English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113822/144841 (79%)
Visitors : 51821800      Online Users : 550
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/34627


    Title: 社團參與、政黨鑲嵌與政治行為之變遷─以台灣社會變遷調查為資料分析
    the changes of civic engagement, embeddedness of political parties and political behaviors─an example of the Taiwan Social Change Surveys
    Authors: 林亞鋒
    Lin, Ya Feng
    Contributors: 熊瑞梅
    林亞鋒
    Lin, Ya Feng
    Keywords: 社團參與
    網絡分析
    鑲嵌性
    政黨
    civic engagement
    network analysis
    embeddedness
    political party
    Date: 2006
    Issue Date: 2009-09-18 10:46:32 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 社團參與在當代社會早已成為非常重要的議題,不論是西方還是台灣學界都有許多相關的研究。不同於西方社團參與的形式,台灣距離政治民主化只有短短的數十年,社團參與在過去威權統治以及現在民主開放的影響下,產生了複雜的運作機制。一方面,政治上的開放使得社團參與遭遇的限制大幅減少,各式各樣社團呈現蓬勃發展的趨勢,目的性的結社成為了最重要的社團參與形式;另一方面傳統文化下的擬式血源性社團並沒有因為威權體制崩解而失去活力,在地方選舉中依舊保有關鍵的地位。
    為了探究台灣解嚴後社團參與的獨特意義,以及民主化之後是否又面臨什麼樣的改變?本文以參與社團所形成的網絡結構作為分析方法,從社團和政黨的網絡鑲嵌性以及社團網絡的社會資本效果,嘗試找出社團網絡的結構及變遷。
    透過研究本文呈現了幾個重要發現:首先,研究結果指出台灣社團參與沒有欣欣向榮的發展,在參與者的比例有下降的趨勢,而且教育程度並無顯著提高,反駁了先前的研究;其次,在1992、1997以及2002年三次調查中,政黨和社團的鑲嵌性變化不大,大致上國民黨是強烈鑲嵌在社團網絡之中,反之民進黨則一直處於邊陲的地位,政黨輪替並沒有造成太大的改變;第三,草根性社團仍是台灣很重要的社會力基礎,其成員參與其他社團的比例相當高,不過受限於成員特殊性的影響,使得連結性有不少的侷限;最後,社團網絡確實會有社會資本的效果,不論是從連結能力還是不同結構位置的社團都被證實,但是在台灣這樣的社會資本卻是帶有選擇性的,整體上參與社團的人確實會比較傾向投給泛藍的陣營。
    Civic engagement in modern societies has been an important academic issue, both in Western countries and Taiwan. Unlike that in the Western societies, the civic engagement in Taiwan has a more complex operating mechanism in that authoritarian ruling in the past and democratization of Taiwan in the recent decades have a joint effect on the associations. On the one hand, because democratization greatly reduced the constraints on civic engagement, all kinds of associations have become prosperous and goal-oriented associations become the most important form of civic engagement. On the other hand, under the influence of traditional culture, primary associations still keep their power even with the collapse of authoritarian regime; they still play a key role in the local elections.
    This thesis analyzes the network structure formed by associations to understand the special meaning of civic engagement in Taiwan after the abolition of martial laws and the changes the network may encounter after the democratization. It looks at three investigations of Social Change Survey in 1992, 1997, and 2002 to find the structure and change from the network embeddedness of associations and political parties and from the effects of social capital obtained by association network.
    This thesis presents the following important findings: First, the associations in Taiwan are not as prosperous as mentioned in previous research. The data show that the proportion of participants among Taiwanese civilians decreases and the educational degree of the members does not significantly increase. Second, in the three surveys, the embeddedness of political parties and associations does not show obvious change. Generally speaking, KMT still strongly embed in association network, while DPP remains isolated from the network. The shift of political power does not cause strong effects. Third, the grassroots associations still are important basis of social forces, having a high ratio of members joining other associations. However, because of specialties of their members, the capacity of the grassroots associations is limited. Finally, association network has its effects on accumulating social capital, which can be shown by the capacity of association network and by the structural locations of different associations. However, such social capital in Taiwan is selective. Generally speaking, people who join the associations tend to support the pan-blue parties.
