本研究欲從宏觀的歷史制度論途徑中之路徑依賴理論觀點，探討樂生事件的發展脈絡。樂生事件源自於1994年，整個事件發展過程中引起諸多疑慮與爭議，惟本研究將聚焦於樂生院在何種情況下被選為捷運機廠預定地、影響事件發展的因素又有哪些？以及相關利害關係人對於事件行為改變程度為何？經由文獻整理描繪出樂生事件的輪廓，以歷史制度論中「路徑依賴」觀點，探討形成樂生事件的基本要素，以及事件的發展脈絡，並了解事件發展歷程中，利害關係人行為改變的情況。進而建構本文的「樂生事件發展路徑之因果關係圖」，並闡釋樂生事件之路徑因果關係；以及檢視新莊里民對樂生事件發展路徑之影響因素的認知看法以及此些影響因素對於樂生事件行為改變程度的影響為何？對樂生事件的軌跡發展做一完整分析。 本文採量化與質化訪談來驗證理論，以了解利害關係人對樂生事件之認知看法，以釐清事件之問題所在。而據以本研究結果顯示： （一）影響事件發展的因素為： 1.關鍵時刻之選擇； 2.制度的強化； 3.反應序列。 （二）新莊里民對事件發展路徑行為改變程度： 1.男性比女性認同反應序列； 2.教育背景為研究所以上比高中（職）、大學或專科認同反應序列； 3.年齡41～50歲比21～30歲及31～40歲之新莊里民，對樂生事件行為改 變程度較正向認同。 （三）樂生事件發展因果關係： 1.關鍵時刻與制度重製之間的關係，獲得驗證； 2.制度重製與反應序列之間的關係，未獲得驗證； 3.關鍵時刻、反應序列與樂生事件行為改變程度之間的關係，獲得驗證。 The research intends to analyze the development of Lo-Sheng case in terms of route dependency perspective of macro historical institutionalism. This case occurred in 1994 and there are several controversial issues in the case, such as factors making the Lo-Sheng become the construction location of the MRT, factors influencing the case, and the extents to which the stakeholders changed. Our research uses literature review to summarize the Lo-Sheng case and uses path dependency perspective of historical institutionalism to discuss the fundamental factors of the case thereby structuring the “Casual relationship diagram of the development of Lo-Sheng case.” We also detect Sinjhuang resident’s opinions concerning factors influencing the Lo-Sheng case and how these factors affect the case thereby summarizing and analyzing the case. The article adopts both quantitative and qualitative method to understand the opinions hold by stakeholders. Our research shows following results: (1) Factors affecting the development of the case include critical juncture, institutional reproduction, and reactive sequence; (2) The extent to which Sinjhuang residents’ behavior changed: 1. Compared with females, males show more support for reactive sequence; 2. Compared with people who has other education backgrounds, one who has master or above education background show more support for reactive sequence; 3. Residents who aged between 41-50 show more positive identification toward the case than ones aged between 31-40; (3) The casual relationship of the development of the case: 1. Relationship between critical juncture and institutional reproduction is valid; 2. Relationship between institutional reproduction and reactive sequence is invalid; 3. Relationship among critical juncture, reactive sequence, and the extent to which the behavior toward the case changed is valid.
