新瓶舊酒？從高雄捷運政策看都市大型計畫與都市政治變遷

Abstract

本研究以高雄捷運政策作為都市大型計畫的個案，處理圍繞著高雄捷運政策過程中所展現的政治過程。我以都市大型計畫如何塑造都市政治型態出發，透過對於都市政治理論和台灣特殊經驗脈絡的反省，嘗試跳脫以往以國家體制轉型、由上至下的單向權力關係來解釋都市政治變遷的普同性觀點，而試圖由地方政府的角色出發、指認出台灣都市政治範疇中不同行動者的能動性，並試圖在空間差異的觀點裡，重新架構高雄市都市政治與政策的發展歷程，藉以從中論證高雄捷運政策當中所展現之權力結構關係與不同的政治行動者邏輯，並呈現出不同尺度下的都市發展變遷。從這樣的觀點出發來看待高雄捷運政策，我有三個主要的研究發現。 首先，我指認了高雄捷運政策從都市交通政策轉變為都市發展政策的過程，並從中發現：高雄捷運政策儘管作為發展政策，但卻並不是如宣稱般地是一個多元治理政策，相反地，這是一個各個政治部門為了維持統治正當性、考量自身的自利動機後所做的政治決策。其次，為了在更進一步檢視高雄捷運政策在不同尺度中的政治運作方式，在中央與地方政府關係的討論中，我論述了中央與地方關係架構在地方政府本身自主性與施政能力的提升、以及中央政府治理邏輯這兩個面向上；並且，藉由比較空間上與時序上的捷運政策差異，我發現國家的治理邏輯會隨其所認知的地方政府與地方首長地位之高低而產生差異，而高雄市與高雄市的市長地位顯然有升高的趨勢。這樣的論點可以進一步推論為：雖然經歷了民主化歷程，且在民進黨執政之後，高雄市取代了台北市的地位，成為晉升中央的踏階，但國民黨時代的官僚派任思維與威權時代舊有的國家統治邏輯可能並未改變。最後，在都市的尺度上，藉由分析高雄捷運政策過程，我發現圍繞著捷運議程的政權型態在政黨輪替的過程中，經歷了一個新民進黨籍市長積極接收舊國民黨時代地方派系的政權再結盟過程；而在這樣的變遷中，在高雄捷運特殊的歷史脈絡、與高雄市工業都市特性影響下，由於捷運政策挾帶著龐大的國家資本進入地方政治場域，致使土地利益不再是地方政權結盟的核心、產生了一個圍繞著捷運工程利益而生的新政權。然而，仔細檢視這個新政權型態，卻是一個依附在特許制度與公權力關係中所形塑的恩庇侍從關係。也因此，就政權的結盟形式、膠結機制與代理人角色來說，這仍是一個威權時代統治邏輯下的恩庇侍從關係。 總結而言，這個研究指認了高雄捷運政策雖是在國家體制轉型中、地方政府自主性提升、與全球化力量共同作用下所產生的新政策形式，但它對應的內涵卻是舊的統治邏輯。就這個層次上來說，高雄捷運政策是一個新瓶舊酒的故事。然而，這當中的政治型態，尤其是地方政治的部分，卻也不全然與以往威權時代相同；就這個層次來說，圍繞高雄捷運政策的政治型態仍有其獨特的變遷。也因此，高雄捷運政策到底是不是一個新瓶舊酒的故事？儘管我可以指認高雄捷運政策並非其所宣稱的多元治理政策，但更多的反省與討論仍是必要的。

The influence of state is remarkable for cities in, or once in, authoritarian states, but there is insufficient knowledge concerning the issue. Urban studies talk about urban policies and urban political operation, but seldom take the role of state seriously; political studies bring the role of state back into researches of policy, but scarcely apply the perspective to cross-scale, such as urban scale, studies. The experience of Taiwan, as well as those of many other developmental states, lay at the conjunction between paucities of both theoretical traditions. This thesis looks into Kaohsiung, the second largest city in Taiwan, and targets at the Kaohsiung Mass Rapid Transit System (KMRT), to explore the political operation of a mega-project. With this example of a city encountering development crisis and a state in transition to democracy, the thesis tries to enrich the comprehension of the question: how can political structure be restructured in the process of a mega-project? Discarding the dominant state-center perspective, this study looks down to the role of local government, from which the intricate political process of the project, regarding various agents and region difference, is pictured out. Therein the power structure and the rationale of relevant agents are summarized into three parts, First comes the policy analysis. Initiated for urban traffic demands, KMRT later advanced to means of development, with which the city authorities claimed to carry out the transition against the crisis of globalization. This turn, including the BOT institution to which it adapted, was adorned by the government as signs of progress and a representation of its pluralism-governance. Nevertheless, empirical evidences showed that the causes of the turn didn’t accord with the official story; an alternative interpretation referring to concerns of legitimacy is suggested. Secondly, according to the statements and acts on KMRT by state and city governments, dynamics of central-local governmental relationship in the transitional authoritarian state are analyzed. Further, the governance rationale on local policies of the central government, which concerns both the rank of a city and the status of its chief, is outlined. Accordingly, with a comparison analysis covering the period of party alternation in power at both central and local levels, it is suggested that, even if the transition to democracy was claimed complete in Taiwan, the old governance rationale of the authoritarian state may still function. At last, narrowing down to urban scale, the city governance comes to analysis. After party alternation in power in Kaohsiung, a new urban regime, which includes the new mayor and some old local factions, was established, and its evolvement hinged around the implement of KMRT. This coalition, different from traditional ones that benefited from local property development and land-values, exploited state capital of the project through means of construction and engineering. But, it is found that while the government is new in the so-claimed democratic era, its governance patterns still resembles the old mode of clientalism during authoritarian ages. Put together, this study reveals the old-wine-in-new-bottle features of current political operation in Taiwan and Kaohsiung: Even if KMRT seems a policy of a new era, it is not as progressive as it claimed to be. The relevant political operation still somehow corresponds to rationales or patterns in the old authoritarian state. This, of course, is not saying the new political operation is a duplication of the old; further research and discussion are still called for.