臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

過去的十幾年間，西方的勞動市場已經有了深遠的轉變，幾乎所有國家都有勞動力分化的情形，當圈外人人口比例增長的同時，也會間接造成社會、經濟、政治機會取得上的困境，因此貧窮、不平等和社會排除的現象重返了西方先進國家的政治議程，形成了勞動市場雙元化的現象。
本研究目的在於檢視不同體制的勞動市場分化情形，並探討制度因素對勞動市場分化的影響效果。以Häusermann & Schwander（2012）使用的圈內人/圈外人新的概念化和測量方式，透過集中具有相似職業輪廓而形成的社會結構團體，而非過去以個人在一個特殊時間點的勞動市場狀態來區分階級，以發掘在後工業化時期下，不同體制中的不同風險群體在勞動市場上的雙元化現象。因此本文以Esping-Andersen（1990）提出的三個福利體制的類型，再加入南歐及東亞模式，比較五個福利體制類型下呈現的雙元化圖像，並探討在社會、經濟、政治的制度脈絡下，對不同福利體制會造成何種程度的勞動市場分化，以及分化的程度為何，開啟了自由、歐陸、北歐、南歐及東亞體制之間的對話。本研究運用ISSP 2005和2006年的資料庫，經過比較分析後的結果發現，自由體制國家的圈外人的比例是所有體制中最高，而且多半為低技術者，僅次於南歐國家，在受訓機會及工會參與都有顯著的差異；北歐的勞動市場分化遍佈且更偏向於女性，但在其他制度上較不明顯，意即圈外人在北歐的勞動市場中不易受到懲罰；歐陸國家則呈現出高度性別化的勞動市場，在收入差距及受訓機會上差異很大；南歐體制國家在某些變項上（例如性別、所得）的雙元化程度看似比其他國家低，但較低的社會不平等卻反映了圈內人面臨了惡劣的工作環境與條件；東亞國家在性別上亦具有高度分化，總所得差距也非常大，青年的世代差異問題嚴重，但在政治整合上並未呈現明顯的雙元化。最後，針對東亞三國─日本、韓國、台灣在各個制度變項上的不平等進行探討。

Over the past decades, the structure of labor markets in the Western countries have changed profoundly. Almost all countries have the situation of labor segmentation. When the outsider’s population proportion growth, it may lead to the welfare losses, and a lack of social and political integration. Poverty, inequality, and social exclusion are back on the political agenda, shaping a dual labor market.

This study aimed to view the labor market divide in different regimes and explore the effect on the institutional factors to the labor market divide. In Häusermann and Schwander’ s study use the new conceptualization and measurement by the class scheme based on occupational profile while people in similar professions tend to have similar employment biographies, but not use the current labor status as a conceptual basis of outsiderness. Then we can explore the different risk groups in the dual labor market in different regimes. Therefore, this study will use three welfare regime types from Esping-Andersen, then add Southern and East Asia model. We will compare to these five welfare regimes and discuss what the extent to which labor market segmentation leads to economic, social and political insider-outsider divides under the different regimes. Finally, we could open the dialogue between Liberal, Continental, Nordic, Southern and East Asia.

After comparative analyze, the results show that there is the highest proportion of outsider in Liberal regime, and most of them are low-skilled persons, secondly only to the southern countries. It also has significant differences in the training opportunity and in union participation. In Nordic countries, labor market segmentation is less between insider and outsider representation but more strongly biased toward women; Continental European countries showing a highly gendered labor market, income gap and training opportunities vary greatly; The labor market in Southern regime is less dualized than other regimes in some variable（such as gender, gross income）. However, the lower levels of inequality simply reflect the poor job conditions even for insiders. East Asia countries also have highly segmentation in gender. And it has wide gross income gap and generation segmentation. But there is no obvious dualization in political integration. Finally, we will discuss about the inequality in various institutions in East Asia countries, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan.

