- 期刊
- OpenAccess
以東西文明會通之哲學探析社區營造發展
ANALYZING THE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNITY BUILDING BASED ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF CONNECTING EASTERN AND WESTERN CIVILIZATIONS
摘要
自社區總體營造政策開始，提供發展資源的支持與經費的挹注，部份社區進而獲得政府資源強力挹注，成為標竿與典範，讓許多社區開始爭相仿效，但其社區總體營造本意為何不得而知，僅就政府社區營造補助計畫內容開始依樣畫葫蘆，展開似是而非的社區營造計畫。社區總體營造發展的歷史脈絡，其淵源與公共領域與公民社會的發展息息相關，本研究以東西文明會通之哲學方法論探析社區營造發展，其社區營造如同自然數中之第一項是「1」，而政府因產官學極力鼓吹與推廣，衍生出近年來的在地創生、城鄉發展等，即為n+1項，為了持續發展而所延伸，再無限擴張讓社區營造政策得以延續，出現社區產業、故鄉再造、農村再生等諸多名詞，如同理想地奔向∞（無窮），而未加以回歸本質，探求其社區營造發展的本質。期初進行社區營造規劃時，背離社區自身需求，補助費申請習慣後，演變成由官方主導形式，規劃成政府所期望形式，而社區營造重要的是人的參與，此形式忽略了人的存在，跳過民眾自主參與，本應回歸探尋自己社區的自然需求，找到屬於自己的在地化發展，找出社區的自體0（零值），從第一項的社區營造著手發展，逐漸展開屬於自己社區的n+1，再成為自給自足的永續發展標竿社區。
並列摘要
Since the implementation of the community overall construction policy, support and funding have been provided for the development resources. Some communities have received strong government support and become benchmarks, leading many other communities to follow suit. However, the original intention of community overall construction is unclear, and some communities have simply replicated the government's community construction subsidy program, resulting in seemingly inadequate community construction plans. The historical context of community overall construction development is closely related to the development of the public domain and civil society. This study uses a philosophical methodology of East-West civilization communication to explore the development of community construction. Community construction is likened to the number 1 in natural numbers, while the government's strong promotion and advocacy have led to the emergence of recent concepts such as local revitalization and urban-rural development, representing n+1 items that extend and expand the community construction policy to ensure its continuity. This has led to the emergence of terms such as community industry, hometown revitalization, and rural regeneration, all seemingly striving towards infinity without returning to their essence or exploring the fundamental nature of community construction development. Initially, when planning community construction, it deviated from the community's own needs and, after becoming accustomed to subsidy applications, evolved into a form led by the authorities, planning according to the government's expectations. However, the essence of community construction lies in people's participation, and this form overlooks the presence of people and bypasses their independent participation. It should have returned to exploring the natural needs of their own community, finding their own localized development, and identifying the community's self-sufficiency, starting from the first item of community construction and gradually developing their own n+1, ultimately becoming a self-sufficient benchmark community for sustainable development.