推動相關的機制，期望讓民眾有更親切，多元的參與途徑，以達成更好的治理。 然而，不論國內外對於政府結合Web 2.0的研究上，主要都聚焦於公共服務的提供，並沒有更進一步探討「政府」與「民眾」關係的內涵，事實上，這種雙向關係的建立是社群網站之所以能進入民眾生活的重要的核心概念，也是政府結合社群網站提供服務應該關注的焦點。因此，本研究從深化治理關係的角度出發，比較立法委員在選舉期間和會期間運用Facebook與民眾溝通、互動的行為，一方面希望探索政治人物所應用的網路科技是否含有治理的功用，突破以往網路選戰的囹圄；另一方面，也希望了解在政府各單位提供的電子參與機制之外，能不能透過更接近民眾日常生活的Facebook建立治理關係，讓電子參與的理念可以藉由不同的途徑所達成。 研究結果發現，立法委員在Facebook在選舉期間和會期間主要應用的策略都是「政治資訊」和「生活分享」兩項，不同於過去競選期間以攻擊對手最為主要應用的策略，立法委員在Facebook上有明顯的策略轉向，可能與Facebook社交的特性有關。另一方面，立法委員所應用的Facebook不論在選舉期間或會期，在電子參與上都達到不錯的比率，但是大部分溝通能以單向的資訊傳播為主，與民眾的雙向互動較為稀少。從分析結果來看，立法委員應用Facebook除了地區之外，並沒有明顯的差異。整體而言，立法委員的Facebook有成為電子參與新途徑的潛力，但是要達成雙向、穩定、長期的治理關係，落實電子參與的理念仍需要繼續努力。 / Facebook, the most popular social media in the world, has changed ways of citizen involvement in governance. Politicians and (elected) public administrators worldwide have adopted Facebook as an important approach to connect with citizens. Following the trend, most legislators in Taiwan also create personal Facebook accounts and Facebook pages as an additional way to reach their potential voters and citizens in general. Ideally, legislators can efficiently operate their constituents and directly communicate with their “friends.” Facebook pages of legislators seem to offer the promise of electronic participation (e-participation), reaching citizens on a common platform and allowing for citizen comments. On the other hand, citizens can establish a link to legislators via information-sharing, dialogue, and consensus-building on Facebook. If the two-way communication works properly and successfully, Facebook will certainly help to create more citizen participation and more public values. This study investigates differences in communication strategies and patterns of legislators’ Facebook in Taiwan during the 2011 election periods and during the 2012 regular legislative sessions, with the aim of exploring whether the Facebook phenomenon can improve the process of online political communication and citizen participation. The finding reveals that percentage of e-participation achieves fine rate, but most communication on legislators’ Facebook is one way. The result indicates that legislators’ Facebook is another platform to distribute public information to citizens, and may have potential to create more public values. To improve democracy, legislators need to get more feedback from citizens, i.e., improving the two-way communication on Facebook.The lessons from this study will help pave the way for future research on political campaign and electronic participation.

長久以來，電子化政府與公民信任之間的因果關係，一直為學者所爭論。眾多研究顯示電子化政府有助於促進公民信任感；然而，目前公民對現有電子化政府服務、電子參與滿意度偏低，且台灣社會資本逐步流失，不免令人質疑電子化政府建立公民信任感的有效性。然而，近年電子治理的提出，眾人期待實現審慎思辨的民主，顯現運用資訊通信科技讓更多公民參與決策過程的重要性。因而引起作者在電子治理對公民信任影響上研究的興趣。 本文認為電子化政府可以促進公民對政府的信任，但前提是這項機制必須值得信賴，否則將出現反效果。故作者從電子治理中的電子參與著手，探討其對公民信任的影響。主要研究方法為文獻回顧及深度訪談，其中訪談對象為十四位具我國電子參與經驗者，運用質性研究分析訪談資料，輔以文獻檢閱釐清電子參與與公民信任之間的影響路徑與因素包括三種類型：1.使用電子參與後，其正面影響因素提升公民對政府的信任感；2.使用電子參與後，其負面影響因素降低公民的內在政治效能感，進而削弱對政府的信任感；3.公民對政府的低度信任，降低使用電子參與的意願與行為。 訪談分析顯示公民對政府的信任和政府電子參與機制的信任感不足，且兩者相互影響。受訪者對政府的信任感比對政府網站和電子參與機制的信任感低，而電子參與經驗豐富者，較不信任電子參與機制；電子參與經驗淺者，較信任電子參與機制。若以電子參與的三種類型觀之，公民對電子資訊提供較為滿意、電子諮詢次之，雖然我國尚未設置電子決策制定，但是多數受訪者對此機制運作表示質疑。 我國電子參與仍在持續推動中，政府應該正視公民信任的重要性，以及電子參與與公民信任之間的負面影響因素，著重在：資訊的深度與多元性、資訊透明度、資訊品質、搜尋系統的設計完善、回應性、使用者的代表性、論壇引導話題、資訊安全與互動性的維護，並消弭數位落差、避免資訊超載等情況，以營造公民進行電子參與的環境與設備，使其有足夠誘因使用，期許我國電子參與推行順利。 / The casual relationship between e-government and citizen trust(in government) has been argued by scholars. Research has shown that e-government may improve citizen trust, but citizens are not satisfied with e-services and e-participation nowadays. When social capital in Taiwan is flowing away, people tend to suspect the effectiveness of e-government in establishing citizen trust. However, citizens still expect deliberative democracy while e-governance comes to reality recently. It means that the importance of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) can enrich the process of decision-making for citizen participation. That’s the reason why the author attempts to explore the effect of e-participation on citizen trust. The evidence support that e-government can improve citizen trust in government. The premise, nevertheless, is its mechanism has gained fundamental trust; otherwise, negative effects will come out. The main research methods include literature review and in-depth interview. There are 14 interviewees with experience of e-participation in Taiwan. In addition, the author used qualitative method to analyze interview data. Besides, using literature to induce three types of effects paths and causes between e-participation and citizen trust. Firstly, after using e-participation, its positive factors improve citizen trust in government. Secondly, after using e-participation, its negative factors lower internal efficacy of citizen and then weaken their trust in government. Thirdly, the low trust in government will weaken willingness and behavior of e-participation. Interview results indicate the lack of citizen trust in government and e-participation, and both also connect each other. Interviewees’ trust in government is lower than their trust in government web sites and e-participation. Citizens with rich experience of e-participation show lower trust in e-participation. On the other hand, those with poor experience of e-participation have more trust in e-participation. If we observe three types of e-participation, citizens are more satisfied with e-information than e-consultation. Although e-decision-making has not been realized in Taiwan, many interviewees suspect this mechanism. The governments in Taiwan keep pushing e-participation. They should know the importance of citizen trust and the negative factors between e-participation and citizen trust revealed in the study. Particularly, governments should focus on depth and diverse information, transparency, quality of information, friendly use of search engine, responsiveness, and representative. They should also properly manage topics of e-forum, information safety, interactivity; eliminate digital divide and avoid information overload. Government should strive for good environment and facilitate citizen usage of e-participation. Our e-participation will succeed while government has good inducement to encourage citizen.