目錄 i
圖目錄 ii
表目錄 ii
第壹章 序論-------------------------------1
第二節 研究動機----------------------------3
第三節 章節安排----------------------------6

第貳章 文獻探討-----------------------------8
第一節 何謂勞動雙元化-----------------------8
第二節 勞動市場上的圈內人與圈外人-------------9
第三節 福利國家中的勞動市場雙元化------------16

第参章 研究設計---------------------------35
第一節 資料來源---------------------------35
第二節 變項測量---------------------------36
第三節 研究方法與研究架構-------------------40

第肆章 各福利體制的雙元化：研究發現與分析-------43
第一節 分析各體制的圈內人與圈外人之結果--------43
第二節 勞動市場的雙元化現象------------------48
第三節 政治整合的雙元化現象------------------53

第伍章 結論與建議---------------------------55
第一節 研究結論----------------------------55
第二節 研究限制與建議-----------------------58

參考文獻-----------------------------------59

中文資料
呂建德、邱靖惠、陳昭榮(2003)。經濟全球化對於台灣勞動體制的衝擊：競爭與保護部門的差異。台灣社會學年會論文集。
李易駿(2002)。全球化對社會福利的挑戰：兼論台灣個案初探。台灣社會福利學刊，2，頁119-154。
李易駿(2006)。社會政策與立法十五講。台中。
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，台灣社會學刊，31，頁189-241。
李健鴻(2011)。當前青年失業的原因、問題與對策。就業安全半年刊，100年第1 期。http://www2.evta.gov.tw/safe/docs/safe95/userplane/half_year_display.asp? menu_id=3&submenu_id=511&ap_id=1301
李碧涵(2000)。市場、國家與制度安排：福利國家社會管制方式變遷，論文發表於《全球化下的社會學想像：國家、經濟與社會研討會》，台灣大學社會學系與台灣社會學社主辦，台北市：台大應力學所國際會議廳與台大社會學系館。民國89年1月15-16日。頁1-21。於：http://www.ios.sinica.edu.tw/tsawww/social_image/李碧涵.rtf
李碧涵、賴俊帆(2009)。婦女就業與彈性工時。台灣勞工季刊，17，43-49。
李誠(2009)。高彈性？高保障？彈性兼安全？什麼是適合我們國情的勞動市場政策。就業安全半年刊，98年第2期。http://www2.evta.gov.tw/safe/docs/safe95/userplane/half_year_display.asp?menu_id=3&submenu_id=483&ap_id=975
林宗弘(2012)。〈台灣的後工業化: 階級結構的轉型與社會不平等，1992-2007(期刊論文修訂重刊)〉，謝雨生、傅仰止編，《社會階層與勞動市場》，頁1-61，台北市：中央研究院社會學研究所。
陳盈方(2005)。東亞生產體制與社會政策的制度鑲嵌：日本與台灣的比較(碩士論文)。取自http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi/ccd=xjg0Xw/record?r1=1&h1=0
曾敏傑、徐毅君(2005)。〈勞動市場結構與失業現象的關聯〉。台灣社會福利學刊，4(2)，頁131-168。
李誠(2000)。勞動市場彈性與安全之研究。經建會委託之專題研究成果報告(編號：(96)038.803)。臺北市：行政院
英文文獻
Anderson, J.C., Pontusson, J. (2007). Workers, worries and welfare states: Social protection and job insecurity in 15 OECD countries. European Journal of Political Research 46, 211-235. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2007.00692.x
Baker, D., Glyn, A., Howell, D., Schmitt J.(2004). Labor Market Institutions and Unemployment: A Critical Assessment of the Cross-country Evidence: Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies, Havard University.
Biavaschi, C., Eichhorst, W., Giulietti, C.,Kendzia, M.J., Muravyev, A.,Pieters, J., …Zimmermann, K.F. (2012). Youth Unemployment and Vocational Training (IZA No. 6890). Retrieved from Bonn, Institute for the Study of Labor website: http://www. iza.org/en/webcontent/publications/papers/viewAbstract?dp_id=6890
Bentolila, S., Jimeno, J. J., Dolado, J. F.(2011). Reforming an Insider-Outsider Labor Market: The Spanish Experience ( IZA, No 6186). Retrieved from Bonn, Institute for the Study of Labor website: http://ftp.iza.org/dp6186.pdf
Bridgen, P., Meyer, T. (2008) Class, gender and chance: the social division of welfare and occupational pensions in the United Kingdom. Ageing and Society, 28 (3), 353-381. doi:10.1017/S0144686X07006873
Davidsson, J., Naczyk, M. (2009). The Insiders and Outsiders of Dualisation: A Literature Review (REC-WP 08/2010). Retrieved from the University of Edinburgh, Dissemination and Dialogue Centre website: http://www.mwpweb.eu/1/ 22/resources/publication_414.pdf
Doeringer, P. B., Piore, M. J.(1971). Internal Labor Markets and Manpower
Analysis. Lexington. Mass.: Heath