    Reference: 中文部分:
    丁仁傑,2001,〈當代台灣社會中的宗教浮現:以社會分化過程為焦點所做的
    初步考察〉。《台灣社會研究季刊》41。
    王甫昌,1994,〈族群同化與動員:台灣民眾政黨支持之分析〉。《中央研究院民
    族學研究所集刊》77,春。
    ───,2003,《當代台灣社會的族群想像》。台北:群學出版有限公司。
    王順民,2001,《當代台灣地區宗教類非營利組織的轉型與發展》。台北:洪葉
    文化事業有限公司。
    王振寰,1996,《誰統治台灣:轉型中的國家機器與權力結構》。台北:巨流。
    王業立,1998,〈選舉、民主化與地方派系〉。《選舉研究》5:1。
    王中天,2003,〈社會資本:概念、起源與現況〉。《問題與研究》42:5。
    王金壽,2004,〈瓦解中的地方派系:以屏東縣為例〉。《台灣社會學》7。
    石元康,1998,〈市民社會與民主〉。頁1-18,收錄於殷海光基金會主編,《市民
    社會與民主的反思》。台北:桂冠圖書公司。
    江今葉,2005,〈準戒急用忍〉。經濟日報,台北第二版,4月7日。
    朱雲漢,1989,〈寡占經濟與威權政治體制〉。頁139-160。收錄於《解剖台灣
    經濟:威權體制下的壟斷宇剝削》。台北:前衛。
    朱柔若,1996,《政經發展與工運變遷之跨國分析》。台北:華泰書局。
    杜慶承,2005,〈中央政權輪替對地方派系的影響─彰化縣個案研究〉。《選舉研
    究》12:1。
    李丁讚、林文源,2000,〈社會力的文化根源:論環境權感受在台灣的歷史形成
    〉。《台灣社會研究季刊》38。
    ───────,2003,〈社會力的轉化:台灣環保抗爭的組織技術〉。《台灣社
    會研究季刊》52。
    李丁讚,2004,〈導論:市民社會與公共領域在台灣的發展〉。頁1-62,收錄於
    李丁讚主編,《公共領域在台灣》。台北:桂冠圖書公司
    李丁讚、吳介民,2006,〈公民社會的概念史考察〉。論文發表於2006年「社
    會學年會」,台中:東海大學,民國95年11月25日至26日。
    李允傑,1999,《台灣工會政策的政治經濟分析》。台北:商鼎文化出版社。
    李雅玲,2004,《解嚴後台灣民間社團的發展與社區文化重建--兼以台北市八頭
    里仁協會為例》。台北:台灣師範大學歷史學研究所碩士論文。
    呂亞力,2000,〈民主在美國導讀〉。收錄於《民主在美國》,台北:貓頭鷹出版
    :城邦文化發行。
    呂建吉,2004,〈台灣佛教傳播現況與傳播模式〉。論文發表於「海峽兩岸宗教
    與社會學術研討會」,台北:國立台灣師範大學,民國93年10月2日。
    吳乃德、林佳龍,1990,〈中產階級與社會運動〉。頁233-244,收錄於蕭新煌主
    編,《變遷中臺灣社會的中產階級》。台北:巨流。
    吳乃德,1993a,〈Convergence Or Polarization? : Ethnic Political Support In The
    Post-Liberalization Stage〉。台北:行政院國家科學委員會科資中心。
    ───,1993b,〈省籍意識、政治支持和國家認同:台灣族群政治理論的初探〉。
    頁27-51,收錄於張茂桂等著,《族群關係與國家認同》。台北:業強出版社。
    ───,2002,〈認同衝突和政治信任:現階段台灣族群政治的核心難題〉。《
    台灣社會學》4。
    ───,2004,〈搜尋民主公民:社團參與的理論與實際〉。頁177-214,收錄
    於李丁讚主編,《公共領域在台灣》。台北:桂冠。
    吳重禮、鄭文智、崔曉倩,2006,〈交叉網絡與政治參與:2001年縣市長與立
    法委員選舉的實證研究〉。《人文及社會科學集刊》18:4。
