透過您的圖書館登入
IP:44.206.227.65
  • 學位論文

日日新鮮的街道市場: 攤位繫留的跨市場攤販移動與市場形構

Daily Reorganization of Street Market: Tracing Cross-market Mobility in Vending and Mooring

指導教授 : 黃舒楣

摘要


本研究自觀察街道市場作為一個「日日新鮮」,「很好逛」的消費空間出發,意圖理解台灣早晨街道市場,在大多數攤位每日抽換經營攤販的情況下,如何能夠重新組合成一個穩定存續的市場。有鑑於此,本研究並未以過去市場與攤販研究經常採用的「非正式性(informality)」來切入,而是以「移動性(mobility)」作為理解街道市場與攤販營業的取徑,並以「攤販本位」而非「市場本位」的立場,分析攤販究竟為何移動與如何移動的問題。本研究藉由台中市南屯市場的街道形構歷程與現況為例,說明高強度的移動現象對市場形成何種影響,以及市場本身的空間與管理,又是何以支持以「日」間距的高移動性。   本研究發現,基於「早市」的服務範圍較小,相當數量的攤販為了突破個別市場需求飽和的環境限制,不得不行跨市場的移動販售策略。然而,攤販的移動必須本於固著的「攤位」繫留而展開,並非全憑己意。基於攤位繫留的取得有門檻與成本,遂衍伸出攤販的移動與固著攤位繫留取得之間複雜的辯證關係,進而形構了當前街道市場的運作與空間形態。因此,移動不只是一種現象,更以具體的攤位交換、釋出與取得的體系落實在空間當中,甚至成為了少數人藉以牟利的商品與服務。商品化後的攤位調度服務不僅使跨市場移動現象更加普遍,因此帶動的租金上漲更提高了固著營業的門檻。   相較於正式市場一切的物理環境都出自於「固著營業」與「劃定的營業範圍」等考量,除了不容易因應外在環境變化,更因為適合的固著地點難尋,使制度以外的街道市場在城市空間中大行其道。另一方面,以「移動性」為本的街道市場,由隨時處於移動狀態的攤販所構成,遂得以高度彈性地因應各種變化。於是,正式市場因為固著而易死,攤販卻因為「移動」而不滅。一個窮途末路的市場,無法吸引攤販前來營業,遂無從觀察到攤販的「移動」;一個「活著」、「成市」的市場,必然會匯聚各種本於個別攤販營業考量的移動性組合而「日日新鮮」,並持續吸引頻繁造訪的顧客。

關鍵字

移動性 繫留 攤位 攤販 市場

並列摘要


Based on participant-observation of the Natun Market in Taichung city, the author took a mobility approach to reconsider the street market being constituted by different vendors and their movements, which renewed the market on a daily basis and made it more attracting to the footloose consumers. The research aims to understand why and how can these vendors run their business in different market on different day of the week fluently, and how a street market can be reorganized as a stable and sustain space under such high fluid situation. Following the actors on the move, the researcher combined multi-sited participatory observation and interviews to illustrated the emergent phenomenon that no one has identified clearly. Actually, being mobile is essential to the business of vending. On account for the service area of morning market is relatively small, there are quite a few vendors have no choice but to be mobile among different market so as to break through the limitation of market saturation. On the other hand, vendor’s mobility has to be moored to the relatively fixed stalls in different market but there are cost and threshold to access these moorings. Therefore, being mobile/immobile is other than a vendor’s self-decision. It turns out that the dialectic of moorings and mobilities construct both the mechanism of the cross-market mobility and the space of a street market. Mobility itself is not only a phenomenon but also embodied as a system of exchange, release, and attaining stalls in different markets. Besides, it becomes as a commodity and service from which a small amount of people can derive a huge benefit. However, commoditized of mobilities not only lead to the popularization of cross-market mobility but also raise the rent of stalls at large. It becomes harder for a vendor to run the business without being mobile. Going beyond the binary understanding of mobility vs. fixity upon old, formal markets confined by solid boundary and buildings, a street market constituted by mobile vendors is much more adaptive to the change of the socio-economic environment. Street markets which are outside the regulation is everywhere in the city because it is far from easy for the government to find a suitable permanent site to settle down a market. However, it indeed serves as a “market” and still plays an important role in materials supplying in city nowadays. Therefore, the formal market is relatively vulnerable and the street market is resilient due to being fixed or mobile. A dying market is hardly to attract vendors and the mobile phenomenon is nowhere to see. However, a “living” and “booming” market is definitely constituted by different combination of mobile and immobile decision of vendors and attracts people to visit frequently.

並列關鍵字

Mobility Mooring Stall Vendor Market

參考文獻


劉妍妙(2011)。菜市買賣生活的民族誌研究:以台中市公有建國市場與民有東興市場為例(未出版之碩士論文)臺灣大學人類學研究所學位論文,台北市。
吳柏緯(2014)現代住宅計劃中的都市修補術-街道市場於南機場國宅群落的社會空間角色(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣大學建築與城鄉硏究所,台北市。
新竹市議會第四屆第次次臨時大會第一次會議記錄(1995)。新竹市第四屆第二次大會暨第三、四次臨時議會議事錄: 936。
吳鄭重(2004)。“菜市場”的日常生活地理學初探:全球化台北與市場多樣性的生活城市省思。台灣社會研究季刊55: 47-99。
戴伯芬(1994)。誰做攤販?-台灣攤販的歷史形構。台灣社會研究季刊17: 121-148。

延伸閱讀