Emmenegger, P., Häusermann, S., Palier, B., and Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (2012). The Age of Dualization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Emmenegger, P.(2010). Gendering Insiders and Outsiders: Labor Market Status and Preferences for Job Security (REC-WP 02/2010). Retrieved from the University of Edinburgh, Dissemination and Dialogue Centre website: http://www.socialpolicy
.ed.ac.uk/recwowepudiac/working_papers/
Emmenegger,. (2009). Barriers to Entry: Insider/Outsider Politics and the Political Determinants of Job Security Regulations. Journal of European Social Policy, 19(2): 131-146.
Esping-Andersen, G.(1990). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Esping-Andersen, G.(1996). Welfare States in Transition. Social Security in the New Global Economy. London: Sage
Esping-Andersen, G.(1999). Post Trade-Union Organization and Industrial Relations in Twelve Countries, in Herbert Kitschelt, Peter Lange, Gary Marks, John D. Stephens(eds.). Coutinuity and Change in Contemporary Capitalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
─ (1999b)., in Herbert Kitschelt, Peter Lange, Gary Marks, John D. Stephens(eds.). Coutinuity and Change in Contemporary Capitalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Estevez-Abe, M., Iversen, T. &Soskice, D. (2001). Social protection and the formation of skills: a reinterpretation of the welfare state. Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage, 145-183.
Fleckenstein, T., Schwander, A.M., & and Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (2011). The Dual Transformation of Social Protection and Human Capital: Comparing Britain and Germany. Comparative Political Studies.
Goos, M., Manning A. (2007). Lousy and Lovely Jobs: the Rising Polarization of Work in Britain, Review of Economics and Statistics, 89(1),118-133.
Häusermann, S., Schwander, H.(2009). Indentifying Outsiders Across Countries: Similarities and Differences in the Patterns of Dualization. (REC-WP 02/2010). Retrieved from the University of Edinburgh, Dissemination and Dialogue Centre website: http://oxpo.politics.ox.ac.uk/publications/JDS_Schwander-Hausermann.pdf
Häusermann, S., Schwander, H.(2012). Varieties Dualizations? In Emmenegger, P., Häusermann, S., Palier, B., and Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (eds.), The Age of Dualization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Häusermann, S.(2010). The Politics of Welfare State Reform in Continental Europe: Modernization in Hard Times, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Häusermann, S., and Schwander, H. (2010, April). Explaining Welfare preferences in dualized societies. Paper presented at the 17th Conference of Europeanists in Montreal, Canada.
Hsiao, H. H. (2012). Precarious Work in Taiwan: A Profile. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(3), 373-389.
Jacob, D. (1998). Social Welfare Systems in East Asia: A comparative analysis including private welfare, London: London School of Economics.
Jung, D. C., Park, C. U.(2013). A new direction in the welfare-work nexus in South Korea, Journal of Asian Public Policy, 6(1), 60-80
Lee, Sophia S.Y.(2011). The Evolution of Welfare Production Regime in East Asia: A Comparative Study of Korea, Japan and Taiwan. The Korean Journal of Policy Studies, 26(1), 49-75.
Lindbeck, A., Snower, D.(1988). The insider-outsider theory of employment and unemployment. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Lindvall, J. and Rueda, D.(2013). The Insider–Outsider Dilemma. British Journal of Political Science, 1-16. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10. 1017/S000 7123412000804
Lue, J.D. & Park, C.-U.(2013). Beyond productivist social policy –the East Asian welfare–work nexus intransition, Journal of Asian Public Policy, 6(1), 1-9.
