事業廢棄物治理模式之困境與契機：旗山農地汙染案為例

Predicaments and Opportunities for Industrial Waste Governance: The Case of Agricultural Land Pollution in Qishan District

10.6683/TPSR.201906_23(1).0001

范玫芳(Mei-Fang Fan)；邱智民(Chih-Ming Chiu)

治理 ； 事業廢棄物 ； 公民參與 ； 新科學政治社會學 ； 在地知識 ； governance ； industrial waste ； new political sociology of science ； public participation ； local knowledge

台灣政治學刊

23卷1期（2019 / 06 / 01）

1 - 41

繁體中文

事業廢棄物治理牽涉違法棄置不易建立危害因果關係，以及違法行為在法規適用上的爭論。本文以高雄旗山農地廢爐渣汙染爭議為個案，採取「新科學政治社會學」分析途徑，探究事業廢棄物治理所牽涉各層級政府單位與組織之間的權力運作，以及科學知識、規則與權力之間如何交織成動態且複雜的網絡。個案凸顯權力結構和資源不對等的問題，以及事業廢棄物治理的困境。居民發現高雄市旗山區圓潭池內因轉爐石級配料回填造成生物大量死亡且發出難聞氣味。環保局宣稱土壤檢測結果為沒有污染，而農委會農糧署檢測發現水質具強鹼性，且土壤重金屬超過土壤污染管制標準。政府單位對於轉爐石究竟歸誰管有不一致的說法；業者聲稱轉爐石乃煉鋼過程中的「副產品」，不適用「廢棄物清理法」。地方居民組成自救會並結盟公民團體展開一連串公民行動，包括：召開記者會、陳情抗議、環境監測與法庭訴訟，不僅形塑政策論述與科學知識生產，同時影響法規修正。本文展示事業廢棄物違法棄置的複雜網絡、規則重新制定與權力圖像轉換的動態性；在地知識與公民行動結盟在打造新的廢棄物治理模式扮演關鍵角色。

Government agencies often face the problem of clarifying causal relationships and regulatory applications in industrial waste disputes. This article uses the case of slag waste pollution on Qishan farmland in Kaohsiung City to explore the dynamic interaction process of power and scientific knowledge production among various levels of government agencies and related organizations. This article adopts the new political sociology of science (NPSS) framework to examine how scientific knowledge, rules and power interact with each other. The case highlights the problems associated with an unequal power structure and resources as well as deficiencies in current industrial waste regulations. Residents found that the Yuantan pool in Qishan was backfilled by slag, which caused a large number of organisms to die and emit an unpleasant smell. The local EPA claims that the soil test results indicated that there was no pollution. However, the Agriculture and Food Agency found that the water quality was strongly alkaline, in excess of the EPA's standard for soil pollution regulations. Different government agencies have competing opinions as to who should take responsibility. The industry claims that slag is a ＂byproduct＂ in the steelmaking process, and therefore the Waste Disposal Act does not apply to it. Following a series of protests and campaigns, local residents and self-help associations engaged in the production of scientific knowledge and lawsuits. Citizen participation has reshaped policy discourses and knowledge production processes, and has led to the amendment of regulatory policies. This article highlights the dynamics of the transformation of networks and power images in relation to the illegal dumping of industrial waste, as well as the crucial role played by local knowledge and citizen activism in the remaking of industrial waste goverance.

