請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/91740完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 洪伯邑 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Po-Yi Hung | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 廖珮岑 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | Pei-Tsen Liao | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-02-22T16:30:10Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2024-02-23 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2024-02-22 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2024 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2024-01-31 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | 王順成,2007。農藥的毒性與安全使用。載於植物保護圖鑑系列8─水稻保護,p.431-447。台北市,行政院農業委員會動植物防疫檢疫局。
永續實踐家,2022年12月22日。全聯深耕生態保育,打出循環經濟知名度,榮獲2022TCSA台灣企業永續獎肯定,今周刊ESG永續台灣。 行政院農業委員會林業及自然保育署,2023。瀕危物種及重要棲地生態服務給付推動方案,摘自:https://conservation.forest.gov.tw/0002186 行政院農業委員會,2018。國土生態保育綠色網絡建置計畫(107至110 年度)。取自:https://www.forest.gov.tw/0002812 行政院農業委員會動植物防疫檢疫局,2015。公告「40.64%加保扶水懸劑等4種農藥為禁用農藥」。取自:https://www.baphiq.gov.tw/theme_data.php?theme=NewInfoListWS&id=7614 行政院農業委員會動植物防疫檢疫局,2020。我國農藥管理及其展望。取自:https://pesticide.baphiq.gov.tw/information/Data/BriefContent/68 江俊宜,2019。生態主義如何介入農業生產政策?論述制度主義的觀點。國立臺灣大學政治學研究所博士學位論文,260頁。 李光中、孫夏天、羅尤娟、石芝菁、張雅玲、邱雅莘,2021。2020年後生物多樣性展望及臺灣里山倡議轉型策略架構芻議。配合國土生態綠網發展中部地方特色農業研討會論文輯8-27。 沈振中,2002 。 2001 年及 1992-2001 年臺灣地區黑鳶主要族群調查簡報。中華飛羽164:10-11。 沈振中,2003。臺灣與亞洲鄰近國家黑鳶定點調查結果之比較。臺灣猛禽研究51-58。 林軒羽,2014。臺灣黑翅鳶(Elanus caeruleus)族群分布趨勢及預測。國立臺灣大學生命科學院生態學與演化生物學研究所碩士論文。58頁。 林俊男,2019。臺灣農民採用友善環境耕作法的關鍵因素與推廣策略。農業試驗所特刊216:95-111。 林怡均,2021年12月16日。鳳梨田抓老鼠,讓專業的來!猛禽晝夜守護,不用老鼠藥的「鴞旺來」上市,上下游。 林育秀、莊書翔,2021。和農民一起守護石虎棲地─友善石虎農作認證之發展,配合國土生態綠網發展中部地方特色農業研討會論文輯136-143。 林惠珊、謝季恩、洪孝宇,2013 。從黑鳶死亡事件到那些農田中消失的生命。中華飛羽 26:22 31 。 林慧貞,2014年11月12日。挽救猛禽黑鳶中毒,農委會2016年禁劇毒農藥加保扶,上下游。 洪孝宇、林惠珊、謝季恩,2013。寂靜的秋天—毒鳥的責任該由誰來扛?屏科大野保所鳥類生態研究室網站。摘自:https://iwcraptor.pixnet.net/blog/post/22522795 洪孝宇,2020。3.5中毒危機。載於林大利、呂翊維、潘森識(編)。吳建龍、林大利(譯)。2020。臺灣國家鳥類報告。行政院農業委員會特有生物研究保育中心、社團法人中華民國野鳥學會。臺灣。 洪孝宇、林惠珊、黃子倫、蔡穎詩、王婉儀、孫元勳,2021。猛禽棲架—鳥類研究的新視野,自然保育季刊116:27-33。 洪孝宇、陳宏昌、許雅玟、王婉儀、謝季恩、林惠珊、孫元勳,2022。比較定點計數、地面相機和棲架相機調查台東水稻田鳥種組成之成效。2022動物行為研討會,台東,1月18-19日。 姚正得、張義榮、廖秭妤,2016。基於發展友善農業環境之臺灣猛禽食性回顧。臺灣猛禽研究16:14-39。 馬振瀚,2022年3月24日。黑翅鳶香米釀成喝的點滴!「糀穗甘酒」登場,台灣農創集合農漁會拚團體戰,上下游新聞。 翁榮炫,2004。黑翅鳶在臺灣的首次繁殖記錄。臺灣猛禽研究2:20 – 25。 基隆市野鳥學會、臺灣猛禽研究會,2004。臺灣地區黑鳶保育行動綱領。 郭華仁,2022。以生態有機農業邁向永續發展目標。載於林朝成(主編),食農X實農:屬於臺灣人的食與農(頁20-47)。臺北市:開學文化事業股份有限公司。 陳玠廷,2014。有機農業發展型態的概念論述。農業推廣文彙59:167-174。 陳玠廷,2018。「再小農化」的有機實踐:以官田水雉綠色保育計畫為例。臺灣鄉村研究13:57-93。 陳昭文,2019。全聯-老鷹紅豆之策略行銷分析。國立政治大學經營管理碩士學程碩士論文,39頁。 曹琬凌,2021。紀錄片的時間政治:老鷹想飛的媒介化故事效應。新聞學研究147:101-149。 廖靜蕙,2018年10月17日。基於科學而非感性 滅鼠週40年走入歷史 防檢局長細說由來,環境資訊中心。 蔡晏霖,2016。農藝復興:臺灣農業新浪潮。文化研究22:23-74 蕭定雄,2013。從文創鍍金走向道德經濟 -- 坪林臺灣藍鵲茶行動。國立臺灣大學建築與城鄉研究所碩士論文,184頁。 謝季恩,2015。探討屏東地區農藥對鳥類的毒害—以紅豆田為例。屏東科技大學野生動物保育研究所學位論文,55頁。 謝順景,2010。綜合論述:臺灣一百多年來的有機農業發展之歷史回顧,臺中區農業改良場研究彙報107:1-12。 羅尤娟,2021。從森林到海岸─織一片國土生態綠網。配合國土生態綠網發展中部地方特色農業研討會論文輯1-7。 蘇金鳳,2019年8月10日。不噴農藥、靠牠捕鼠 益全香米升級命名「黑翅鳶米」,自由時報。 蘇慕容,2021。有機農業促進的現況與新創機會。符合環境永續之作物友善管理研討會23-28。 