    何明修,2003,〈政治民主化與環境運動的制度化〉。《台灣社會研究季刊》50。
    何定照,2007,〈網路串連,部落客主導新社運〉。聯合報,A3版,4
    月16日。
    林佳龍,1989,〈威權侍從政體下的台灣反對運動:民進黨社會基礎的政治解釋〉
    。《台灣社會研究季刊》2:1。
    林南著,林佑聖、葉欣怡譯,2005,《社會資本》。台北:弘智文化事業有限公司。
    邱瑜瑾,1996,《解嚴後台中市都市發展型塑的社會機制》。台中:東海大學社
    會學研究所博士論文。
    邱育琤、徐永明,2004,〈民進黨執政菁英的形成:以第一次中央政黨輪替為
    觀察對象〉。《台灣政治學刊》8:2。
    范雲,2003,〈政治轉型過程中的婦女運動:以運動者及其生命傳記背景為核
    心的分析取向〉。《台灣社會學》5。
    紀金山,1996,《社區爭議事件集體行動體系之結構分析》。台中:東海大學社
    會學系碩士論文。
    徐火炎,2001,〈政黨認同與投票抉擇:台灣地區選民的政黨印象、偏好與黨派
    投票行為之分析〉。《人文及社會科學集刊》4:1。
    徐永明、陳鴻章,2003,〈地方派系與國民黨:衰退還是深化?〉。《台灣社會學》
    8.
    郭承天、吳煥偉,1997,〈民主與經濟發展:結合質與量的研究方法〉。《問題
    與研究》36:9。
    張苙雲,1986,《組織社會學》。台北:三民。
    張茂桂,1989,《社會運動與政治轉化》。台北:財團法人張榮發基金會、國家
    政策研究中心。
    張毅欽,2003,《從林合社區看台灣公民社會發展的困境與契機》。新竹:清華
    大學社會學研究所碩士論文。
    陳杏枝,1999,〈台灣宗教社會學研究之回顧〉。《台灣社會學刊》22。
    陳義彥,1979,《台灣地區大學生政治社會化之研究》。台北:嘉新水泥文化基
    金會。
    陳義彥、蔡孟熹,1997,〈新世代選民的政黨取向與投票抉擇─首屆民選總統
    的分析〉。《政治學報》66。
    陳陽德,1981,《臺灣地方民選領導人物的變動》。台北:四季。
    陳介玄,1994,〈派系網絡、樁腳網絡及俗民網絡─論台灣地方派系形成之社會
    意義〉,頁31-67,收錄於東海大學東亞社會經濟研究中心編,《地方社會》。
    台北:聯經。
    陳宗逸,2006/9/1,「看報治國反撲,沉默螺旋發酵」,《新台灣新聞周刊》。台北
    545。
    陳東升,1995,《金權城市:地方派系、財團與台北都會發展的社會學分析》。
    台北:巨流。
    陳明通,1995,《派系政治與台灣政治變遷》。台北:月旦出版社。
    陳雪玉,2003,《桃園閩客族群與地方政治關係的歷史探討(1950-1996)》。桃園
    :中央大學歷史學研究所碩士論文。
    陳陸輝,2000,〈台灣選民政黨認同的持續與變遷〉。《選舉研究》7:2。
    陳家倫,2006,〈台灣新時代團體的網絡連結〉。《台灣社會學刊》36。
    游清鑫,2002,〈政黨認同與政黨形象:面訪與焦點團體訪談的結合〉。《選舉研
    究》9:2。
    曾權林,2006,《地方派系組織與選舉關係之研究-以高雄市三民區為例》。高雄
    :高雄師範大學成人教育研究所碩士論文。
    彭家發、馮建三、蘇蘅、金溥聰,1997,《新聞學》。台北:國立空中大學。
    黃毅志,1998,〈社會階層、社會網絡與心理幸福〉。《台灣社會學刊》21
    傅仰止,2001,〈個人網絡中他人聯繫強度的結構原理〉。《台灣社會學》3。
    ───,2005,〈社會資本的概念化與運作:論家人重疊網絡中的時間投資機制〉
    。《台灣社會學》9。
    趙永茂,1978,《台灣地方派系與地方建設之關係》。高雄:德馨室。
    熊瑞梅、邱瑜瑾,1995,〈都市政治菁英的社會資源與社會圈:台中市為例〉。頁
