公共政策制定一直被視為是門理性解決問題的科學。然而，文獻中還 未充分的檢視政策中想解決的「問題」是如何在特殊的情境下被賦予特定 的意義。此研究運用在台灣進行的一比較案例研究來觀察政策創新是如何 被當作是個工具來解決三個公共領域的各種問題。此研究提供一個實作主 義的切入點，去發掘政策制定者如何在每日公務的處理中詮釋他們遇到的 問題，並認為透過自我省思的練習，政策制定者及研究者可加強其創新能 力。在此研究中，將有兩階段的問題化分析被執行。第一階段進行一個三 位體分析，剖析每個政策創新中的威信度(ethos)、理法(logos)及情感(pathos)面向；第二階段則採用一個修改過的Bacchi「這問題代表為何」(WPR)研究取向來系統化的分析問題化及批判政策創新過程中的提問與假設。

Public policymaking has long been considered a science of rational problem solving. However, the literature has not yet adequately addressed how policy “problems” are given specific meanings in particular contexts. This research uses a comparative empirical study in Taiwan to observe the process of problem identification in three different policy domains. This study contributes to an understanding of the practical logic of policy making as individual policy practitioners assign interpretations to “problems” in their daily practices and argues the need for policy analysts and policy-makers to be self-reflexive to enhance problem solving capability. A two-phase problematization analysis is performed: first a triadic analysis of the ethos, logos and pathos of problem solving cases; second, Bacchi’s ‘What’s the problem represented to be?” (WPR) approach is adapted and modified as a systematic guideline for problematizing and critically reflecting on the process of problem representation by questioning assumptions.