摘要
半農半X的實踐在台灣的新農業運動中儼然成為一個顯著議題，也反映出台灣的農業轉型與鄉鎮社區營造的需求。然而半農的階級身分及其農業勞動，卻也引發正反兩面的爭議。本論文以宜蘭縣深溝村為研究場址，以文本分析與參與 觀察研究法，同步呈現田野環境與行動者的狀態與互動肌理，並以「農藝復興」作為研究觀點，進一步聚焦於深溝村新農民的返鄉務農行動，和他們在實踐半農半X新生活運動中的處境、發展與合作過程，一方面重新理解「半農」作為一個正在形成中的新農民身分與農村共同體範疇，他們如何凸顯、回應與突破傳統農政體制下的治理困境與發展限制，二方面，他們又如何試圖修補資本主義與工業社會中的生活、生產(勞動)、生態與生命所面臨的破壞。 首先，藉由「宜蘭農舍爭議」中有關農舍興建與農地使用的討論，讓「半農」 的存在凸顯農業體制與相關農民福利的管理政策，對農民身份早已出現界定不清的問題。同時也透過半農在農業之外的跨界連結與多方行動，彰顯出農業政策在執行上所衍生的政治、社會與生態各個面向的問題，以及這些問題如何阻礙農業與農村的永續發展。其次，經由探討生產勞動與行銷面的實務經驗，半農跟傳統 農民同樣面臨著國家農業治理與經濟市場之發展規則與困境時，如何以其創新與開放的特性來面對挑戰、突破困境，進而形成具備自我賦權的抵抗意識與自主發展的社群。最後，針對半農在不同的「半 X」創新行動與跨界連結中，透過「農譯/農義/農技藝/農文藝/農記憶」各種不同形式的「轉譯」，讓農業問題的解決能導向社會連帶的重建以及人類與自然關係的修補，並試圖在跨界對話中尋找有別於資本主義的競爭模式與工業社會的異化關係之外，各種人與非人之行動者共存的可能性，並以此達成修復「人─地─農─食」之間複雜的連結、合作與協商的共榮關係。
並列摘要
The idea of half-farmer and half-x, advocated by a Japanese activist Naoki Shiomi, has not only been a significant issue in the new agricultural movement but also has shown what Taiwan agricultural transformation and regional revitalization need. However, half-farmer and half-x is a contested idea that easily causes debates in Taiwan. This study, conducted in Shengou village, Ilan, uses research methods of textual analysis and participated observation, presenting new farmers’ agricultural activities and their interaction with the ecological landscape. In perspective of “Agricultural Renaissance”, this study focuses on why new farmers migrate from cities to the village and they are involved in innovative agricultural activities and how they are engaged in the making of half-farmer. These new farmers, in their collective action and collaboration, on one hand, have formulated as a new identity of half-farmer and built a village community when facing dilemma and limits of traditional agricultural regime. On the other, half-farmers are eager to repair life, labor, and ecology ruined by capitalism and industrial society. This study intends to explore three issues. First, the significance of half-farmer is highlighted in the controversies of farmhouse building and use of agricultural land of Ilan. It shows that the definitions of farmer have been blurred in farmer welfare and management policy. In addition, by way of half-farmer’s cross-boundary connection and multi-level collective actions, political, social, and ecological problems caused by agricultural policy that deter sustainable development of agriculture and village are exposed. Second, facing similar difficulties of agricultural economy and governance with what traditional farmers encounter, half-farmers apply their innovative and flexible solutions, overcoming challenges and empowering their community with consciousness of autonomy and resistance. Finally, half-farmers go beyond their agricultural activities by which they also expand and translate their agricultural labor and experience in linking to build agricultural culture and communal lives in the villager and trying to rebuild social sodality and fix broken relations between people and nature. Eventually, the half-farmers are looking forwards to crafting a creative co-existence between human and non-human actors and overcoming the capitalist competition and industrial alienation that would be potential to reconstruct an agricultural complex for dynamitic and harmonious connection and collaboration among agriculture, human being, environment, and food ways.