    47-101,收錄於收於林松齡、王振寰主編,《台灣社會學研究的回顧與前
    瞻論文集》,東海大學社會系。
    熊瑞梅、紀金山,2002,〈師資培育法形成的政策範疇影響力機制〉。《台灣社會
    學》4
    熊瑞梅,2001a,〈都市行動體系的分析:以台中市為例〉。《台大社會學刊》29。
    ───,2001b,〈性別、個人網絡與社會資本〉。頁179-215,收錄於邊燕杰等
    主編,《華人社會的調查研究》。Oxford:Hong Kong。
    蔡明惠、張茂桂,1994,〈地方派系的形成與變遷:河口鎮的個案研究〉。《中央
    研究院民族學研究所集刊》,77,春。
    蔡長斌,2005,《寺廟組織與平安燈文化的建構:制度與網絡的機制》。台中:
    東海大學社會學研究所碩士論文。
    劉中興,2006,《地方政治生態對選舉影響之探討-以2001年及2005年兩屆
    桃園縣長選舉為例》。台北:開南管理學院公共事務管理學研究所碩士論文。
    劉佩怡,2005,〈台灣宗親政治形成的初探─以桃園縣為個案分析〉。《人文學報》
    ,29。
    劉頂順,2001,《高雄市地方派系之研究─以澎湖派、台南派為例》。台南:台
    南師範學院鄉土文化研究所碩士論文》。
    劉滿娣,2004,《地方派系對選舉影響之研究─以美濃鎮1998年~2003年選
    舉為例》。台北:台灣師範大學政治學研究所碩士論文。
    鞠海濤,2006,《民進黨社會基礎研究》。台北:水牛圖書出版事業有限公司。
    蕭新煌,1989,《社會力:台灣向前看》。台北:自立晚報。
    蕭新煌,2004,〈台灣的非政府組織、民主轉型與民主治理〉。《台灣民主季刊》1:
    1。
    蕭全政,2004,〈經濟發展與台灣的政治民主化。《台灣民主季刊》1:1。
    謝雨生、吳齊殷、李文傑,2006,〈青少年網絡特性、互動結構和友誼動態〉。《
    台灣社會學》11。
    瞿海源,1999,〈宗教〉。頁531-536,收錄於王振寰、瞿海源主編,《社會
    學與台灣社會》。台北:巨流圖書公司。
    顧忠華、林勝偉,2004,〈社會資本的理論定位與經驗意義:以戰後台灣社會變
    遷為例〉。《國立政治大學社會學報》37。
    顧忠華,1998,〈民主社會中的個人與社群〉。頁19-54,收錄於殷海光基金會主
    編,《市民社會與民主的反思》。台北:桂冠圖書公司。
    ───,2000,〈台灣非營利組織的公共性與自主性〉。《台灣社會學研究》4。
    ───,2003,〈社會運動的機構化:兼論非營利組織在公民社會中的角色〉,
    頁1-28,收錄於張茂桂、鄭永年主編,《兩岸社會運動分析》。台北:新自然
    主義股份有限公司。
    ───,2004,〈公共領域的社會基礎〉。頁147-175,收錄於李丁讚主編,《公
    共領域在台灣》。台北:桂冠圖書公司。
    ───,2005,《解讀社會力:台灣的學習社會與公民社會》。台北:左岸。
    Coleman, James S. 著,鄧方譯,1992,《社會理論的基礎》。台北:五南出版社。
    Habermas著,曹衛東譯,2002,《公共領域的結構轉型》。台北:聯經。
    Putnam, Robert D. 著,王列、賴海榕譯,2001a,《使民主運轉起來 : 現代義大
    利的公民傳統》。南昌:江西人民出版社。
    Tocqueville, A. 著,秦修明、湯新楣、李宜培譯,2005,《民主在美國》。台北
    :貓頭鷹出版:城邦文化發行。
    英文部分:
    Aberg, Martin. 2000. "Putnam`s Social Capital Theory Goes East: A Case Study of Western Ukraine and L`viv " Europe-Asia Studies 52:295-317.
