「農村再生條例草案」與「農村改建條例草案」之比較研究

A Comparative Study between the Rural Regeneration Act(draft) and the Rural Re-building Act (draft)

林岩(Yein Lin)

指導教授 ： 蕭全政

國立臺灣大學/社會科學院/政治學研究所/碩士(2010年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2010.01096

摘要

從「農村發展政策」的歷史結構鑲嵌及其發展脈絡進行政經分析，台灣的農村發展在國家機關採取「汲取性農業政策」主導下，農業的資源、農地的利用與農村的勞力，都被用來作為發展國家經濟，以及供應都會發展之需；而作為農業發展及農民生活主體的「農村」，長期被忽略與犧牲，以致於農村社會的建設嚴重的落後與不足。
扁政府與馬政府都分別提出「農村發展政策」，但不同政黨所研擬的草案，會隱含不同的政策目標與不同的偏差動員。「農改條例草案」與「農再條例草案」都是經由總統親自指示推動辦理，再交由其重要幕僚擘劃研擬；總統還必須親自與反對者溝通，而顯示農村政策的複雜政治性與高度爭議性。
「農村改建條例草案」編列基金一千億元，另外「農村再生條例草案」基金卻被立委加碼至二千億元，預算變成民進黨版的2倍；兩者都是以全國4,000個農村進行更新改造工作，但預算卻完全不同。「農改條例草案」由內政部主政、「農再條例草案」則由農委會負責，不同主辦機關的政策執行能力完全不同，其對農村未來的發展也必然不同。「農改條例草案」的第四章「田園社區之開發」與「農再條例草案」第三章的「農村土地活化」，都是外界持較多反對意見的部分；這兩章都涉及土地開發的利益問題，以致於讓外界高度質疑政策推動之真正目的。
「農村發展政策」必須考慮農業「三生功能」，更須配合「國土空間規劃」與「縣市合併改制」等國家整體發展政策，並作前瞻創新的規劃，農村才會有美好的發展遠景。

關鍵字

農村再生 ； 農村改建 ； 農村政策 ； 政經分析 ； 偏差動員

並列摘要

Analyzing the political and economy in terms of the historically embedded structure and the development of the Taiwan rural development policy, agriculture related resources, land used, and the manpower in the rural villages are all used for developing Taiwan’s economy and the metropolis, especially under the government’s domination of extractive agriculture policy. Rural villages, as the living basis for the farmers and agricultural development, had been passed over and sacrificed, causing the backward and shortages of infrastructures in rural communities.
Both Ma administration and Chen administration proposed “rural development policy” separately; however, the drafts containing diverse policies and the mobilization of bias raised from one party was very different from the other. The Rural Re-building Act draft and the Rural regeneration Act draft were instructed by former President Chen and President Ma respectively, and developed by the administrative agencies. The rural development policy is so complicated and controversial, so both Presidents had to negotiate with the objectors in person.
The main differences between these two acts are as follows. First of all, the Rural Re-building Act draft drew a budget of one hundred billions, but the Rural Regeneration Act draft were about double in compare with the former administration and reached two hundred billions after been raised by the legislators. Secondly, both acts were committed to remodel 4,000 nationwide rural villages, but the bases of budget plans were so different. In addition, the Ministry of the Interior was in charge of the former act; however, the Council of Agriculture is responsible for the latter one. The fact shows that governed by different authorities came up with different implementing competence, same as rural villages development in the long term. Finally, many outsiders dissented the chapter four of Rural Re-building Act draft (rural community development) and the chapter three of the Rural Regeneration Act draft (activated village land), because these two chapters were both involved in advantages of land development, causing the opponents wondering the main driving force of rural development policy.
To building a better perspective of Taiwan’s rural village, the rural development policy should integrate with three vital agricultural functions-productivity, livelihood and ecology, harmony with national development policies, including national spatial planning and county-city municipality restructuring policy, and eventually, mark out a more prospective and innovative plan for the rural villages.

並列關鍵字

Rural regeneration ； Rural re-building ； Rural policy ； Political and economy analysis ； the mobilization of bias

參考文獻

王玉真，2005。《現階段農地釋出執行問題之研究》，台北：台灣大學政治研究所碩士論文。

方瓊瑤，2006。《社區總體營造的政治經濟分析，1965-2005》，台北：臺灣大學政治學系研究所碩士論文。

陳武雄，2009a。〈通過農村再生條例不能拖〉，《農政與農情》，202：6-9。

台灣教會公報週刊，2009。〈農村再生條例未能讓農村再生〉，2979：4。

立法院法制局，2008。《「農村再生條例草案」評估報告》，台北：立法院法制局。