地方政府推動城鄉新風貌政策執行機制之研究─以中和市為例

The study of the executive mechanism of how local council to operate the townscape improvement policy-take Janghe City as an example

游鎔潞(Jung-Lu You)

指導教授 ： 蘇瑛敏

國立臺北科技大學/設計學院/建築與都市設計研究所/碩士(2006年)

https://doi.org/10.6841/NTUT.2006.00317

摘要

自1997年「創造城鄉新風貌計畫」萌芽以來，政府希望透過補助各縣市政府之方式改善城鄉風貌，讓台灣每個城市及鄉村發揮獨到魅力與生機。但執行至今，地方的成效各有褒貶，地方政府執行成效不佳，為何無法達成中央政府之期望？到底中央的政策推動至地方，之間產生何種落差？地方在推動與執行上又遭遇何種瓶頸？因此本研究希望由下而上、從地方單位去探討城鄉新風貌之執行機制缺失與落差之癥結點。
本研究針對內政部營建署在1998至2005年時期，推動「創造城鄉新風貌計畫」在各階段政策變遷、執行機制與架構、補助型式、提案與審核方式等內容據以分析，並以中和市城鄉新風貌實施成果之案例、公私部門訪談結果及中日案例操作模式中，探討城鄉新風貌政策變革與執行機制對地方單位造成之問題。
根據研究發現，『人』的因素直接或間接的影響地方政府推動城鄉新風貌政策執行成敗之關鍵，其造成原因有「中央政策與計畫名稱頻繁更動，申請需求一再調整不連貫，使基層單位無所適從，無法真正了解執行方法、計畫方向」、「大眾對創造城鄉新風貌無正確認知」、「基層人力與能力不足無法落實品管成效」、「地方民代政績導向，致使計畫執行倉促無地方特色」、及「社區營造」推動不足。因此本研究提出「勿隨意變動城鄉新風貌政策與計畫名稱」、「以人民為主，政府為輔，從一而終」、「運用NPO團體推動」、「制定城鄉新風貌支援制度促進地區振興」等機制，提供中央與地方政府及中和市未來推動城鄉新風貌政策檢討與執行之參考依據，同時可作為其他地區之借鏡。

關鍵字

城鄉新風貌

並列摘要

The beginning of “Townscape Improvement Program” was from 1997. In order to enhance the identity and potential opportunity of each place, central authorities budget local councils for operating their townscape improvement projects. However, there are still problems of the program: Why local councils cannot reach central authorities’ expectation? Is there a gap between central authorities and local councils? Do local councils have problems to execute and operate their townscape improvement projects? Briefly, it is considerable to find the key issues of the weakness of townscape improvement operation at local council’s position.
There are three dimensions of the study to identify the key issues. First, analyzing the policy transition, executive mechanism, structure, budget types, draft resolution, and examination of “Townscape Improvement Program” by construction and planning agency, ministry of interior between 1998 and 2005. Secondly, interviewing the executive body of townscape improvement projects in Jung-He City. Thirdly, reviewing the executive mechanism and operation of townscape improvement program in Japan, which is the helpful example to formulate the issues.
It is interesting to note that “human being” is the key point to influence the weakness/ strength of townscape improvement operation at local councils’ position. At first, the central authorities change their policy frequently, which confuse local councils to operate the program. Second, local residents misunderstand the spirit of townscape improvement. Third, the number of experts of townscape improvement is not enough in local councils to control the quality of works. Forth, councilors only concern for the achievement the program, which rush the operation badly. Finally, the weakness of community empowering is also one of the issues. In conclusion, there are four suggestions of the study:
1. Do not change the townscape improvement policy and plan if not necessary.
2. The benefit of local residents should be the chief consideration of townscape improvement, not central authorities.
3. NPO should be the primary institution to operate townscape improvement.
4. There should be the auxiliary system to support townscape improvement operation to enhance town development.
In my opinion, these suggestions would be supportive for central authorities and local councils to executive and operate the townscape improvement policy.

並列關鍵字

townscape improvement

參考文獻

[2] 呂佩珊，台灣應用公益信託促進社區環境營造之研究，台北科技大學建築與都市設計研究所碩士論文，2005

[41] 鼎漢國際工程顧問股份有限公司，台北縣中和、新店、新莊、樹林都是在發展計畫總結報告書，台北縣政府委託，2002.3。

[25] 大豐工程顧問股份有限公司，華新街整體商店街風貌規劃設計總結報告書，台北縣中和市公所委託 ，2006。

參考文獻

一、中文部份