承載量之外：重想觀光浪潮下的小琉球韌性

Abstract

小琉球位處臺灣西南方海域，為一座面積6.8 平方公里的珊瑚礁小島。設籍人口 1.2 萬人，近年承載百萬年旅遊人次。大量人潮集中在特定連假與夏季，在缺乏有效管理機制的情況下，生態、生活與遊憩品質皆受到影響，已構成過度觀光（Overtourism）現象。儘管政府機關以「永續觀光（Sustainable Tourism）」為願景，召開數場觀光管理會議，但「總量管制」始終未被落實。小琉球的過度觀光挑戰尚未有明確解方。 本研究透過長期返鄉實踐，結合參與觀察、會議紀錄分析與半結構式訪談，檢視小琉球在觀光快速擴張下的島嶼特質、產業轉型歷程、島民行動與治理困境。研究指出，過度觀光問題並非單純源於遊客數量超載，而是反映治理制度的斷裂。包括多重權責機關重疊、協商機制形式化，以及地方利害關係人參與角色的高度侷限。 研究進一步發現，小琉球相關政府部門透過「會議」與「說明會」等制式協商機制進行觀光管理討論；場域多設於鄉公所或遊客中心等簡報型空間；實際參與者多為協會組織、鄉民代表與村長等具既有話語權者。此類傳統參與形式難以包容多元、以行動為導向的地方經驗。致使島民在環境保育、文化保存等過程累積的關鍵知識，無法有效進入治理討論中。小琉球的觀光治理與島民實踐之間，形成結構性的斷裂。 而島民在承載量（Carrying Capacity）框架下的「總量管制」反對聲音，並非否定環境保育的重要性，而是源自對「生計風險」的高度擔憂。不過，近年會議與研究多僅納入海洋環境、觀光承載量等視角，缺乏商業評估、產業風險管理與文化環境等跨領域分析。也就是說，相關政策討論不僅未回應「經濟」面向的評估，也持續停留在「生態衰退」的現象說明，而未有任何管理措施試辦方法，導致實施承載量的可能性不斷被削弱。 因此，本研究以「島嶼韌性（Island Resilience）」為分析視角，主張從追求單一承載量數值的視角，轉向島嶼在動態變遷中，政府的協商機制、地方的行動量能等綜觀探討。並強調將島民的實踐力量納入治理核心，依此修補承載量框架下，長期忽視的島嶼韌性缺口。

Liuqiu is a small coral reef island located off the southwestern coast of Taiwan. Despite its limited land area of 6.8 km² and a registered population of approximately 12,000 residents, the island accommodates over one million tourist visits annually. Tourist flows are highly concentrated during peak holidays and summer seasons. In the absence of effective management mechanisms, this concentration has led to declining ecological conditions, local livelihoods, and recreational quality, constituting a case of “overtourism”. Although the government promotes “sustainable tourism” and has convened multiple management meetings, visitor capacity control has yet to be implemented, leaving tourism governance in a prolonged state of suspension. This study draws on long-term field engagement, combining participant observation, meeting record analysis, and semi-structured interviews to examine Liuqiu’s island characteristics, industrial transformation, local actions, and governance challenges under rapid tourism expansion. The findings suggest that overtourism is not solely a result of excessive visitor numbers, but reflects structural discontinuities in governance, including overlapping institutional responsibilities, formalized negotiation processes, and limited roles for local stakeholders. Tourism governance is primarily conducted through standardized meetings and public briefings, typically involving established actors such as association representatives and local officials. These formats fail to incorporate diverse, practice-based local knowledge, resulting in a disconnection between governance systems and islander practices. Furthermore, local resistance to carrying capacity policies stems not from opposition to environmental protection, but from concerns over livelihood risks. However, current policy discussions remain narrowly focused on environmental indicators, lacking interdisciplinary perspectives such as economic evaluation and risk management. This study proposes “island resilience” as an analytical framework, shifting the focus from a fixed carrying capacity threshold to the dynamic interplay between governance mechanisms and local capacities, and emphasizing the integration of local practices into the core of tourism governance.