Adams, W. M. (2019). Geographies of conservation II: Technology, surveillance and conservation by algorithm. Progress in Human Geography, 43(2), 337-350. Anderson, C. R., Bruil, J., Chappell, M. J., Kiss, C., & Pimbert, M. P. (2019). From transition to domains of transformation: Getting to sustainable and just food systems through agroecology. Sustainability, 11(19), 5272. Avelino, F., & Wittmayer, J. M. (2016). Shifting power relations in sustainability transitions: a multi-actor perspective. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning,18(5), 628-649. Baumann, M. D. (2022). Agrobiodiversity’s caring material practices as a symbolic frame for environmental governance in Colombia’s southern Tolima. Geoforum, 128, 286-299. Baker, Tom, and Pauline McGuirk. (2017). Assemblage thinking as methodology: commitments and practices for critical policy research. Territory, Politics, Governance 5(4), 425-442. Benson, E. S. (2016). Trackable life: Data, sequence, and organism in movement ecology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 57, 137-147. Balbontin, J.Negro, J. J.Sarasola, J. H.Ferrero, J. J. and Rivera, D. 2008. Land-use changes may explain the recent range expansion of the black-shouldered kite Elanus caeruleus in southern Europe. Ibis 150, 707–716. Chen, K. H., Lin, W. L., & Lin, S. M. (2022). Competition between the black‐winged kite and Eurasian kestrel led to population turnover at a subtropical sympatric site. Journal of Avian Biology, 2022(10), e03040. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). (2011). Aichi Biodiversity Targets. https://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/ de La Bellacasa, M. P. (2017). Matters of care: Speculative ethics in more than human worlds (Vol. 41). U of Minnesota Press. eBird Basic Dataset 2023. Version: EBD_relMay-2023. – Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Escobar, A. (2019). Thinking-feeling with the Earth: Territorial Struggles and the Ontological Dimension of the Epistemologies of the South. In Knowledges born in the struggle (pp. 41-57). Routledge. Fisher, B., Tronto, J., Abel, E. K., & Nelson, M. (1990). Toward a feminist theory of caring. Circles of care, 29-42. Haraway, D. J. (2008). When species meet. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Hodgetts, T., & Lorimer, J. (2015). Methodologies for animals’ geographies: Cultures, communication and genomics. Cultural geographies, 22(2), 285-295. Hodgetts, T., & Lorimer, J. (2020). Animals’ mobilities. Progress in Human Geography, 44(1), 4-26. Hong, S. Y., H. S. Lin, B. A. Walther, J. E. Shie, and Y. H. Sun. 2018. Recent Avian Poisonings Suggest a Secondary Poisoning Crisis of Black Kites During the 1980s in Taiwan. Journal of Raptor Research, 52(3), 326-337. Hong, S. Y., Morrissey, C., Lin, H. S., Lin, K. S., Lin, W. L., Yao, C. T. & Sun, Y. H. (2019). Frequent detection of anticoagulant rodenticides in raptors sampled in Taiwan reflects government rodent control policy. Science of The Total Environment, 691, 1051-1058. International Partnership for the Satoyama Initiative (IPSI). 2021. ABOUT IPSI. https://satoyama-initiative.org/about/ Krzywoszynska, A. (2019). Caring for soil life in the Anthropocene: the role of attentiveness in more‐than‐human ethics. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 44(4),661-675. Kneafsey, M., Maye, D., Holloway, L., & Goodman, M. K. (2021). Geographies of food: An introduction. Bloomsbury Publishing. Lamine, C. (2015). Sustainability and resilience in agrifood systems: Reconnecting agriculture, food and the environment. Sociologia ruralis, 55(1), 41-61. Lang, T., & Heasman, M. (2015). Food wars: the global battle for mouths, minds and markets. Routledge. Lawson, V. (2007). Geographies of care and responsibility. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 97(1), 1-11. Lin, W. L., Chen, K. H., Liao, C. P., & Tseng, H. Y. (2022). Short-term exposure of anticoagulant rodenticides leads to the toxin accumulation from prey (Rattus losea) to predator (Elanus caeruleus). Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety: 233, 113361. Lorimer, J. (2007). Nonhuman Charisma. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 25(5), 911–932. Lorimer, J. (2012). Multinatural geographies for the Anthropocene. Progress in Human Geography, 36(5), 593–612. Lorimer, J., & Driessen, C. (2013). Bovine biopolitics and the promise of monsters in the rewilding of Heck cattle. Geoforum, 48, 249-259. Lorimer, J. (2015). Wildlife in the Anthropocene: Conservation after Nature. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Lorimer, J., Hodgetts, T., & Barua, M. (2019). Animals’ atmospheres. Progress in Human Geography, 43(1), 26-45. Lorimer, J. (2020). The probiotic planet: using life to manage life (Vol. 59). U of Minnesota Press. Margulies, J. D. (2019). On coming into animal presence with photovoice. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 2(4), 850-873. Nally, D. (2011). The biopolitics of food provisioning. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 36(1), 37-53. Peleg, O., Nir, S., Leshem, Y., Meyrom, K., Aviel, S., Charter, M. & Izhak, I. (2018).Three decades of satisfied Israeli farmers: barn owls (Tyto alba) as biological pest control of rodents. In Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 28(28). Philo, C. & Wilbert, C. (2000). Introduction. In: Philo, C. & Wilbert, C. (eds.) Animal Spaces, Beastly Places: New Geographies of Human-Animal Relations. London: Routledge, 1–36. Reisman, E., & Fairbairn, M. (2020). Agri-food systems and the Anthropocene. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 111(3), 687-697. Steffen, W., Grinevald, J., Crutzen, P., & McNeill, J. (2011). The Anthropocene: conceptual and historical perspectives. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 369(1938), 842-867. Stoetzer, B. (2022). Ruderal City: Ecologies of Migration, Race, and Urban Nature in Berlin. Duke University Press. van den Berg, L., Teixeira, H. M., Behagel, J. H., Verschoor, G., Turnhout, E., Cardoso, M., & Botelho, M. I. V. (2022). From managing transitions towards building movements of affect: advancing agroecological practices and transformation in Brazil. Geoforum, 131, 50-60. Wezel, A., S. Bellon, T. Doré, C. Francis, D. Vallod, & C. David, C. 2009. Agroecology as a science, a movement or a practice. