再建（見）公共性：淡水捷運站青少年街舞空間的社會排除與協商

Navigating Spatial Publicity: Social Exclusion and Negotiation of Young People’s Street Dance Space at Tamsui MRT station

10.6234/JGR.2016.64.02

王鎂欣(Mei-Hsin Wang)；謝雨潔(Yu-Chieh Hsieh)

公共空間 ； 街舞 ； 社會排除 ； 青少年地理學 ； 淡水捷運站 ； public space ； street dance ； social exclusion ； young people’s geography ； Tamsui MRT station

地理研究

64期（2016 / 05 / 01）

27 - 43

繁體中文

本研究依循空間與社會互構的觀點，闡述淡水捷運站公共空間為街舞青少年族群挪用時，所產生的社會排除與協商議題。藉由梳理青少年再造的街舞空間，剖析「成人化的」街舞空間如何被使用者改造，達到喚醒社會重視青少年空間使用與資源分配的目的。本研究使用之研究方法包括觀察法、問卷調查法與深入訪談法。研究參與對象則包含使用淡水捷運站公共空間的行人、街舞青少年、捷運站管理者等。希望了解因為身分、年齡、性別等社會差異，所產生自我與他人的認同與排斥機制。本研究發現可包含以下三點。第一，在各族群對應之下青少年也可能成為社會資源優勢者排除他人的使用權。第二，但可藉由理性行為建立妥善協商機制。第三，排除與協商可藉由解讀立場改變，使公共空間的利他行為更加顯著。社會排除具有多重網絡及轉化的特點，而公共決策機制應賦予青少年表達使用空間需求的管道，避免青少年的公共訴求遭到忽略，並重視多元需求與個體差異，公共空間的公共性才得以提升。

This study adopts the perspective of the mutual construction of space and society. It explores the issues of social exclusion and negotiation in the public space at Tamsui MRT station. Specifically, this research aims to understand the ways in which young people produce and transform the public space into a street dance location. We explore how the 'adultized' public space is reproduced by young street dancers. In doing this, this research emphasizes society needs to pay more attention to young people’s need of space. The methods adopted in the study are observation, questionnaire survey and in-depth interview. The participants include pedestrians, street dancing young people and MRT managers of the Tamsui MRT station. These methods are used to investigate the ways in which the social differences in social roles, age, and gender create the mechanism of inclusion and exclusion between the self and the other. There are three parts to this research finding. First, people with more social resources can exclude others’ usage rights, and therefore teenagers may be excluded. Second, more rational behavior can lead to a negotiable space. Third, if people try to understand others, public spaces would be friendlier. Soc ial exclusion has multiple networks that might be changed. The research findings suggest the publicity of public spaces can be improved if young people have opportunities to express their needs. Respecting the requirements and differences between users of public spaces is also needed.

