反苗栗後龍福祿壽殯葬管理園區開發案的發展歷程之環境運動分析

台灣自1980年代以來，隨著政治的民主化和經濟的蓬勃發展，民眾的環保意識逐漸抬頭，生活環境充斥著各種汙染與公害影響問題，民眾為了保護自身權益，開始表達對環境惡化的不滿甚至發動各種抗爭行動。鄰避設施的爭議，往往在於政府、廠商的官僚與本位心態，在政策規劃階段未與當地居民妥善溝通、尊重地方聲音，加上現行環評制度的結構性缺失，使得民眾只能被動地接受政策決定，導致環境社會運動在台灣各地方頻頻發生。本研究從「文化構框」和「資源動員」論點，探究「反福祿壽殯葬園區抗爭運動」的發生原因、運動的發展歷程、環境運動框架、組織的動員策略、大眾傳播媒體與網際網路在環境運動中扮演的角色與作用，以及地方政治生態對於環境運動的發展產生之影響力。本研究發現，公共政策在發展階段，地方居民的政策參與權與環境權普遍遭受忽略，政府常以「公共利益」試圖掩蓋其程序的不正義。環境運動是否能號召群眾支持、參與，端看社運組織塑造的「策略性框架」能否說服社會大眾認同；其次，環境運動的策略性框架不僅是抗爭者的武器，政府部門、企業主或支持政府的群眾也可能發起反制框架來打擊社運組織的正當性。地方政治生態、居民年齡結構與經濟背景、組織資源多寡與媒體的意識型態…等因素都有可能影響環境運動的組織策略與未來發展。

關鍵字

反福祿壽殯葬園區開發案；環境運動；鄰避設施；資源動員；框架理論

並列摘要

Since 1980, due to political democratization and economic boom in Taiwan, the public has been aware of environmental protection. Confronting pollution nuisances in living environment, the public to protect their rights starts to bravely declare dissatisfaction with environmental degradation and even protest. The dispute over NIMBY buildings usually comes of bureaucracy and egoism from the government and makers. During the period of policy formulation, they do not have a proper discussion with local residents and respect locals’ voice. Besides, the structural deficiency in the current environmental impact assessment and review forces the public to accept a policy decision leading to frequent environmental movements throughout Taiwan. The study, on the basis of “cultural framing” and “resource mobilization” theory, discusses the cause of “Anti Fulusou Mortuary Service Area Campaign”, the development history of social movements, the framework of environmental movements, organization’s mobilization strategy, the role and function of mass media and internet in environmental movements, and the influence of local political ecology on environmental movements. It is found from the study that during the development of public policy, participation rights of local residents in policy and their environmental rights are generally neglected. The government usually takes advantage of “public interest” to cover up the procedural injustice. Environment movements supported and participated by the public depend on if the public identifies with “strategic framework” created by social movement organization. Next, although the strategic framework for environmental movements is the weapon protesters have, the government, entrepreneurs or government supporters may attack legitimacy of social movement organization with a “countermeasure for the framework”. Factors such as local political ecology, the age structure of residents, resources owned by organization and the ideology of mass media could affect organization strategy and future development of environmental movements.