臺灣私有文化資產保存的衝突與實作：以鹿港的常民老建築保存運動為例

Abstract

本文探討台灣文化資產保存的結構性困難之處，討論對象鎖定在鹿港的官方政策及民間保存運動的實踐，探討從劃設古蹟保存區到以《文化資產保存法》指定登錄，最後是近期以補貼修繕私有老建築的制度演變過程。潛力文化資產經常被形容為半夜會「被」失火，長久以來，文化資產以及建築相關領域關注的是修繕技術層面的問題，然而這並沒有觸及到核心問題，即所有權人為何要堅持拆除潛力文化資產？都市社會學的傳統關注都市政權在追求都市經濟成長過程中導致房地產價格飆漲的現象，在歷經文化轉向後，開始關注資本積累的新方式是透過地方傳統的復甦來打造文化景觀，可以說國家矛盾地同時肯定所有權人拆除老建築再開發的地產治理邏輯以及所有權人保留老建築以建構文化景觀來刺激文化消費的文化治理方針。都市社會運動理論則關注草根的在地居民及底層勞動者透過抵抗運動來維持空間的文化差異性和獨特性，凸顯運動者和主張保存的所有權人的主體性。本文意圖接合鉅觀的政治經濟環境變遷的分析以及由下而上的公民運動的力量，納入不同行動者的立場以及互動來描繪文資場域的面貌，因而發展出三個主要的問題意識：首先，私有文資保存事件中的所有權人與地方政府、在地公民團體、中介者（包括建商、掮客）之間如何互動？第二、決定所有權人要保存或不保存該老建築的關鍵因素是什麼？第三、私有文化資產的保存需要經歷哪些動員的過程？

本文發現，儘管主張房地產開發是所有權人為何要拆屋的原因的政治經濟學的分析仍具解釋力，大多適用於具有較高經濟潛力的舊都市中心，但是在以鹿港為代表的城鎮地區，所有權人未必完全傾向開發而駁斥保存，反而是出於文資保存門檻過高而放棄，包括現行文資保存的執行在時效上的不可預期性、產權複雜導致整合困難、修繕自負額的分配問題等等。此外，保存與不保存並非是所有權人一念之間的結果，事實上是經歷家族與地方長期的演變過程，包括家族的經濟實力下滑、在地人際網絡的瓦解、家族的光榮情感與記憶扭轉為暗黑與隱晦等等。既然拆除是多重因素構成，那麼保存也應該有超乎經濟的其它途徑，尤其是重建社會關係。近年來由於文資保存制度成效不彰，在保存團體持續的抗爭帶來的壓力下，使得中央政府與地方文化當局不得不修法來作出改革；同時發展出老屋修繕補貼政策，希冀以鼓勵取代法律的強制力來提升所有權人的修繕與保存意願。經本研究的田野發現，老屋修繕政策的順利開展，背後來自一套新的運作模式，文資保存團體親身投入保存修繕的實作，他們的提案包括彈性修繕、以修代租、經營活化等等成功爭取到所有權人認同，最後老屋、老屋所有權人、修繕業者、地方政府共同構成緊密且穩固的行動者網絡。即使目前保存團體面臨修繕經費斷炊的處境，他們在老屋中重啟現代生活的嘗試，仍舊持續為保存帶來豐沛的能量。

This article explores the structural difficulties in the preservation of cultural heritage in Taiwan, discusses the official policies and the practice of the private preservation movement in Lukang, and explores the evolution of the system, including the planning of historic monument preservation areas to the Cultural Assets Preservation Act. The basic legal regulation system, and finally the recent policy of subsidizing the renovation of old private buildings.

Potential cultural assets are often described as being subject to fire (arson) in the middle of the night. For a long time, cultural assets and construction-related fields have focused on the technical aspects of restoration. However, this has not touched on the core issue, which is why the owners insist on demolishing potential cultural assets?

The tradition of urban sociology focuses on the phenomenon of skyrocketing real estate prices caused by urban regimes pursuing urban economic growth. After experiencing the cultural turn, it began to pay attention to the new way of capital accumulation, which is to create cultural landscapes through the revival of local traditions. It can be said that the state paradoxically affirms the real estate governance logic of supporting owners to demolish old buildings for redevelopment, and the cultural governance logic of owners retaining old buildings to construct cultural landscapes and stimulate cultural consumption. On the other hand, urban social movement theory focuses on grassroots local residents and lower-class workers maintaining the cultural difference and uniqueness of space through resistance movements, highlighting the subjectivity of activists and owners who advocate preservation. This study intends to combine the analysis of macroeconomic changes in the political and economic environment and the power of bottom-up citizen movements, and incorporate the positions and interactions of different actors to describe the face of the cultural assets field, thus developing three main problematics : First of all, how do the owners of private cultural assets interact with local governments, local citizen groups, and intermediaries (including builders and brokers)? Second, what are the key factors that determine whether an owner should preserve or not preserve the building? Third, what mobilization processes are needed to preserve private cultural assets?

This article finds that although the analysis of political economy still has explanatory power and is mostly applicable to old urban centers with high economic potential, in rural areas represented by Lukang, the owners do not necessarily fully favor development and refute preservation. On the contrary, The reason for abandoning the idea of preservation is because the threshold for cultural heritage preservation is too high, including the unpredictability of the current implementation of cultural heritage preservation, the difficulty of integration due to complex property rights, the distribution of repair deductibles, etc. In addition, whether to preserve or not to preserve is not the result of a single thought of the owner. In fact, it is a long-term evolution process in which the relationship between the family and the local area is weakened, including the decline of the family's economic strength, the disintegration of the local interpersonal network, the family's glorious emotions and memory is transformed into darkness and obscurity, so preservation should have other means beyond economics, such as rebuilding social relationships. In recent years, due to the ineffectiveness of the cultural heritage preservation system and the pressure brought by the continued struggles of preservation groups, the central government and local cultural authorities have had to amend the law to make reforms; at the same time, they have developed a subsidy policy for the renovation of old houses, hoping to encourage method rather than force to enhance the owner's willingness to repair and preserve. According to the fieldwork of this study, the success of the old house renovation policy comes from a new operating model. Different from the traditional government rationing project funds that are contracted to manufacturers, cultural heritage preservation groups have invested in the implementation of preservation and renovation. Their proposals include Flexible repairs, repairs instead of leasing, business revitalization, etc. successfully won the approval of the owners. In the end, the old houses, the owners of the old houses, the repairers, and the local government formed a close and stable network of actors. Even though preservation groups are currently facing a shortage of funds for repairs, their attempts to restart modern life in old houses continue to bring abundant energy to preservation.