    Baum, Joel A.C. and Jitendra V. Singh. 1996. "Dynamics of Organization Responses to Competition." Social Forces 74:1261-1297.
    Bonacich, Philip. 1987. "Power and Centrality: A Family of Measures " American Journal of Sociology 92:1170-82.
    Bourdieu, Pierre. 1986. Distinction : a social critique of the judgement of taste. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
    Boxman, EAW, PM De Graaf, and HD Flap. 1991. "The impact of social and human capital on the income attainment of Dutch managers." Social Networks 13:51-73.
    Breiger, Ronald L. 1973. "The Duality of Persons and Groups." Social Forces 53:181-190.
    Burris, Val. 2005. "Interlocking Directorates and Political Cohesion among Corporate Elites." American Journal of Sociology 111:249-83.
    Burt, Ronald S. 1983. Corporate Profits and Cooperaton: Networks of Market Constraint and Directorate Ties in the American Economy. New York: Academic Press.
    —──. 1992. Structure Holes: The Social Structure of Competition MA: Harvard University Press.
    Coleman, James Samuel. 1988. "Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital." American Journal of Sociology 95:95-120.
    Cornwell, Benjamin and Jill Ann Harrison. 2004. "Union Members and Voluntary Associations:Membership Overlap as a Case of Organizational Embeddedness." American Sociological Review 69:862-881.
    Costa, D.L. and Khan, M.E. (2003) “Civic engagement and community heterogeneity: an economist’s perspective”, Perspectives on Politics, 1: 103–111.Dahl, Robert Alan. 1961. Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City. Newhaven, CT: Yale University Press.
    Diamond, Larry. 1992. "Economic Development and Democracy Reconsidered." American Behavioral Scientist 35:450-499.
    Durlauf, Steven N. 2002. "Bowling Alone: A Review Essay." Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 47:259-273.
    Emirbayer, Mustafa and Jeff Goodwin. 1994. "Network Analysis, Culture, and the Problem of Agency." American Journal of Sociology 99:1141-1454.
    Erick-Hans, Klijn. 1996. "Analyzing and Managing Policy Processes in Complex Networks: A Theoretical Examination of the Concept Policy Network and its Problems " Administration & Society 28:90-119.
    Foley, Michael W. and Bob Edwards. 1998. "Civic Society and Social Capital beyond Putnam." American Behavioral Scientist 42:124-139.
    Freeman, Linton C. 2004. The Development of Social Network Analysis. North Charleston, South Carolina: BookSurge, LLC.
    Freitag, Markus. 2003. "Beyond Tocqueville: the Origins of Social Capital in Switzerland." European Sociology Review 19:217-232.
    Fung, Archon. 2003. "Associations and Democracy: Between Theories, Hopes , and Realities." Annual Review of Sociology 29:515-539.
    Galaskiewicz, Beth Duckles, and Olga Mayorova. 2007. "Strong Family and Embedded Consumption." in Contexts of Social Capital: Social Networks in Communities, Markets and Organizations, edited by H. R. May, L. Nan, and R. Breiger. London: Routledge.
    Granovetter, Mark. 1973. "The Strength of Weak Ties." American Journal of Sociology 78:1360-1380.
    —──. 1985. "Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness." American Journal of Sociology 91:481-510.
    Gulati, Ranjay and Martin Gargiulo. 1999. "Where Do Interorganizational Networks Come From? ." American Journal of Sociology 104:1439-93.
    H., Erickson B. 2004. "The Distribution of Gendered Social Capital." in Creation and Returns of Social Capital: A New Research Program, edited by F. H. and V. B. London: Routledge.
    Hoffmann, Stefan-Ludwig. 2003. "Democracy and Associations in the Long Nineteenth Century: Toward a Transnational Perspective " The journal of Modern History 75:269-298.
