土地開發的程序政治：苗栗縣空間規劃的庸屬化與離地化

Abstract

本研究以苗栗縣晚近土地開發的程序衝突為焦點，探討地方政治與治理結構轉型下空間規劃的角色轉化。作者採用空間制度相關政府公報、規劃機構統計數據、竹科竹南基地周邊特定區都市計畫和福祿壽殯葬園區非都市開發計畫的規劃書圖、規劃審議會議紀錄、公私單位文函、新聞報導，以及深度訪談資料作為分析素材；並且結合地方治理、空間調節機制、規劃的資本主義社會秩序協調角色，以及程序操作和技術邏輯等觀點，提出地方空間調節的程序政治，以及程序的可行性建構概念來深化治理結構轉型下規劃程序的社會衝突研究。 作者主張，中央黨政首長、黃劉派系要角與大型資本業者是在選舉佈局、產業轉型壟斷投資、地方財政限制，以及公私合夥興起的提案脈絡下，主導派任、遴聘與委託空間規劃機構辦理程序。而地方居民與公民團體為維繫空間環境利益，或不滿彼此方案的組織抗爭，使得規劃程序成為各方協力鬥爭的政治過程。空間規劃在程序政治中扮演著調節衝突的角色。 那麼，在霸權集團主導的政商－專業協力關係之中，規劃機構依循的民意馴化、制度合法、工程控管、生態補償、空間財務及時間效益等可行技術邏輯，是圍繞著霸權集團的選舉民意輿論與產業壟斷利益所運行。規劃機構在程序中建構可行性的操作，使得霸權集團的提案權力得以透過程序施展，既有空間社會條件或生態特殊性質則被替代為無危空間計畫的均質配置。 空間規劃在地方空間調節的程序政治中，邁向了促成霸權集團積累空間生產，同時將市民組織的異質訴求轉化為均質空間配置之庸屬化及離地化的角色轉化。這樣的角色轉化機制，使得空間規劃得以在地方政治與治理結構轉型下，扮演維持資本主義社會秩序和諧的政治角色。

This thesis focuses on the procedural conflict of recent land development in Miaoli County and explores the role of spatial planning under local politics and governance structural transformation. The author uses government gazettes, statistical data of planning agencies, planning review meeting records, official and private documents, news reports, urban/non-urban development planning of Specific Districts of Zhunan Science Park and Fu-Lu-Shou Funeral Park, and in-depth interview as analysis materials. The author also combined the viewpoints of local governance, spatial regulation regime, and planning as a role of harmonizing capitalist social order and propose the concept of 'procedural politics in local spatial regulation' and 'Feasibility Construction in Procedures' to deepen the study of social conflict in planning procedures. The author argues that the central party and government chiefs, local faction leaders, and large capitalists entrusted spatial planning agencies to handle the procedures under the context of election layout, industrial monopoly investment, local fiscal restrictions, and the rise of public-private partnerships. However, the demands of residents and civic groups to maintain the interests of the spatial environment make the planning procedures a political process. Spatial planning becomes a mediator of conflict in procedural politics. Under the dominant relationship of the hegemonic group, the feasible technical logic such as the domestication of public opinion, the legality of the system, the engineering control, the ecological compensation, the space finance, and the time benefit that the planning agency follows are based on the electoral public opinion and industrial monopoly interests. The feasibility construction operate by the planning agencies enables the proposing power of the hegemonic group to be exercised through procedures, and the existing spatial social conditions or the special ecological characteristics are replaced by a homogeneous planning configuration. In the procedural politics of local spatial regulation, spatial planning has moved towards the role transformation of subordination and delocalization: facilitates the accumulation of space production by hegemonic groups and at the same time transforms the heterogeneous demands of civic organizations into homogeneous spatial configuration. Such role transformation mechanisms enable spatial planning to play a political role in maintaining the harmony of capitalist social order under the transformation of local political and governance structures.