環境運動的社會力源起：人情初探

賴麒泰(LAI CHI-TAI)

指導教授 ： 王順美

國立臺灣師範大學/理學院/環境教育研究所/碩士(2004年)

摘要

八０年代中期以降，台灣的社會力蓬勃湧現，激烈地衝撞當時的威權體制。九０年代以降，台灣的環境運動在民主化的階段中發展。社會力不再僅僅是突然，或偶發的現象，而是在日常民主生活中持續萌發的一個常態。大多數的社會運動研究僅以外部政治機會結構的改變，來解釋社會力的興起。將集結於環境團體下的諸多行動者，視為沒有歷史、文化，追求簡單目標的個體。視社會力，為“非日常性的、激烈的與憤恨的”抗議與革命。

首先，本研究視社會力為“日常性的、溫和的與愉悅的”抗議與革命。其次，唯有深切理解環境行動者的生命傳記背景、回到環境行動者參與的環境團體、環境行動的現場及日常生活中來深度考察，才能知曉如何在不同情境下轉化為各種行動的基礎。最後，本研究分析單位是「事故」，即「個人」與「他人/群體」間行動/互動方面的資料。綜合以上，本研究企圖正面回答社會內部自主性力量形成的根源。

本研究採紮根理論研究法，資料收集方式主要有參與觀察、深度訪談、問卷調查，及文件分析等，本研究的經驗性發現可以歸納如下：

首先，環境行動者之間的人情類型有三種，分別是同志、同志亦朋友、同志似家人。其次，人情類型的產生繫乎於彼此之間「致力經營」或「不致力經營」人情的策略與技巧，即形成人情類型的機制。環境運動的形成，是透過行動者及其生命傳記背景，在環境的限制下所主動選擇的歷程。訪談資料指出：組織劇碼、議題與策略皆不是中性的。個人在社會關係中，並非由社會文化機械性地規約的；反之，個人是有相當的自由度與自主性的。社會不但模造了個人，個人也在不斷地模造社會。再其次，行動者由一開始原初的身體，進入到不同的人情類型中，慢慢的身體也會起了轉化，漸漸有了享受自然的愉悅身體。甚至，擁有環境權的身體。本研究稱此三階段的轉化歷程，為環境權感受的形成。由「人與人」的關係，發展到「人與人」及「人與自然」彼此交織為生活脈絡的「人情」。

最後，本研究提出了立基於本土經驗的研究架構與結果，期能更充分、正面地解釋九０年代以降台灣環境運動的社會力源起。

關鍵字

社會力 ； 環境運動 ； 紮根理論研究法 ； 人情

並列摘要

In the midterm of 1980s, the period of dictatorship in Taiwan, there were various social forces continuously flourishing and colliding with the contemporary authority. In the 1990s, the period of Taiwan moving toward Democratic consolidation, the environmental movements progressively sprouted up. Hereafter, social forces are no more the occasional or accidental phenomenon, but the germinating normality in the daily life. Most researches in social movements explain the rise of social forces only by the change of external political opportunity structure. In these researches, many actors in the environmental organizations were regarded as people who have no historical concept, no cultural level, and pursue simple goals. Also, social forces were regarded as the attribution of unexpectedness, violence, and resentment.

This research is different. First of all, this research regarded social forces as “expected, mild, and delightful” protests and revolutions. Secondly, only when we thoroughly comprehend the environmental actors’ biographical backgrounds and deeply examine their environmental groups, actions, scenes, and daily life, we can understand how these backgrounds have been transformed into various bases of different activities in different situation. Finally, the analysis unit of this research is “incidents”, that is, the information of action/interaction between “individuals” and “others/groups.” To sum up, this research attempts to positively answer the origin of autonomic forces inside the society.

This research adopts grounded theory approach. In this approach, the main methods of data collection are participating observation, depth interview, questionnaire survey, and text analysis. The “field experience-based” discoveries of this research are concluded as follows.

Firstly, there are three types of relationship among environmental actors. Secondly, these types of relationship were generated from mutually “cultivated” or “decultivated” tactics and skills, which formed the mechanism of relationship. The formation of environmental movements is the process of free-will options from environmental actors and their biographical backgrounds in the context. It’s showed clearly in the interview data that organizational repertoires, issues, and tactics are not neutral. In the social relations, individuals were not mechanically restricted by social culture. On the contrary, individuals have quite a few freedom and autonomy.Society models individuals, and individuals also unceasingly model the society.Thirdly, from their initially original body, actors get into different types of relationship and then their body transformed. Step by step, they go deep into the delighted body of nature enjoyment. They even eventually have the body of owing environmental rights. The above-mentioned three-stage course is the formation of environmental rights perception in this research. That is, the relations of “person to person” goes into the relationship interwove by “person to person” and “person to nature” in the context.

In conclusion, this research brings up the study skeleton and result based on local experience. Hopefully it could completely and positively explain the origin of social force in Taiwan environmental movement since 1990s.

並列關鍵字

social force ； environmental movement ； grounded theory approach ； realationship

參考文獻

丁仁傑(1999)：《社會脈絡中的助人行為：台灣佛教慈濟功德會個案研究》。台北：聯經。

何明修(2003a)：〈政治民主化與環境運動的制度化(1993-1999)〉。《台灣社會研究季刊》，第五十期，頁217-275。

何明修(2003c)：〈自主與依賴：比較反核四運動與反美濃運動中的政治交換模式〉。《臺灣社會學期刊》，第三十期，頁1-49。

李丁讚、林文源(2000)：〈社會力的文化根源：論環境權感受在台灣的歷史形成1970-86〉。《台灣社會研究季刊》，第三十八期，頁133-206。

李丁讚、林文源(2003)：〈社會力的轉化：台灣環保抗爭的組織技術〉。《台灣社會研究季刊》，第五十二期，頁57-119。