1. 朱柔若、孫碧霞(2010)。印尼與大陸配偶在台社會排除經驗之研究。教育與社會研究，20，1-52。
   連結：
2. 張培新(2009)。企業社會責任的理論與實踐：以美體小舖為例。美容科技學刊，6(2)，85-102。
   連結：
3. Young, J. (2003). Social Exclusion. http://www.malcolmread.co.uk/JockYoung/social_exclusion.pdf.(accessed 2013/03/19).
4. 全國法規資料庫（ 2013 ） ：《兒童及少年福利與權益保障法》。http://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawOldVer_Vaild.aspx?PCODE=D0050001。（2014/05/06 瀏覽）【Laws and Regulations Database of the Republic of China (2013). The protection of children and youths welfare and rights act. http://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawOldVer_Vaild.aspx?PCODE=D0050001 (accessed 2014/05/06).】
5. 中時電子報（ 2014 ）：〈血汗捷運警1 人顧8500 名通勤族〉，《中時電子報》。http://video.chinatimes.com/video-cate-cnt.aspx?cid=6&nid=129789。（2014/05/02 瀏覽）【Chinatimes (2014). One metro police officer cares for eighty five hundred passengers. Chinatimes. http://video.chinatimes.com/video-cate-cnt.aspx?cid=6&nid=129789 (accessed 2014/05/02).】
6. Bunnell, T.,Yea, S.,Peake, L.,Skelton, L.,Smith, M.(2012).Geographies of friendships.Progress in Human Geography,34(1),490-507.
7. Collins, R.,Esson, J.,Gutierrez, C.O.,Adekunle, A.(2013).Youth in motion: spatialising youth movement(s) in the social sciences.Children's Geographies,11(3),369-376.
8. Holloway, S.L.(2014).Changing children's geographies.Children's Geographies,12(4),377-392.
9. Holloway, S.L.(Ed.),Valentine, G.(Ed.)(2000).Children's Geographies: Playing, Living, Learning.London:Routledge.
10. Katz, C.(2004).Growing up Global: Economic Restructuring and Children's Everyday Lives.Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.
11. Knox, P.,Pinch, S.(2010).Urban Social Geography: An Introduction.London:Routledge.
12. Konstantoni, K.(2012).Children's peer relationships and social identities: exploring cases of young children's agency and complex interdependencies from the Minority World.Children's Geographies,10(3),337-346.
13. Louise, H.(Ed.)(2011).Geographies of Children, Youth and Families: An International Perspective.New York:Routledge.
14. Paasche, T.F.,Yarwood, R.,Sidaway, J.D.(2014).Territorial tactics: the socio-spatial significance of private policing strategies in Cape Town.Urban Studies,51(8),1559-1575.
15. Pain, R.(2001).Gender, race, age and fear in the city.Urban Studies,38(5-6),899-913.
16. Pred, A.(1993)。空間的文化形式與社會理論讀本。台北=Taipei:明文書局=Ming-Wen。
17. Rachel, P.(Ed.),Michael, B.(Ed.),Duncan, F.(Ed.),Jamie, G.(Ed.),Robert, M.(Ed.),Graham, M.(Ed.)(2001).Introduction Social Geographies.London:Hodder.
18. Rodó-de-Zárate, M.(2015).Young lesbians negotiating public space: an intersectional approach through places.Children's Geographies,13(4),413-434.
19. Ruddick, S.(2003).The politics of aging: globalization and the restructuring of youth and childhood.Antipode,35(2),334-362.
20. Sevilla-Buitrago, A.(2014).Central Park against the streets: the enclosure of public space cultures in mid-nineteenth century New York.Social & Cultural Geography,15(2),151-171.
21. Shabazz, R.(2014).Masculinity and the mic: confronting the uneven geography of hip-hop.Gender, Place & Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography,21(3),370-386.
22. Sibley, D.(1995).Geographies of Exclusion: Society and Difference in the West.New York:Routledge.
23. Skelton, T.(Ed.),Valentine, G.(Ed.)(1998).Cool Places: Geographies of Youth Cultures.London:Routledge.
24. Valentine, G.(2004).Public Space and the Culture of Childhood.Burlington:Ashgate.
25. Valentine, G.,Waite, L.(2012).Negotiating difference through everyday encounters: the case of sexual orientation and religion and belief.Antipode,44(2),474-492.
26. Wood, B. E.(2012).Crafted within liminal spaces: young people's everyday politics.Political Geography,31,337-346.
27. 李靜怡(2005)。台南=Tainan，國立成功大學藝術研究所=Department of Institute of Art Studies, National Cheng Kung University。
28. 夏鑄九譯、王志弘譯、Castells, M.(2000)。網絡社會之崛起。台北=Taipei:唐山=Tonsan。
29. 張菁芬(2005)。社會排除現象與對策：歐盟的經驗分析。台北=Taipei:松慧=Song-Hui。
30. 畢恆達(2014)。空間就是想像力。台北=Taipei:心靈工坊文化=PsyGarden。
31. 彭正波(2010)。從貧困到社會排斥：理論演進與政策構想。技術經濟與管理研究，2，126-128。
32. 黃舒那(2011)。南投=Nantou，國立暨南國際大學社會政策與社會工作學系=Department of Social Policy and Social Work, National Chi Nan University。
33. 黃德祥(2000)。青少年宵禁問題之探討。刑事政策與犯研究論文集，3，171-187。
34. 萬毓澤譯、Sennett, R.(2007)。再會吧！公共人。台北=Taipei:群學=Socio。

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。