地方創生浪潮的發展政權重構與共利性演繹—以桃園大溪為例

Development Regime Reconstruction and Common Benefit Reconfiguration of the Place-making wave──Take the example of the Taoyuan Daxi

張皓鈞(Hao-Chun Chang)

指導教授 ： 黃麗玲

國立臺灣大學/工學院/建築與城鄉研究所/碩士(2020年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU202002396

摘要

「地方創生」是近年台灣城鄉規劃熱門概念。鄉村地方在左派批判的觀點中，是全球化與新自由主義情境下資本流動的受害者；但隨著網絡科技、文化經濟、協力治理的興起，又獲取其自由主義式的可能性。通過「治理政治」與「發展政權」的視角，得以一窺創生時代國家政策、社會、市場與地方團體的複雜關係。
本研究爬梳晚近20年台灣政策系譜與地方實踐典範轉型，指出2010年代台灣民間興起廣義地方創生運動，在文創與社會創新的另類發展可能中，採用「地方事務事業化」的地方經營模式與行動組織，重新編整了地方的發展資源，展現跳脫地方資源分配結構與僵化協力體制的能動性。在政策研究方面，2016年起國發會的地方創生政策，強化公共管理的企業主義思維，企圖引導基層政府與地方治理聯盟靈活回應新發展需求。但也展現了發展型國家在新自由主義轉型的張力，國發會訴諸政治整合與網絡化治理的背後，忽略了創新制度建制與實務困境，導致政策目標混淆、缺乏程序依歸而未獲得廣泛社會參與，也遭遇部會政治和地方侍從主義的後座力。
而社造到創生的政策典範轉型張力，以及個別事業體走向以地方共識為基礎的願景規劃時，乃通過一種交互的發展性論述機制得以協調。國家將城鄉不均與高齡少子化的政府治理危機，訴諸振興地方產業以創造人口回流。而民間行動者通過社群主義的想像共同體營造與新創聯盟，將個人的返鄉行動鑲嵌地方轉型與再發展的過程中，成為從私利實踐公益的可能路徑。通過這種將個別發展性演繹為社會公共性的「共利性」調節，帶有創新創業色彩的地方創生行動者躋身發展政權一員。
桃園大溪的案例具體而微地展現了地方社會的轉變歷程。1996年社造脈絡下的老街保存運動，讓大溪取得了桃園社造與文化觀光龍頭地位。往後小鎮特有的宗族與小商業者社會脈絡，透過社區協力政策被編整進地方發展政權中，但逐漸衍生山頭紛立與觀光模式淺碟化等發展困境。2015年左右出現新興的文創與返鄉青年力量，通過「河西認同」聚落想像，尋求老城區之餘的多元發展面向與公共生活實踐。2019年大嵙崁文教基金會啟動「大嵙崁地方創生」倡議，匯聚部分尋求地方轉型的社會力。希望以參與式過程凝聚地方共識與願景方案，並透過共利性將個別事業體提案賦予公共性意涵，進而向國發會提案，但在實務上面對未獲政府授權與地方競合大於整合的困境。而倡議行動也顯影了地方治理角色在創生浪潮的轉化對位，如大嵙崁文教基金會的非營利組織開拓財源、區公所去自治化的治理失能、文化機構木博館與地方的互為主體性競逐等。創生行動者透過引入了市場力量與商業談判技巧，在地方樹立先行的創生模式典範，展開了跨層級公部門的政治溝通搏奕，重塑地方創生的意涵與治理權力邊界。

關鍵字

地方創生 ； 大溪 ； 另類發展 ； 政權政治 ； 共利性演繹

並列摘要

"Place-making" is a popular concept for urban and rural planning in Taiwan recently. From the perspective of the left wing, rural areas are victims of capital flows of globalization and neoliberalism; but with the rise of Internet technology, cultural economy, and collaborative governance, rural areas have also acquired their possibilities. Through the perspective of " governmentality " and “regime theory”, it is possible to discover the current complex relationship between national policies, society, markets and local community.
This research summarizes the transformation of Taiwan’s policy and the paradigm of local practicen in the last 20 years. Pointing out that in 2010s, Taiwan’s civil society started the generalized movement of Place-making. Under the alternative development possibility of cultural economy and social innovation, it adopted the special local business model and organization type of “Entrepreneurship of local affairs”, and reorganized local development resources. Demonstrate the initiative to break away from the local resource structure and rigid community policy. In terms of policy research, the Place-making policy of the National Development Council(NDC) since 2016 has strengthened the entrepreneurialism of public management, and allow grassroots governments and local governance alliances to respond new development needs flexibly. But it also shows the tension of the developmental state in neoliberal transition. Behind the political integration and networked governance of Place-making policy, it ignores the system innovation and practical dilemmas, resulting in confusion of policy objectives and no widespread response, also encountered the backlash of ministerial politics and local clientelism.
The transformational tensions of Community building to Place-making policy, and individual business entities moving towards local consensus-based planning, are coordinated through an interactive developmental discussion. The national governance crisis of urban-rural inequality and aged society has resorted to revitalizing local industries to create population returns. And the local actors build a community of new creative class alliances, embedding the individual action in the process of local transformation and redevelopment, and become a possible path for self-interest to public welfare. Through this "common benefit" reconfiguration, local actors with a sense of innovation and entrepreneurship are among the members of the development regime.
The case of Taoyuan Daxi shows the course of local society transformation. In 1996, the He-Ping street preservation movement under the context of Community building, local community achieved the leading status of Taoyuan collaborative governance and cultural economy. Then, the social context of the town's clan and small business organization has been integrated into the local development regime through community cooperational policy, but it has gradually evolved into the development dilemma of diversified organizations and thin market of tourism. In 2015s, new forces of cultural economy and returning youth was merging. Through the " Left bank identity" community imagination, they seek out the diversified development orientation and public life practice besides the old street. In 2019, Takoham Culture And Education Foundation launched the " Takoham Place-making " initiative, gathering some of the social forces seeking local transformation. They gather local consensus and vision plans through a participatory process, and give individual business proposals a public meaning through common benefit reconfiguration, and then submit proposals to the NDC. However, in practice, it faces the dilemma of not being authorized by the government and local competition. The initiatives have also shown the role transformation of local governance in Place-making wave, such as the non-profit organization finding financial resources, the de-autonomy of the local government, the subjectivity struggle of cultural institutions and local groups. By applying market forces and commercial negotiation skills, new development regime try to establish a pioneering business model, launched a cross-level political communication, and reshaped the meaning of Place-making and the boundary of governance power.

並列關鍵字

Place-making ； Daxi ； Alternative development ； Regime theory ； Common benefit reconfiguration

參考文獻

Brown,Wendy.（2015）.Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism's Stealth Revolution.Cambridge: MIT Press

Hall,P. （2001）. Urban Geography.London: Routledge

Harvey, D.（1989）. “From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: the transformation in urban governance in late capitalism”, Geografiska Annaler, 71B （1）: 3-17.

Jan Nederveen Pieterse.（2012）.國家教育研究院主譯；謝明珊、陳彥蓁譯。《發展理論：解構與重構》。新北市: 韋伯文化國際。

Sakamoto、川上桃子、王振寰等人（2017）。《未竟的奇蹟：轉型中的台灣經濟與社會》。台北：中央研究院社會所。