● 中文摘要：

　　本研究的目的在綜整國內外修復式司法(RJ)方案成效評估指標及案件評估指標等相關文獻資料後，與我國實證研究結果進行比較分析，對於我國修復式司法試行方案的規劃以及評估提出芻議。報告分為六章： 第一章介紹研究的背景、目的、國內外評估現況、研究架構與研究問題。本章指出其他國家對於RJ的評估已發展出不同的模式，且累積相當多的經驗，而我國尚缺乏系統性的研究，藉此點出研究的重要性以及研究欲回答的具體問題。 第二章介紹研究的設計與實施。本研究進行期間，修復式司法試行方案仍在持續執行中，故研究團隊在蒐集資料的過程中，不斷積極涉入與長期觀察，透過與方案規劃與執行者的密切互動，共同擬定方案改進的策略，採行動研究途徑。研究團隊以多元方式蒐集了質與量的資料。研究工具的設計與研究的實施均依照嚴謹的研究方法原則與流程，並確實遵守研究倫理的要求。 第三章為國外RJ方案評估的比較分析，資料蒐集的範圍為：英國（英格蘭及威爾斯）、澳洲、紐西蘭、德國以及加拿大的RJ經驗與方案評估的發展與現況。分為三節：RJ發展概況之比較、評估指標之比較分析、以及綜合討論。 第四章則為我國RJ方案具體內涵與執行模式分析與檢討。本章分析了各地檢署的執行計畫、案件資料、統計資料、以及問卷調查資料等，輔以七次的焦點座談以及三次的深度訪談後，歸納整理出我國RJ方案的具體內涵、執行模式、影響成效的因素、以及實務上的挑戰。 第五章綜整第三、四章的研究發現，逐一回應最初提出的研究問題，並歸納研究的結論，據以對目前的RJ試行方案提出具體建議。第六章將本研究案的整體研究發現精煉、聚焦為我國RJ方案指導綱領芻議，提供給RJ方案規劃者以及執行者做為參考依據。  

● English Abstract:

     The current report aims to comprehensively review the literature on indicators for effectiveness evaluation and case assessment of restorative justice (RJ) projects. After comparing and analyzing the results of literature review and empirical findings, domestic and abroad, we propose some suggestions for planning and evaluating the RJ practices in the future. The first chapter introduces the background and purpose of the study. It goes on inspecting the contemporary evaluation of RJ practices, and describing the research structure and empirical questions. We point out that many other countries have already developed various assessment models and guidelines through accumulating empirical evidence, while systematic study in RJ domestic practices is still lacking. We summarize this chapter with emphasizing the significance of current report and proposing substantial questions awaiting answers. The second chapter outlines the design and practice of action research approach. This study was conducted during the pioneer project was under enforcement. Therefore, the research team not only has deep involvement in the process, but also interacts constantly with the staff and practitioners of RJ projects, in terms of drafting the strategy for practice advancement. During the action research process, we collect both qualitative and quantitative material through multiple research methods, namely secondary data analysis, questionnaire survey, and interviews. In order to inprove the research validity and reliability, the design of research instrument has strictly followed the principle and process of action research, in addition to adhering to the requirement of research ethics. The third chapter compares and analyzes both the development and state-of-art of RJ project evaluation reports in selected countries, namely UK (England and Wales), Australia, New Zealand, German, and Canada. This chapter is divided into three sections: the previous two sections address both the historical development and the evaluation indicators of each country. It summarized with the comparison of different cases and the reflection of current practices in Taiwan. The fourth chapter turns to discussing the major ingredient of RJ models in Taiwan. We analyze the document collected from 21 district attorney offices, including the project plans, case records, statistics, and survey data. It is then supplemented by transcriptions from seven focus groups and three in-depth interviews to categorize the RJ projects in different settings, and to answer the following questions: What have influenced the effectiveness of RJ projects in the district attorney offices? What are the frontline challenges for RJ practitioners? The fifth chapter integrates and reorganizes our findings and evidence from domestic and international investigation. The initial research questions are answered and, in turn, the research conclusion is generalized. The suggestions for future project are listed. The final research outcomes are further refined and concentrated to develop the RJ guidelines (Chapter six). The RJ guidelines will provide RJ project managers and practitioners as references for future action. 

● 文章連結：

https://goo.gl/mLD2Cu

● 資料來源：

政府研究資訊系統