1. 杜文苓, Wen-ling,陳致中, Chih-chong(2007)。民眾參與公共政策的反思以竹科宜蘭基地設置為例。台灣民主季刊，4(3)，33-62。
   連結：
2. 周桂田, Kuei-tian(2004)。獨大的科學理性與隱沒（默）的社會理性之「對話」，在地公眾、科學專家與國家的風險文化探討。台灣社會研究季刊，56，1-63。
   連結：
3. 范玫芳, Mei-fang(2007)。風險論述、公民行動與灰渣掩埋場設置爭議。科技、醫療與社會，5，43-70。
   連結：
4. 范玫芳, Mei-fang,張簡妙琳, Mia-lin(2014)。科學知識與水政治：旗山溪治水爭議之個案研究。人文及社會科學集刊，26(1)，133-173。
   連結：
5. 楊智元, Chih-yuan,周桂田, Kuei-tian(2015)。超越決定論的風險治理：替代性風險知識的產生。政治與社會哲學評論，54，109-156。
   連結：
6. 自由時報，2014，〈大林反爐渣回填，自救會長遭毆〉，http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/paper/816360，查閱時間：2017/09/26。Liberty Times. 2014. “Dalin fanying luzha huitian, zijiu huizhang zaoou” [Da-lin anti slag buried in the pothole, the leader of self-help association was beaten]. (Accessed on September 26, 2017).
7. Dominguez Rubio, F.(ed.),Baert, P.(ed.)(2012).The politics of knowledge.New York, NY:Routledge.
8. Frickel, S.(ed.),Moore, K.(ed.)(2006).The New Political Sociology of Science Institutions, Networks, and Power.Madison, WI:University of Wisconsin Press.
9. Frickel, S.,Gibbon, S.,Howard, J.,Kempner, J.,Ottinger, G.,Hess, David J.(2010).Undone Science: Charting Social Movement and Civil Society Challenges to Research Agenda Setting.Science, Technology & Human Values,35(4),444-473.
10. Hackett, E.(ed.),Amsterdamska, O.(ed.),Lynch, M.(ed.),Wajcman, J.(ed.)(2008).The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
11. Hajer, M.,Wagenaar, H.(2003).Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
12. Irwin, A.(ed.),Wynne, B.(ed.)(1996).Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University.
13. Jasanoff, S.(1996).Is Science Socially Constructed- And Can It Still Inform Public Policy?.Science and Engineering Ethics,2(3),263-276.
14. Jasanoff, S.(ed.)(2004).States of Knowledge: The Co-production of Science and Social Order.New York, NY:Routledge.
15. Orsini, M.,Smith, M.(2010).Social Movements, Knowledge and Public Policy: The Case of Autism Activism in Canada and the US.Critical Policy Studies,4(1),38-57.
16. Ottinger, G.(2010).Buckets of Resistance: Standards and the Effectiveness of Citizen Science.Science, Technology, and Human Values,35(2),244-270.
17. Pierre, J.(ed.)(2000).Debating Governance: Authority, Steering, and Democracy.Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.
18. Renn, O.(2005).Risk Governance: Towards an Integrative Approach.Geneva, CH:International Risk Governance Council.
19. Rück, B.(ed.)(1993).Risk is a Construct: Perceptions of Risk Perception.Munich, DE:Knesebeck.
20. Wynne, B.(2001).Creating Public Alienation Expert Cultures of Risk and Ethics on GMOs.Science as Culture,10(4),445-481.
21. 中天新聞，2017，〈政府沒看見嗎？爐渣埋田剝四層皮！「一田四吃」業者賺飽〉，https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyQ7gdh5gsM，查閱時間：2018/05/13。Ctitv .2017. “Zhengfu mei kanjian ma? Luzha maitian bo sicengpi! ‘Yitian sichi’ Yezhe zhuanbao” [Didn't the government see it? The slag is buried in the field. “Kill two birds with one stone” The company earns much money]. (Accessed on May 13, 2018).
22. 中聯資源，2018，〈旗山大林里轉爐石回填大坑洞的故事〉，http://www.chc.com.tw/chi.html，查閱時間：2018/02/02。CHC Resource Corporation. 2018. “Cishan dalinli zhuanlushi huitian dakengdong de gushi” [The Story of BOF slag buried pothole in Da-lin Villiage Qishan District]. (Accessed on February 2, 2018).