Miura, M. (2012). Welfare through Work: Conservative Ideas, Partisan Dynamics, and Social Protection in Japan, 65-92. Cornell : Cornell University Press
Oesch, D. (2006). Redrawing the Class Map: Stratification and Institutions in Germany, Britain, Sweden and Switzerland, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Oesch, D. (2008). Stratifying Welfare States: Class Differences in Pension Coverage in Britain, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland. Swiss Journal of Sociology, 34(3): 533-554.
Palier, B., Thelen, K. (2010). Institutional Dualism: Complementarities and Change in France and Germany. Politics&Sociery, 38(1), 119-148.
Peng, I. (2012). Economic Dualization in Japan and South Korea. In P. Emmenegger, S. Hausermann, B. Palier & M. Seeleib-Kaiser (Eds.), The Age of Dualization: The Changing Face of Inequality in Deindustrializing Societies (pp. 226-249). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rosenberg, S. (1991). From Segmentation to Flexibility: A Selective Survey. Review of Radical Political Economics, 23(1 & 2), 71-79.
Rueda, D. (2005). Insider-Outsider Politics in Industrialized Democracies: The Challenge to Social Democratic Parties. American Political Science Review, 99(1): 61-74.
Rueda, D. (2007). Social Democracy Inside Out, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schwander, H. (2010, January). Assessing the Extent of Dualization: Differences in Pension Coverage between Insiders and Outsiders in Britain, Switzerland and Sweden. Paper prepared for presentation at the annual meeting of the Swiss Political Science Association. University of Geneva.
Sigeman, T. (2009). Insiders and Outsiders in the Labour Market: Experiences of a Nordic Welfare State in Labour Law Perspective. Stockholm Institute for Scandianvian Law, 265-278.
Song, J. (2012). Economic Distress, Labor Market Reforms, and Dualism in Japan and korea. An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 25(3): 415-438. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0491.2012.01566.x
Tarohmaru, H(2011). Income inequality between standard and nonstandard employment in Japan, Korea and Taiwan, In Y. Sato & J. Imai(Eds.), Japan’s New Inequality: Intersection of Employment Reforms and Welfare Arrangements, Trans Pacific Press, 54-70.
Verick, S.(2009). Who Is Hit Hardest during a Financial Crisis? The Vulnerability of Young Men and Women to Unemployment in an Economic Downturn (IZA, No.4359). Bonn: The Institute for the Study of Labor(IZA)
Yashiro, N. (2011). Myths about Japanese employment practices: An increasing insider−outsider conflict of interests. Contemporary Japan, 23, 133-155. DOI 10.1515/cj.2011.008
Yu, W.H. (2009). Gendered Trajectories: Women, Work and Social Changes in Japan and Taiwan. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Yun, J.W.(2008). Reforming the Dualities. The Politics of Labor Market Reform in Contemporary East Asia. University of California.
Won S.Y., & Pascall G.(2004). A Confucian War over Childcare? Practice and Policy in Childcare and Their Implications for Understanding the Korean Gender Regime, Social Policy & Administration, 38(3), 270-289.

網路資料
行政院主計處人力資源統計年報資料(2012)。取得日期：102年5月1日。
http://www.stat.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=18844&ctNode=4944
國際經濟合作與發展組織(OECD)2012年就業統計資料。取得日期：101年10月28日。http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=FTPTC_I
國際經濟合作與發展組織(OECD)2011年統計資料庫。取得日期：102年5月1日。 http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx