世界工廠轉身超大城市：深圳資本積累與空間生產

Abstract

本研究探討深圳的資本積累與空間生產。對話對象為全球生產網絡與全球都市主義理論。本文指出不論是全球生產網絡理論當中的區域資產概念，或是全球都市主義研究中的聚集經濟概念都遺漏了思考區域資產跟聚集經濟一開始是如何形成。聚集經濟的運作取決於一個有穩定性和支持性機構的市場經濟，但是在許多發展中的經濟體，市場力量的運作受到國家政府操縱的影響。在深圳，國家和地方機構所形塑的遊戲規則，正在不斷地透過談判與爭議之後才能形塑市場。 本研究分析深圳的經濟發展建基在土地市場化、商品化與疊加土地價值推力中所形成。1. 2003年深圳關外土地統徵前，深圳資本積累依靠著全球製造業跨界到深圳進行製造出口進而帶動當地工業化。在這個過程中，從內陸湧進深圳打工的廉價勞動力和輕易可以取得的土地是企業與深圳耦合最重要的要素。低廉的勞工、土地生產要素克服了當時後進工業化國家的資本積累危機，維繫了企業的營運，同時也成功的讓深圳用地生錢、槓桿開發；2.1992年深圳關內全面城市化則是宣告深圳以城市現代化作為一種有利工具，地方政府從籌錢轉變為籌地，透過由上而下的法定圖則，地方政府與國家利用土地使用權的市場化和商品化獲取相應的利益；3. 2008年全球金融危機後，中央啟動經濟梯度轉移，開發內陸土地、升級已發展城市。此時，深圳透過舊城改造、都市更新、戶籍改革下的特大城市吸納與排除人口的治理方式意圖讓深圳從世界工廠轉向超大城市。 在上述的發展歷程之下，深圳產生三種空間型態：1.1986年深圳二線關設立，一方面管制人口流動，另外一方面則是打造關內成為花園城市，花園城市服務的是深圳關內的戶籍人口；2.2008年以前，深圳關外則因為地方政府規劃未到（86總規與96總規皆以關內作為都市規劃對象）形成一種「“未都市化”的工業化空間」狀態；3. 2008年以後，深圳二線關取消，關外站上地方政府法定圖則的舞台，基礎設施大力開發。而在既有工業化空間中，地方政府、村集體與資本家仍在協商利益的分配。在上述情境之下，生活在深圳關外的租客工人生活在隨時施工、道路系統不佳與缺乏公共設施的城市空間中。這樣的空間分離也間接打造了外來工人對大型工廠提供的再生產空間的製造甘願。

This dissertation explores capital accumulation and spatial production in Shenzhen, contributing to the theory of global production networks (GPN) and of global urbanism respectively. This study points out that the two theories pay less attention to how regional assets and agglomeration economies have initiated. Unlike the western countries whose agglomeration economies depend on a market economy, China the developing economic entity has greatly relied on the deployment from the state and the dynamic negotiations among the vertical (tiao) and horizontal (kuai) institutions. By adopting semi-structured interviews, participatory observations, and archival data, the dissertation elucidates how the land's marketization, commodification, and values have shaped economic development and spatial arrangements in Shenzhen. Three non-linear stages can be identified. Firstly, before the land acquisition in 2003, cheap labor force and land provided the primary solution to embark capital accumulation in Shenzhen. Taking the advantages of the two kernel elements, global manufacturing industries coupled with Shenzhen municipal government and facilitated industrialization. Land as leverage circularly generates capitals. Secondly, the commencement of comprehensive urbanization within Shenzhen Guannei since 1992 denoted that the municipal government has started to collect land simultaneously. The land itself as a commodity to create more capitals for more people. By promulgating top-down statutory plans and land user rights policies (of marketization and commodification), the state and the municipal government have accelerated urban modernization and obtained corresponding benefits. Thirdly, the financial crisis in 2008 triggered the state to launch economic gradient transfer; the state has gradually explored and expanded to inland spaces. Urban renewals and the household registration system act as a governance to transform Shenzhen from the world factory to megacities (chaoda chengshi). Land as a governance to regulate the “quality” of the city. Three spatial arrangements have been shaped under such context and made versatile impacts on the city’s contour and disposition. The once dual administrative structure and limitation of population mobility created Guannei (the center of Shenzhen) a garden city and Guanwai (outskirt) an un-urbanized space. The outskirt land, wherein the local government, village collectives, and capitalists play different key roles in negotiating the distribution of interests, began to vigorously develop since 2008 when the cancellation of the dual administrative structure. The examination of the initiation of capital accumulation in Shenzhen and its spatial production also provide an understanding to see how people are stratifying in the process of urbanization; players in the table of the land game benefit while non-players are inevitably “manufacturing consent.”