23. 行政院農委會，2015，〈轉爐石不得回填農地，違反者應依區域計畫法裁罰及限期改善〉，https://www.coa.gov.tw/theme_data.php?theme=news&sub_theme=agri&id=5310，查閱時間：2017/09/05。Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan. 2015. “Zhuanlushi bude huitian nongdi, weifanzhe yingyi quyu jihuafa caifa ji xianqi gaishan” [BOF slag shall not backfill agricultural land, violators cut the penalty area and within a specified period in accordance with the Regional Planning Act ]. (Accessed on September 5, 2017).
24. 呂國禎, Kuo-chen,陳良榕, Liangjung(2015)。全台污泥亂倒，政府在哪？。天下雜誌，568，96-98。
25. 東森新聞，2016，〈映誠公司涉非法回填魚塭獲利近4億，實際負責人詐欺起訴〉，https://house.ettoday.net/news/838085#ixzz5ThKMQl3z，查閱時間：2017/12/28。ETtoday News. 2016. “Yingcheng gongsi she feifa huitian yuwen huoli jin siyi, shiji fuzeren zhaqi qisu” [Zhicheng company suspected of illegal backfilling of fish ponds and profit nearly 400 million, the actual representative was prosecute with Offenses of Fraud]. (Accessed on December 28, 2017).
26. 高雄市旗山區公所，2018，〈認識旗山〉，https://cishan88.kcg.gov.tw/Content_List.aspx?n=A5FE81E9DBC4BCC9，查閱時間：2018/04/03。Cishan District Office Kaohsiung City. 2018. “Renshi Cishan” [Introduction of Qishan]. (Accessed on April 3, 2018).
27. 高雄高等行政法院，2017，〈高雄高等行政法院新聞稿〉，http://jirs.judicial.gov.tw/GNNWS/download.asp?sdMsgId=52811，查閱時間：2017/05/31。Kaohsiung High Administrative Court. 2017. “Kaohsiung Gaodeng xingzhengfayuan xinwengao” [Press release by Kaohsiung High Administrative Court]. (Accessed on May 31, 2017).
28. 黃煥彰，2016，〈控訴高雄市政府長期包庇中聯公司於水質水量保護區掩埋爐碴〉，https://www.cet-taiwan.org/sites/cet-taiwan.org/files/%E9%99%84%E4%BB%B6-%E6%97%97%E5%B1%B1%E6%B1%99%E6%9F%93%E5%8F%B2%28%E6%92%B0%E6%96%87_%E9%BB%83%E7%85%A5%E5%BD%B0%29.pdf，查閱時間：2018/02/02。Huang, Huan-chang. 2016. “Kongsu Kaohsiung shizhengfu changqi baobi zhonglian gongsi yu shuizhi shuiliang baohuqu yanmai luzha”[Kaohsiung City Government accused long-term cover-up of CHC Resource Corporation buried slag in water quality and water reserve zone] . (Accessed on February 2, 2018).
29. 旗山新聞，2017，〈旗山大林農地回填廢爐渣案，在地居民與聲援團體盼盡速清除〉，https://www.facebook.com/chishannews/videos/1832095887051553/，查閱時間：2018/04/27。Chishan News. 2017. “Cishan dalin nongdi huitian feiluzha an, zaidi jumin yu shengyuan tuanti pan jinsu qingchu” [The case of dumping slag in Da-lin farmland in Qishan ]. (Accessed on April 27, 2018).
30. 監察院，2015，〈糾正案文〉，http://www.taiwanwatch.org.tw/sites/default/files/epapers/20150506-03.pdf，查閱時間：2015/05/06。The Control Yuan. 2015. “Jiuzhengan wen” [Corrections].(Accessed on May 6, 2015).
31. 鄭涵文、陳貞樺，2016，〈旗山找「碴」當農地變成掩埋場〉，https://www.twreporter.org/i/steel-slag/01/#chapter-01，查閱時間：2018/04/27。Cheng, Han-wen, and Chen-hua Chen. 2016. “Qishan zhao ‘cha’ dang nongdi biancheng yanmaichang” [Qishan found “slag”:when the farmland becomes a landfill]. (Accessed on April 27, 2018).
32. 環保署，2012，〈垃圾焚化廠焚化底渣再利用規定〉，https://oaout.epa.gov.tw/law/LawContent.aspx?id=GL006152，查閱日期：2019/05/23。Environmental Protection Administration. 2012. “Lesi fenhuachang fenhua dizha zailiyong guiding” [Regulations of reuse of waste slag of incineration plants]. (Accessed on May 23, 2019)

1. (2023)。環境法案如何進入政策議程？如何獲得立法通過？《溫室氣體減量及管理法》的個案分析（2006～2015）。政治學報，76，111-144。