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 29, 503-515. Wezel, A., Brives, H., Casagrande, M., Clement, C., Dufour, A., & Vandenbroucke, P. (2016). Agroecology territories: places for sustainable agricultural and food systems and biodiversity conservation. Agroecology and sustainable food systems, 40(2), 132-144. Wilson, H. F. (2017). On geography and encounter. Progress in Human Geography, 41(4), 451–471. | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/91740 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 農田中的老鼠會啃食作物的人與野生動物衝突一直存在,比起使用老鼠藥或農藥造成老鼠及誤食中毒老鼠的猛禽死亡,臺灣的生態研究學者嘗試利用猛禽喜歡滯空拍翅以覓食的習性,在田間架設棲架,邀請猛禽協助農民捕鼠。從2017年架設至今,猛禽棲架逐漸成為田間生物防治的基礎設施。出現在棲架上的猛禽不只成為田間夥伴,也是被保育對象及守護農田的指標物種。不過,傳統單一最大產量化的農法思維依然是臺灣的主流,猛禽棲架真的能推動農業實踐上的轉型,改變以往的農業生命政治形式嗎?由於棲架為田間重要技術物,因此本研究採取「跟著棲架走」的研究方法。從2021至2023年間,以全台各地的猛禽棲架形成之空間為核心,分析圍繞棲架而行動之生態研究學者、農民及非人將會如何拼裝,共同創造新的生態系統/知識。研究結果表明,透過棲架與其上之紅外線自動相機,農民更容易與猛禽及其他鳥類遭遇,並在農業日常實作中,使農田生態食物網系統具象化,從中長出與非人互動的身體感,進而產生實際的保育行動。我認為臺灣的永續農業發展至今,已經從早期注重食品安全而開始推行的有機/友善農法,逐漸演變成與非人行動者共存、協作的多元生態農業形式,並且嘗試突破傳統認為的慣行/有機二元對立的思考模式。此外,透過擴大關懷網絡,不只是農民、生態科學研究者、田間的各種生物與技術物,還包含政府、民間企業等單位的互相關懷與協作,逐漸將生態農業變成一股新的生活理念,鑲嵌進食品供應系統以及食農教育現場,從中長出不同以往的多元農業實踐、生活方式與生命政治形式。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | Human-wildlife conflict, such as rats that would destroy crops, is a common situation in farmland all around the world. Compared to the usage of pesticide or other kinds of poison to kill the animals destroying crops, biological control has become more popular in terms of the protection for both crops and the environment. In 2017, in order to attract raptors catching rats, a group of Taiwanese researchers decided to set up a raptor perch nearby a farmland with an automatic camera up on it. Since then, raptor perches have gradually become the infrastructure for biological control, forging an alternative biopolitics of agriculture. However, while industrialized agriculture is still the mainstream in Taiwan, can raptor perches truly drive a transformation in agricultural practices and change the previous form of agricultural biopolitics? This thesis tries to tackle with this question by focusing on the human-raptor encounter and the emerging care for the multi-species relationship. Specifically, I look into the agroecology practices, production, and consumption to re-consider the connections among biological control, farmland practices, and human-environment relations in Taiwan. The results show that through the perches and the automatic camera, farmers are more likely to encounter raptors and other creatures. These encounters, for farmers, have then been the way of learning to be affected with the raptors, an embodied process of sensing the abstract ecological food web. This embodiment has therefore led to conservation actions and the changes in agricultural practice. Farmers’ embodiment of the ecological food web, I argue, has also demonstrated that the development of agriculture in Taiwan has evolved from the organic/friendly farming emphasizing on food safety, to the diverse agroecology practices, attending to collaborations with non-human actors. I take these scenarios as a breaking down of the dualistic thinking of industrialized/organic agriculture. Meanwhile, collaborations with non-human actors have triggered the expansion of care networks concerning agriculture. Meaning, the raptor perch has initiated the entanglement among farmers, researchers, the nonhuman elements in the farmland, the governments, and private enterprises. This emerging entanglement has gradually pushed the agroecology to become a new life philosophy, embedded in food supply system and the agri-food education in Taiwan. