不只是文化資產保存：由華光社區文化資產保存運動探討如何「賦形」規劃理論

Heritage Preservation and Beyond: Re-materializing Planning Theories with a Case Study of the Preservation Movement of Huaguang

10.6128/CP.43.3.229

黃舒楣(Shu-Mei Huang)

國土活化 ； 文化資產保存 ； 華光社區 ； 臺北刑務所 ； 賦形 ； Revitalization of national assets ； Cultural heritage ； Huaguang ； Taihoku Prison ； Materialize

都市與計劃

43卷3期（2016 / 09 / 30）

229 - 260

繁體中文

脫胎於都市化過程之文化資產已然專業化發展，文化與都市規劃之關係卻愈加疏離，且官僚分工忽視了一個重要經驗議題:台灣的文化資產議題多半涉及國有土地規劃課題，而國有土地規劃課題的規劃歷史債務，正可透過文化資產認識來釐清。此課題還有其理論潛力，能回應當代規劃理論探討「去抽象化」或「賦形」理論之迫切性，如何能透過文化資產與規劃的重新對話來落實。本文透過參與式觀察法檢視華光社區文化資產保存運動，反省華光抗爭運動後期啟動的文資保存論述 (2013 年 2 月∼2014 年 11 月)，如何重新定義「拆除」為「破壞」，由之探討如何以文化資產保存過程的物質環境變動來「賦形」規劃理論於實踐。

Cultural heritage, which partially resulted from processes of urbanization, has become a profession of its own right. The professionalization of cultural heritage, however, alienates it from the field of planning. The tendency leaves a significant issue unattended, which is, that much of built heritage in Taiwan is located on state properties intertwined with planning histories. It is through studying cultural heritage that we may be able to clarify these planning failures and thereof responsibilities. Moreover, the empirical question could enable an exploration into ways to rematerialize planning theories. Based on the authors' participant-observation of the preservation movement as part of the community movement occurring at Huaguang during the period from January 2013 to November 2014, this paper provides a reflective account of the preservation movement. It addresses the following questions: What opportunities and limitations can cultural heritage offer to urban movements against the top-down project and the resulting forced relocation? In which way does it redefines ＂demolition＂ as ＂destruction＂ and allows the tension between residents and citizen to materialize? The analytical results show how cultural heritage can play a large role in re-materializing planning theories into practices.

