曖昧的公園─台北市公園綠地向堤外移轉的政治經濟學分析

Abstract

本研究以台北市河濱公園之發展歷程作為研究主軸，試圖釐清與探究台北市公園綠地歷年來逐漸移轉至堤外之現象的背後主導力量，以及其所造成的影響與問題。 從日治時代開始，歷代政府皆並未積極面對都市公園綠地不足的問題。而這樣逐漸惡化與擴大的都市問題，則在將河川整治之後的堤外高灘地充作「河濱公園」，並試圖制度化成一般都市公園的作法下得到了抒解。但隨之而來的問題，則是對其定位的爭議以及在防洪安全與休憩使用上的矛盾衝突。 本研究以都市成長機器理論為觀察介面。挑選台北市公園闢建史上具代表性的三個個案（十四十五號公園、寶藏巖以及大佳河濱公園）進行案例分析。指出「河濱公園」作為一種台北市新興的特殊空間產物，其獨特而無法被明確定義的曖昧性，以及得以快速成長並被市民大眾接納的原因，乃是因為「河濱公園」已成為了都市成長聯盟與反成長聯盟的共同解。而原本都市規劃與公園綠地的闢建等作為市場機制所無法維持資本主義社會再生產的國家介入手段，則被「河濱公園」所破解，並將隨著其逐漸成為台北重要的都市集體消費場域，而變得越來越不可取代。 台北市都市堤防內土地的高度資本再積累隨著都市成長機器運作下依舊蓬勃，而隨著「河濱公園」在被定位與理解為一種體制內的「公園」與都市集體消費之後，反成長聯盟的施力點變得薄弱，其聲音亦被「河濱公園」的綠色形象所消音。市民大眾在不知覺與不自覺的情況下，失去了爭取政府提供都市集體消費的權力與動力。

“Riverside Park” is a newly arising spatial product in Taipei. This study analyzes the political-economy development process of riverside park in Taipei. The objectives are to clarify the leading forces that transform traditionally inner city located parks in Taipei to riverside in the past decades and justify their impacts and issues caused by the transformation. Since the Japanese Colonial Period, none of the city government leaders has positively faced the shortage of green space. The problem is solved when vacant riverside space is artificially transformed into “riverside park” after river remediation and when riverside flood terrain is institutionalized as urban space. However, the tradeoffs accompanied are the public conflicts in terms of flood protection, erosion control, native habitat protection, recreation, and spiritual values. This study shapes the political-economy justification from the perspectives of Urban Growth Machine Theory. Three cases in the riverside park transforming history of Taipei (No. 14 and 15 Park, Bao-Tzang-Yen and Da-jia Riverside Park) are analyzed. The unique and unidentified ambiguity and the reasons that cause fast “riverside park” growth and being widely accepted by the public are that “riverside park” has become the greatest common divisor between urban growth coalition and anti-urban growth coalition. Moreover, the intervention initiated by the state produced as the outcome of applying urban planning and riverside renovation not only to symbolize a market mechanism of exchange value but to support the capitalist society, which can’t totally sustained by “inner city park.” “Riverside Park” slowly becomes an important collective and irreplaceable consumption in Taipei. The spatial competition and capital agglomeration in Taipei is still challenging under the operation of urban growth machine. However, while “Riverside Park” is justified as institutionalized “park” and urban collective consumption, the real-world application of anti-urban growth coalition is weak due to the green image of “riverside parks” is diminishing. As a result, the public loses their privileges and incentives to fight for urban collective consumption produced by city government and pro-growth coalition.