綠色堡壘：台北新圓環之綠活論述、自然再現與偽公共空間

Green Fortress: Green-life Discourses, Representations of Nature, and Pseudo-public space of New Jiancheng Circle, Taipei

10.3966/101632122015030091006

邱啟新(Chi-Hsin Chiu)

都市再生 ； 自然再現 ； 公私合夥 ； 偽公共空間 ； Urban Redevelopment ； Representation of Nature ； Public-private Partnership ； Pseudo-public Space

建築學報

91期（2015 / 03 / 01）

99 - 118

繁體中文

建成圓環改建緣起於市場現代化政策，受台北市都市發展影響，納入新自由主義治理範疇，採綠活導向之ROT模式，重新定位場所機能與再生地方意象。本文分析該模式之歷史意義與市民使用經驗，研究方法為歷史分析、行為地圖調查、半結構訪談，透過政治生態學理論，探討自然在圓環更新案之意義轉變。第一部份探討圓環歷史之自然形式變遷，以2000年初台北車站特定區規劃採用之綠活論述與圓環最初之綠地構想，作為2007年民營化後綠活設計之對照點；第二部分評估市民使用空間之經驗，以定位2012年後自然在新圓環之角色。研究發現圓環從初期綠地構想、綠色消費，至現階段之複合展館，自然元素從實質自然，轉變至社會自然，最終成符號化之第三自然；民眾隨之產生高級化與現代感、神秘感與領域性、排外性與壓迫感三大面向感受。隨圓環之自然層級改變，場所公共性逐漸降低，本文發展出「綠色堡壘」概念界定挪用綠活意象之「偽公共空間」（pseudo-public space）與都市再生策略，雖創造高品味意象，卻缺乏活動包容性與空間友善性，犧牲場所可提供之公共生活，長期終難以真正活絡地區。結論反思自然元素在建築設計中角色，且建議政府、專業者與民眾可改善前述問題之作法。

Beyond a modernized marketplace, Jiangcheng Circle in Taipei has become an object of the city's neoliberal urban governance since the early 2000s. Holding a ROT contract with the Municipality, a company remodels the building into a facility symbolic of green lifestyle by taking major influence from the ＂nature＂. This paper examines the historical significance of its green-life oriented redevelopment, while evaluating users' experiences. Research methods include historical analysis, behavior mapping and semi-structured interviews. The analyses employ a framework of political ecology to uncover the implications of the redevelopment. The first part reviews the changing forms of nature, contrasting the post-privatization period with the early 2000s when green-life inspired planning discourses first emerged. The second part evaluates users' experiences to clarify the roles of nature after 2012. The paper considers the city's original plan of green space as well as the investor's green-consumption business as the Second Nature, while identifying the latest uses of landscape design and horticulture as the Third Nature. As the level of nature changes, Jiangcheng Circle becomes an exclusive environment. Users perceive it as a place characterized by such images as ＂modern and high-end ＂, ＂mysterious and territorial＂, ＂exclusive and confined＂. The paper develops the concept of ＂Green Fortress＂ to theorize a new type of ＂pseudo-public space＂. A ＂Green Fortress＂ may temporarily catalyze property development with enhanced images, while failing to revive a neighborhood in the long run. The conclusions rethink the significance of nature embodied in architectural design, suggesting solutions for public officials and design professionals.

