領域取向規劃論述之檢討－傅里曼(John Friedmann)的新民粹主義

A Critique of Territorial Approach Planning-John Friedmann's Neo-populism a Review Essay

徐進鈺(Jinn-Yuh Hsu)

《台灣社會研究季刊》 3卷1期 (1991/09) Pp. 151-175

https://doi.org/10.29816/TARQSS.199109.0005

摘要

本文旨在對以傳里曼(J. Friedmann)為代表的領域取向的規劃論述進行介紹與批判。相對於主流的規劃論述而言，傳氏在認識論上與政治立場上進行了斷裂與再建的工作，尤其是揚棄強調垂直分工的傳統規劃模式，他轉向一種新的規劃方式，結合了社會學習與水平發展模式，由鄰里單元作為社會轉化的基地，他稱之為領域取向的規劃方式。本文最後則嚐試通過三方面，包括傳氏在處理社會與空間關係上，對當代國家扮演角色，以及其社會解放的策略等面向，加以進一步討論與批判，以指出這種新人道主義的規劃論述，如不能對複雜的社會過程有更全面性的分析，則極易流入另一形式的社會烏托邦，而無法具體而眞實地改變、轉化社會。

關鍵字

規劃理論 ； 約翰•傅里曼

並列摘要

The conventional concern of planning is defined in terms of the deployment of technical reason in the public domain but Friedmann's aim is to shift to encompass social transformation. He tries to formulate an approach for future planning practice based on an epistemological and political break with mainstream planning. His central vision is the constitution of political commuity based on non-dominating forms of civil association, in which planning plays a facilitating or mediating role. Friedmann attempts to ground the subject of this new planning in elements of civil society, the household, the region, the peasant periphery and the global community, which he called ”territorial systems”. Territorial systems occur on the periphery and are local and self-organizing, whereas functional systems require formal and hierarchical control, nation-state, multinationals and the social classes. For Friedmann the recovery of political community in planning, is synonymous with the recovery of territiorial systems which had been dominated by funitional systems in modern societies.
In his separation of society and space, he exaggerates the degree of harmony within territorial units, sorely misses conflicting interests, and falls for the illusion of territorial utopia. Against the notion of planning as a tool of state domination, Friedmann emanicipates planning to become a weapon to mobilize community. However he resorts to creativity of ”the people”, the analysis is redolent of critical theory's failure to identify a concrete historical agency. Territorial approaches, emphasize a return to small scale and decentralized living patterns, autonomous development, However, this ideology of ”small is beautiful”, in its extreme, won't lead to the paradise of a decentralized regional development, but rather to the hell of local elite domination.

並列關鍵字

planning theory ； John Friedmann