《台灣社會學》

傳統主導福利國家改革的觀點認為，福利國家面臨內外交迫的變遷壓力，無法再持續實踐慷慨的福利承諾，緊縮改革是確保福利國家永續運作的對策之一，但不同於福利國家榮景時期，政治人物樂於福利加碼爭取選民支持，福利刪減是十分不受歡迎的改革行動，經常招致選舉懲罰而丟失權力的風險，成為民主競爭下的政治禁忌，政治人物只有在找到避免責難的政治策略，降低選票後座力的前提之下，緊縮才會獲得實踐的契機。然而，如果福利緊縮是冒險的政治行動，蔡英文政府為何願意投入推動年金改革，動機為何？不過年金改革不代表著成果會自然水到渠成，仍可能得面對既得利益者的頑強抵抗，政治行動者必須仰賴政治策略來化解各方阻力，那麼蔡英文政府所採取的政治策略為何？另一方面，多數國家推動年金改革都選擇低調行事來避免殃及選舉，但依舊難以避免引起龐大的政治衝突，蔡英文政府反而嘗試將緊縮改革作為爭取選票的政績，十分值得進一步考察。本研究指出，從蔡英文政府年金改革的經驗分析可以發現，福利刪減如何成為可能，取決於政治行動者的政治策略，並且是在有利的制度結構與選舉條件支持之下發生。

The traditional perspective toward welfare state reforms contends that welfare states can no longer sustain generous welfare promises in the face of intense pressure for change, with austerity measures among the possible strategies to ensure sustainable operation. However, welfare cutbacks are highly unpopular policy reforms that often lead to electoral punishment and the loss of power for incumbents. Politicians can only consider welfare cutbacks when they have found strategies to mitigate the backlash. Yet despite the political risk associated with welfare cutbacks, the Tsai Ing-wen administration committed to pension reform even before taking offi  ce Secondly, from a functionalist perspective, fi scal crises are often the driving force behind reforms, but the Tsai Ing-wen administration prioritized reforming military, civil service, and teacher pensions, while the fi nancially critical labor insurance system was not immediately a part of the political agenda. This raises the question of why the administration selectively pursued pension reform. Furthermore, pension reforms in most countries cause significant political conflicts, necessitating a low-key approach to avoid electoral punishment. In contrast, the Tsai administration attempted to use the reform as a means to solicit public votes. This unconventional approach warrants further investigation. The study demonstrates that the political strategy choices regarding pension reform under the Tsai Ing-wen administration were not made on a whim but rather were constrained by institutional legacies and voter preferences, shaping the final policy outcomes.