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2024-02-22T16:30:10Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2024-02-22T16:30:10Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝誌 I
摘要 IV Abstract V 圖次 IX 表次 IX 第一章、緒論 1 第一節、研究緣起與問題 1 第二節、文獻回顧與理論架構 5 一、永續農業思潮 5 二、生態農業實踐:食農系統轉型與關懷倫理的改變 8 三、保育的生命政治:遭遇、情感與非人魅力 11 第四節、研究方法 14 第五節、章節安排 19 第二章、棲架,架起了誰? 20 第一節、老鷹消失了?猛禽生態研究與農業的交會 20 第二節、不只是人的農業?農業與生態保育的交會 24 農藥、水稻直播與鳥類 24 全國農地滅鼠週與鼠害防治 27 第三節、偶然成為田間幫手?黑翅鳶與意外的鳥類居民 32 小結:偶然歷史產生的獨特地景網絡 34 第三章、棲架成為新的感知系統 35 第一節、人鳥相遇在自動相機中 35 意外的攝影角度帶來的人氣與相遇 36 棲架技術的變革 38 農友的反應與「在地棲架」的出現 44 小結:棲架創造的動物氛圍 52 第二節、人、非人與土地共組的棲架網絡 54 放棄,多元生態的密碼? 54 與土地共感?看見棲架食物鏈 58 土裡、天空到鄰居:建構生態農業網絡 65 小結:農業實踐的身體感、非人魅力以及「生態觀」 73 第四章、定位生態農業商品:產業鏈光譜的形成 76 第一節、大面積種植產業裡的生態商品 76 大面積鳳梨產業經營邏輯 77 農會團體戰行銷策略 82 棲架的在地新意象:農會通路裡的「生態農業」 84 第二節、小面積種植產業裡的生態商品 89 摸索米的「個性」 89 米商品的多樣通路與銷售邏輯 91 迷你棲架DIY:小農市集裡的「生態農業」 96 第三節、「生態」食農教育 100 在地「米食文化」:不只有稻米的產地 100 食物鏈的真諦 105 第五章、結論:資本網絡的孔隙,被猛禽鑽出的關懷農業網絡 110 第一節、偶然串聯的可視性技術 110 第二節、農業中的生態保育?棲架帶動的視角翻轉 112 第三節、資本主義的廢墟:重新搭建關懷網絡 115 參考文獻 119 | - |
| dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
| dc.subject | 情感 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 生態農業 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 生命政治 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 關懷 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 保育 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 遭遇 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | biopolitics | en |
| dc.subject | affect | en |
| dc.subject | encounter | en |
| dc.subject | conservation | en |
| dc.subject | care | en |
| dc.subject | agroecology | en |
| dc.title | 請猛禽來捕鼠?臺灣的生態農業實作與多物種關係 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Ask Raptors to Catch Rats? The Emerging Care for the Multiple Species Relationship through the Agroecology Practices in Taiwan | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 112-1 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 蔡晏霖;簡妤儒;何俊頤 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Yen-Ling Tsai;Yu-Ju Chien;Chun-Yi Ho | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | 情感,生態農業,生命政治,關懷,保育,遭遇, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | affect,agroecology,biopolitics,care,conservation,encounter, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 125 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202400312 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2024-02-02 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 理學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 地理環境資源學系 | - |
| 顯示於系所單位: | 地理環境資源學系 | |
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-112-1.pdf | 5.68 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。