    Hsung, Ray-May and Yi-Jr Lin. 2007. "Social Capital of Personnel Managers: the Causes and Return of Position-Generated Networks and the Participation in Voluntary Associations." in Context of Social Capital: Social Networks in Communities, Markets and Organizations, edited by R.-M. Hsung, N. Lin, and R. Breiger. London: Routledge.
    Ikeda, Ken`ichi and Tetsuro Kobayash. 2007. "Making democracy work via the functioning of heterogeneous personal networks: An empirical analysis based on a Japanese election study." in Contexts of Social Capital: Social Networks in Communities, Markets and Organizations edited by R. M. Hsung, N. Lin, and R. Breiger. London: Routledge.
    Kalmijn, Matthijs and Henk Flap. 2001. "Assortative Meeting and Mating: Unintended Consequences of Organized Settings for Partner Choices " Social Forces 79:1289-1312.
    Knoke, David. 1990. Organizaition of Collective action New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
    —──. 1990 Political Networks: The Structural Perspective, Edited by M. Granovetter: Cambridge university press.
    Knoke, David and James H. Kuklinski. 1982. Network analysis Beverly Hills, Calif Sage Publications.
    Korkut, Umut. 2005. "The Relationship Between Democratization and Invigoration of Civil Society: The Case of Hungary and Poland." East European Quarterly 39:149-177.
    Laumann, Edward O. and David Knoke. 1987. The Organizational States. Madison, Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press.
    Lazarsfeld, Paul Felix and Elihu Katz. 1955. Personal Influence : The Part Played by People in The Flow of Mass Communications. NY: Free Press.
    Lin, Nan. 2001. "Social Capital: Social Networks, Civic Engagement, or Trust?" in annual meeting of the Hong Kong Sociological Association. Hong Kong.
    Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1959. "Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy." American Political Science Review 53:69-105.
    Mark, Noah. 1998. "Birds of a Feather Sing Together." Social Forces 77:453-485.
    Marsh, Robert M. 2005. "Social Capital and Democracy in a New Democracy." The Sociological Quarterly 46:593-615.
    McClenaghan, Pauline. 2000. "Social Capital: Exploring the Theoretical Foundations
    of Community Development education." British Educational Research
    Journal 26:565-582.
    McPherosn, Miller J. and Pamela A. Popielarz. 1992. "Social Network and Organizational Dynamics." American Sociological Review 57:153-170.
    McPherson, J. Miller and Pamela A. Popielarz. 1995. "On the Edge or in Between; Niche Position, Niche Overlap, and the Duration of Voluntary Association Memberships." American Journal of Sociology 101:698-720.
    McPherson, Miller J. 1983. "An ecology of Affiliation." American Sociological Review 48:519-532.
    —──. 2006. "Social Isolation in America: Changes in Core Discussion Networks over Two Decades." American Sociological Review 71:353-375.
    McPherson, Miller J. and Thomas Rotolo. 1996. "Testing A Dynamic Model of Social Composition: Diversity an Change in Voluntary Groups." American Sociological Review 61:179-202.
    McPherson, Miller J. and Lynn Smith-Lovin. 1986. "Sex Segregation in Voluntary Associations " American Sociological Review 51:61-80.
    —──. 1987. "Homophily in Voluntary Organizations: Status Distance and The Composition of Facto to Face Groups." American Sociological Review 52:370-379.
    Messner, Stevenson F., Eeic P. Baumer, and Richard Rosenfeld. 2004. "Dimensions of Social Capital and Rates of Criminal Homicide." American Sociological Review 69:882-903.
    Moore, Gwen, Sarah Sobieraj, J Allen Whitt, Olga Mayorova, and Daniel Beaulieu. 2002. "Elite Interlocks in Three U.S. Sectors: Nonprofit, Corporate, and Government." Social Science Quarterly 83:726-744.
    Moy, Patricia, Edith Manosevitch, Keith Stamm, and Kate Dunsmore. 2005. "Linking Dimensions of Internet use and Civic Engagement." Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 82:571-586.