1. 江尚書、周素卿、吳幸玲(2010)。都市再發展與新自由主義治理的經驗模式：以台北車站特定專用區之開發為例。都市與計劃，37(2)，167 -191。
   連結：
2. 吳曼寧（2011/11/2）。建成圓環轉型再出發，改賣有機蔬果。聯合報，A3。Wu, M. (2011/11/2). Jiancheng Circle reopened: an Organic farm produce market. United Daily, A3.
3. Smith, N. (2009). Nature as accumulation strategy. Retrieved Mon date, 20xx from http://neil-smith.net.
4. 楊正海（2011/11/4）。台北圓環變身將賣鮮蔬好樂活引進「農夫市場」模式。聯合晚報，A10。Yang, C. (2011/11/4). A new farmer's market will be located in Jiancheng Circle. United Daily, A10.
5. 郭安家（2012/2/4）。日本「花鳥園」餐飲集團將進駐圓環。聯合報，A3。Kuo, A. (2012/2/4). Kamo group, the owner of Japanese Kachoen, will operate in Jiancheng Circle. United Daily, A3.
6. Armstrong, W.(ed.),McGee, T. G.(ed.)(1985).Theaters of Accumulation.NY, USA:Methuen & Co.
7. Baker, T.(2011).London, UK,Urban Laboratory, University College London.
8. Bourdieu, P.,Nice, R.(trans.)(1984).Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste.London, UK:Routledge.
9. Braun, B.(ed.),Castree, N.(ed.)(1998).Remaking Reality: Nature at the Millenium.London, UK:Routledge.
10. Brenner, N.,Theodore, N.(2002).Cities and the geographies of 'actually existing' neoliberalism.Antipode,34(3),349-379.
11. Bromley, R.(ed.),Gerry, C.(ed.)(1979).Casual Work and Poverty in Third World Cities.NY, USA:John Wiley & Sons.
12. Chiu, C.(2013).Informal management, interactive performance: Street vendors and police in a Taipei Night Market.International Development Planning Review,35(4),335-352.
13. Escobar, A.(1998).Whose knowledge, whose nature? Biodiversity, conservation, and the political ecology of social movements.Journal of Political Ecology,5,53-82.
14. Harvey, D.(1989).From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: The transformation in urban governance.Geografiska Annaler,71(1),3-17.
15. Jordan, D. K.(ed.),Morris, A. D.(ed.),Moskowitz, M. L.(ed.)(2004).The Minor Arts of Daily Life: Popular Culture in Taiwan.HI, USA:University of Hawaii Press.
16. Mitchell, D.(2003).The Right to the City: Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space.NY, USA:The Guilford Press.
17. Ong, A.(2006).Neoliberalism as Exception: Mutations in Citizenship and Sovereignty.NC, USA:Duke University Press.
18. Portes, A.(ed.),Castells, M.(ed.),Benton, L. A.(ed.)(1989).The Informal Economy: Studies in Advanced and Less Developed Countries.MD, USA:John Hopkins University Press.
19. Smart, A.,Smart, J.(2005).Petty Capitalists and Globalization: Flexibility, Entrepreneurship and Economic Development.NY, USA:State University of New York Press.
20. Smith, N.(1984).Uneven Development: Nature, Capital, and the Production of Space.GA, USA:University of Georgia Press.
21. Sorkin, M.(ed.)(1992).Variation on a Theme Park: The New American City and the End of Public Space.NY, USA:Hill and Wang.
22. Wark, M.(1994).Third nature.Cultural Studies,8,115-132.
23. Yeo, S. J.,Hee, L.,Heng, C. K.(2012).Urban informality and everyday (night)life: A field study in Singapore.International Development Planning Review,34(4),369-390.
24. Yu, S. D.(1995).CA, USA,Department of Humanities, University of California.
25. Zukin, S.(2009).Naked City.London, UK:Oxford University Press.
26. Zukin, S.(1995).The Cultures of Cities.MA, USA:Blackwell.
27. Zukin, S.(1982).Loft Living: Culture and Capital in Urban Change.NY, USA:Rutgers University Press.
28. 王東奎(1989)。台中市=Taichung，東海大學建築及都市設計研究所=Department of Architecture, TungHai University。
29. 江宗霖(2004)。台北市=Taipei，國立台灣大學建築與城鄉研究所=Department of Graduate Institute of Building & Planning, National Taiwan University。
30. 行政院環保署(2012)。綠色生活及消費指引。
31. 吳英明(1996)。公私部門協力關係之研究：兼論公私部門聯合開發與都市發展。高雄市=Kaohsiung:復文圖書=Fuwen Books。
32. 李尚叡、高嘉濃、林建華、蘇重、威鹿島大睦(2007)。臺北車站特定專用區歷史發展新契機－C1/D1聯合開發大樓與機場捷運臺北站之興建。捷運技術半年刊，36，117-130。
33. 張文怡(2005)。台北市=Taipei，國立台北大學都市計畫研究所=Department of Graduate Institute of Urban Planning, National Taipei University。
34. 張晉維(2010)。台北市=Taipei，國立台灣大學建築與城鄉研究所=Department of Graduate Institute of Building & Planning, National Taiwan University。
35. 梁瑋倩(2008)。新北市=New Taipei City，淡江大學公共行政學系公共政策研究所=Department of Public Administration, Tamkang University。
36. 郭中端、、崛込憲二(1994)。從圓環小吃話圓環今昔。台北文獻，110，145-153。
37. 陳盈秀(2012)。台北市=Taipei，國立台灣大學地理環境資源學研究所=Department of Geography, National Taiwan University。
38. 陳鵬宇(2009)。台北市=Taipei，國立台灣大學地理環境資源學研究所=Department of Geography, National Taiwan University。
39. 黃鈞毅(2008)。新竹縣=Hsinchu County，中華大學行政管理學研究所=Department of Public Administration, ChungHua University。
40. 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，17，12l-148。
41. 薛德升、黄耿志(2008)。管制之外的“管制”：城中村非正規部門的空間集聚與生存狀態—以廣州市下渡村為例。地理研究，27(6)，1390-1399。

1. 高郁婷,王志弘(2022)。公共空間的維護政治：新北市三重區公園的清潔工作。地理學報，103，37-63。
2. 胡海豐(2016)。從「都市治理」到「公司治理」：都市更新的可行性探討。都市與計劃，43(1)，31-57。