1. 林崇熙(2010)。文化資產的價值經營。文化資產保存學刊，13，41-56。
   連結：
2. 林崇熙(2009)。文化資產作為一種新科學。文化資產保存學刊，10，13-28。
   連結：
3. 許肇源、連哲民、黃柏璋(2008)。從新莊樂生療養院事件看台灣都市文化資產保存機制之缺失。都市與計劃，35(3)，269-289。
   連結：
4. 榮芳杰、傅朝卿(2009)。「世界文化遺產」的監測機制對文化遺產經營管理的影響與啟示。建築學報，67，57-80。
   連結：
5. 劉厚連(2002)。國家資產經營管理體制問題之探討，兼評「國家資產經營管理委員會」之功能。土地問題研究季刊，1(3)，112-125。
   連結：
6. 劉厚連(2005)。我國公有土地私有化問題之制度分析。土地問題研究季刊，4(1)，70-76。
   連結：
7. 顏亮一(2006)。市民認同、地區發展與都市保存：迪化街個案分析。都市與計劃，33(2)，93-109。
   連結：
8. 顏亮一(2007)。國族認同的時空想像：台灣歷史保存論述的形成與轉化。規劃學報，33，91-106。
   連結：
9. Ashworth, G. J. (2009). Paradigms and paradoxes in heritage as development, In Requalifying Old Places for New Uses, International IAPS-CSBE & HOUSING Network, Istanbul..
10. Wirth, L. (1938). Urbanism as a way of life. American Journal of Sociology, 44(1): 1-24. DOI: 10.1086/217913.
11. Alcoft, L.(ed.),Potter, E.(ed.)(1993).Feminist Epistemologies.New York:Routledge.
12. Ashworth, G. J.,Graham, B. J.,Tunbridge, J. E.(2007).Pluralising Pasts: Heritage, Identity and Place in Multicultural Societies.London:Pluto Press.
13. Beauregard, R.(2013).The neglected places of practice.Planning Theory & Practice,14(1),8-19.
14. Beauregard, R.(1990).Bringing the city back in.Journal of the American Planning Association,56(2),210-215.
15. Beauregard, R. A.(2012).Planning with things.Journal of Planning Education and Research,32(2),182-190.
16. Bernard, H. R.(1994).Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches.Walnut Creek:AltaMira Press.
17. Campbell, H.(2002).Planning: An Idea of Value.Town Planning Review,73(3),271-288.
18. Casey, E.(1993).Getting Back into Place: Toward a Renewed Understanding of the Place- World.Bloomington, Indiana:Indiana University Press.
19. De Munck, V. C.,Sobo, E. J.(1998).Using methods in the field: A practical introduction and casebook.Walnut Creek:AltaMira Press.
20. DeWalt, K. M.,DeWalt, B. R.(2002).Participant Observation: A Guide for Fieldworkers.Walnut Creek:AltaMira Press.
21. Flyvbjerg, B.(2004).Phronetic planning research: Theoretical and methodological reflections.Planning Theory & Practice,5(3),283-306.
22. Flyvbjerg, B.(1998).Rationality and Power: Democracy in Practice.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
23. Forester, J.(2006).Exploring urban practice in a democratising society: Opportunities, techniques and challenges.Development Southern Africa,23(5),569-586.
24. Forester, J.(1999).The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes.Cambridge MA:MIT Press.
25. Gold, R. L.(1958).Roles in sociological field observations.Social Forces,36,217-223.
26. Graham, B.,Ashworth, G. J.,Tunbridge, J. E.(2000).A Geography of Heritage: Power, Culture, and Economy.London:Arnold.
27. Green, B.(2009).Understanding and Researching Professional Practice.Rotterdam:Sense Publishers.
28. Habermas, J.,McCarthy, T. A.(trans.)(1984).Theory of Communicative Action Volume One: Reason and the Rationalization of Society.Boston:Beacon Press.
29. Halbwachs, M.,Coser, L. A.(1992).On Collective Memory.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
30. Harding, S. G.(ed.)(2004).The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader.New York:Routledge.
31. Harrison, P.(2014).Making planning theory real.Planning Theory,13(1),65-81.
32. Hayden, D.(1995).The Power of Place: Urban Landscapes as Public History.Cambridge MA:MIT Press.
33. Healey P.(1996).The communicative turn in planning theory and its implications for spatial strategy formations.Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design,23(2),217-234.
34. Hutter, M.(ed.)(2004).The Family Experience: A Reader in Cultural Diversity.Boston:Pearson Education.
35. Innes, J. E.,Booher, D. E.(2010).Planning with Complexity: An Introduction to Collaborative Rationality for Public Policy.Abingdon:Routledge.
36. Jacobs, J.(1961).The Death and Life of Great American Cities.New York:Vintage.
37. Kemmis, S.(2005).Knowing practice: Searching for saliences.Pedagogy, Culture & Society,13(3),391-426.
38. Lefebvre, H.(1991).The Production of Space.Oxford:Blackwell.
39. Lennon, M.(2015).Finding purpose in planning.Journal of Planning Education and Research,35(1),63-75.
40. Ley, D.(1983).A Social Geography of the City.New York:Harper & Row.
41. Ley, D.(1996).The New Middle Class and the Remaking of the Central City.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
42. Low, S. M.(2000).On the Plaza: The Politics of Public Space and Culture.Austin:University of Texas Press.
43. Low, S. M.,Lawrence-Zúñiga, D.(2003).The Anthropology of Space and Place: Locating Culture.Malden:Blackwell.
44. MacIntyre, A. C.(2007).After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory.Notre Dame:University of Notre Dame Press.
45. Marshall, C.,Rossman, G. B.(1995).Designing Qualitative Research.Newbury Park:Sage.
46. Marshall, C.,Rossman.G. B.(1989).Designing Qualitative Research.Thousand Oaks:SAGE.
47. Molotch, H.(1976).The city as a growth machine: Toward a political economy of place.American Journal of Sociology,82(2),309-332.
48. Schmuck, R.(1997).Practical Action Research for Change.Arlington Heights:IRI/Skylight Training and Publishing.
49. Smith, L.(2006).Uses of Heritage.London:Routledge.
50. Thompson, E. P.(1966).History from below.Times Literary Supplement,279-280.
51. Yiftachel, O.(2006).Re-engaging planning theory? Towards 'south-eastern' perspective.Planning Theory,5(3),211-222.
52. Zhang, L.(2010).In Search of Paradise: Middle-Class Living in a Chinese Metropolis.Ithaca:Cornell University Press.
53. 王志弘(2013)。歷史保存的弔詭，公共文化的困境。台灣建築，215，100-103。
54. 王淳熙、傅朝卿(2010)。文化景觀保存維護的永續性實踐。文化與建築研究集刊，14，1-21。
55. 林政佑(2014)。日治時期台灣監獄制度與實踐。臺北:國史館。
56. 侯志仁編(2013)。反造城市：台灣非典型都市規劃術。臺北:左岸。
57. 夏鑄九(1998)。臺灣的古蹟保存：一個批判性回顧。建築與城鄉研究學報，9，1-9。
58. 曾平輝(2008)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺中，東海大學公共事務碩士專班。
59. 華特‧ 班雅明、許綺玲譯(1998)。迎向靈光消逝的年代。臺北:台灣攝影。
60. 黃麗玲(2010)。對臺北市都市更新政策的反思。建築師雜誌，9，93-97。
61. 黃麗玲編(2008)。流動與根著。臺北:台灣社會研究。
62. 楊宜靜(2015)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺北，國立臺灣大學建築與城鄉研究所。
63. 蔡敏真(2012)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺北，國立臺灣大學地理環境資源學研究所。

1. 高郁婷,王志弘(2023)。文化與空間的再連結：「再造歷史現場」政策初探。文化研究，37，7-56。
2. 王志弘(2019)。臺灣都市與區域發展之文化策略批判研究回顧，1990s－2010s。文化研究，29，13-62。
3. 顏亮一,張耕蓉(2022)。文化治理及其不滿：新莊街之都市運動。文化研究，34，21-66。
4. 楊一萌,王志弘(2023)。文化治理的正當化政治：廣州都市更新下恩寧路與泮塘五約的文創產業化。都市與計劃，50(1)，85-119。
5. (2024)。不只是環境議題：臺北市樹木保護的都市政治。地理學報，107，91-128。
6. (2024)。臺北市永春街聚落之分區變更與回饋爭議評析。國立台灣大學建築與城鄉研究學報，24，120-136。