    Newton, Kenneth. 1997. "Social Capital and Democracy." American Behavioral Scientist 40:575-586.
    Paxton, Pamela. 2002. "Social Capital and Democracy: an Interdependent Relationship " American Sociological Review 67:254-277.
    Pescosolido, Bernice A. and Beth A. Rubin. 2000. "The Web of Group Affiliations Revisited: Social Life, Postmodernism, and Sociology " American Sociological Review 65:52-76.
    Presthus, Robert Vance. 1978. The organizational society. New York St. Martin`s Press.
    Putnam, Robert D. 2001. Bowling Alone: the Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York Simon & Schuster.
    Riley, Dylan. 2005. "Civic Associations and Authoritarian Regimes in Interwar Europe: Italy and Spain in Comparative Perspective." American Sociological Review 70:288-310.
    Rosenfeld, Richard, Steven F. Messner, and Eric P. Baumer. 2001. "Soical Capital and Homicide." Social Forces 80:283-309.
    Rotolo, Thomas and John Wilson. 2004. "What Happened to the "Long Civic Generation" ?Explaining Cohrt Differences in Voluntarism " Social Forces 82:1091-1121.
    Sampson, Robert J., Doug McAdam, Heather MacIndoe, and Simon Weffer-Elizondo. 2005. "Civil Society Reconsidered: The Durable Nature and Community Structure of Collective Civic Action." American Journal of Sociology 111:673-714.
    Sandell, Rickard. 2001. "Organization Growth and Ecological Constraints: The Growth of Social movement in Sweden, 1881 To 1940." American Sociological Review 66:672-693.
    Saxton, Gregory D. and Michelle A. Benson. 2005. "Social Capital and the Growth of the Nonprofit Sector " Social Science Quarterly 86:16-35.
    Schofer, Evan and Marion Fourcade-Gourinchas. 2001. "The Structural Contexts of Civic Engagement: Voluntary Association Membership in Comparative Persepctive " American Sociological Review 66:806-828.
    Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1942. Capitalism, Socialsim, and Democracy NY: Harper & Row.
    Simmel, George. 1955. Conflict and the Web of Group Affiliations Translated by W. K. H. and B. R. New York: Free Press.
    Skocpol, Theda, Marshall Ganz, and Ziad Munson. 2000. "A Nation of Organizers: The Institutional Origins of Civic Voluntarism in the United States." The American Political Science Review 94:527-546.
    Stinchcombe, Arthor L. 1965. "Social Structure and Organization." in Handbook of Organizations edited by J. G. March. NY: Rand Mcnally.
    Stolle, Dietlind and Thomas R. Rochon. 1998. "Are all Associations Alike." American Behavioral Scientist 42:47-65.
    Tolbert, Charles M., Michael D. Irwin, Thomas A. Lyson, and Alfred R. Nucci. 2002. "Civic Community in Small-Town America: How Civic Welfare Is Influenced by Local Capitalism and Civic Engagement " Rural Sociology 67:90-113.
    Woolcock, Michael and Deppa Narayan. 2000. "Social Capital : Implications for
    Development Theory, Research, and Policy." The World Bank Research
    Observer 15:225-249.
    Wu, Nai-te. 1987. "The Politics of a Regim Patronage System: Mobilization and Control within an Authori-tarian Regime." Department of Political Science, Chicago.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    社會學研究所
    94254003
    95
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0094254003
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[社會學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    400301.pdf47KbAdobe PDF2878View/Open
    400302.pdf98KbAdobe PDF21039View/Open
    400303.pdf79KbAdobe PDF21008View/Open
    400304.pdf72KbAdobe PDF2847View/Open
    400305.pdf201KbAdobe PDF2994View/Open
    400306.pdf324KbAdobe PDF21363View/Open
    400307.pdf259KbAdobe PDF21248View/Open
    400308.pdf166KbAdobe PDF2948View/Open
    400309.pdf396KbAdobe PDF21142View/Open
    400310.pdf329KbAdobe PDF2978View/Open
    400311.pdf133KbAdobe PDF21051View/Open
    400312.pdf155KbAdobe PDF21364View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback