:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:從權力的觀點審視土地徵收之結構性問題
書刊名:社會科學論叢
作者:鍾麗娜 引用關係徐世榮 引用關係
作者(外文):Chung, Li-naHsu, Shih-jung
出版日期:2012
卷期:6:2
頁次:頁70-99
主題關鍵詞:權力土地徵收公共利益PowerLand expropriationPublic interest
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(6) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(1)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:4
  • 共同引用共同引用:814
  • 點閱點閱:232
在台灣因為國家機器徵收權的濫用,衍生許多抗議事件,使得土地徵收已成為一嚴重的社會問題。本文藉由權力的三面向,來解構土地徵收制度之實施與修法過程中所涉及之權力觀,並進一步剖析土地徵收制度中,有權者(國家機器)如何取得被支配者(所有權人)自願的順從,以闡述個中權力與利益的糾葛及思索土地徵收問題之根源所在。研究認為,台灣在經濟發展掛帥及選票至上的枷鎖下,國家機器對權力的運籌,已不再是隱而未顯的掌控,而是赤裸裸的權力操縱,加上在政客官僚自利心的共犯結構下,使得土地徵收侷限於技術面而忽略結構面的問題,是為當今面對土地徵收問題首應正本清源的。
Land expropriation has become a serious social problem in Taiwan society. Many protests emerge recently because the state abuses its power of eminent domain. Researches indicate that land policy and land expropriation are strongly influenced (or strictly controlled) by local political coalitions. Using the theory of three dimensions of power the paper tries to dissect the institution of land expropriation and power structure underneath of it. The paper would like to explore the problem of why those victims of land expropriation would obedient to the state's orders. What is the root problem of Taiwan land expropriation? In the name of economic growth and election first the paper maintains that the state has manipulated its hegemonic power on those victims, whose human rights have been deprived because of land expropriation. Accompanied with strong influences from local political factions and financial syndicates the problem of land expropriation has been wrongly defined as technical issue, such as the amount of money compensation. The paper argues that in order to solve the problem of land expropriation the problem of it must be put on the right place.
期刊論文
1.Gendro, R.(2006)。Forging Collective Capacity for Urban Redevelopment: ‘Power To,’ ‘Power Over,’ or Both?。City Community,5(1),5-22。  new window
2.Stone, C. N.(1980)。Systemic Power in Community Decision Making: a Restatement of Stratification Theory。American Political Science Review,74(4),978-990。  new window
3.Bachrach, Peter、Baratz, Morton. S.(1962)。Two Faces of Power。American Political Science Review,56(4),1021-1047。  new window
4.Bachrach, P.、Baratz, M. S.(1963)。Decisions and nondecisions: An analytic framework。American Political Science Review,57(3),632-642。  new window
5.Dahl, Robert Alan(1957)。The Concept of Power。Behavioral Science,2(3),201-215。  new window
6.徐世榮、廖麗敏(20110900)。建構民主人權的土地政策。臺灣社會研究季刊,84,403-429。new window  延伸查詢new window
會議論文
1.陳立夫(2011)。評土地徵收條例修正草案。土地強制徵收學術研討會,輔仁大學法律學院 (會議日期: 2011 年5 月24 日)。輔仁大學。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.鍾麗娜(2012)。都市政治與土地政策之政經結構分析--以台南科學工業園區特定區開發案為例(博士論文)。國立政治大學。new window  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Lukes, Steven、林葦芸(2006)。權力--基進觀點。台北:志文印刷事業有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
2.蕭全政(2000)。政治與經濟的整合--政治經濟的基礎理論。台北:桂冠圖書有限公司。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Crenson, M. A.(1971)。The Un-politics of Air Pollution, A Study of Non-Decision Making in the Cities。Baltimore, MD:The Johns Hopkins Press。  new window
4.Gendron, R.、Domhoff, G. W.(2009)。The Leftmost City: Power and Progressive Politics in Santa Cruz。Boulder, CO:Westview Press。  new window
5.Vaughan, R. J.、Buss, T. F.(1998)。Communicating Social Science Research to Policy Makers。Thousand Oaks:Sage Publications。  new window
6.Gramsci, A.、Quintin Hoare、Geoggrey Nowell Smith(1976)。Selections from the Prison Notebooks。New York, NY:International Publishers。  new window
7.Bachrach, P.、Baratz, M. S.(1970)。Power and Poverty: Theory and Practice。New York, NY。  new window
8.March, James G.、Olsen, Johan P.(1989)。Rediscovering Institutions。New York:Free Press。  new window
9.Polsby, Nelson W.(1963)。Community Power and Political Theory。Yale University Press。  new window
10.Schattschneider, Elmer Eric(1960)。The Semi-Sovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America。Holt, Rinehart, and Winston。  new window
11.Giddens, Anthony(1985)。The Nation-State and Violence。Polity Press。  new window
12.王振寰、瞿海源(2003)。社會學與台灣社會。台北:巨流圖書公司。  延伸查詢new window
13.徐世榮(2001)。土地政策之政治經濟分析:地政學術之補充論述。臺北:正揚出版社。  延伸查詢new window
14.陳新民(1990)。憲法基本權利之基本理論。臺北市:三民書局。new window  延伸查詢new window
15.Gaventa, John(1980)。Power and Powerlessness: Quiescence and Rebellion in an Appalachian Valley。University of Illinois Press。  new window
16.陳東升(19950000)。金權城市:地方派系、財團與臺北都會發展的社會學分析。臺北:巨流。new window  延伸查詢new window
17.Lukes, Steven Michael(1974)。Power: A Radical View。Macmillan Press。  new window
18.丘昌泰(2003)。公共政策:基礎篇。臺北:巨流。new window  延伸查詢new window
19.O'onnell, G.(1979)。Tensions in the B-A State and the Question of Democracy。The Modern Authoritarianism in Latin America。Princeton NJ:Princeton University Press。  new window
其他
1.(20110801)。A7產專區今截標。  延伸查詢new window
2.(20120118)。選後大投資林口A7百億標出。  延伸查詢new window
3.(20120718)。内政部:機捷A7徵收案沒違法,http://news.chinatimes.com/realtime/110101/112012071801500.html., 20120925。  延伸查詢new window
4.(20120706)。未徵地先標售政院遭糾正,http://news.sina.com.tw/article/20120706/7257328.html, 20120925。  延伸查詢new window
5.(20111214)。「土徵條例」三讀,政府徵地改採市價徵收補償,未來徵收導致弱勢者無屋可住,應妥善安置,台灣農民陣線認為實質未採民間要求,將繼續抗爭。  延伸查詢new window
6.(20111213)。内政部:參酌民間版本保護優良農田。  延伸查詢new window
7.(20110717)。内政部列優先法案,吳揆:不為快而草率。  延伸查詢new window
8.(20110715)。發還大埔農地,少數爭端化解。  延伸查詢new window
9.(20111213)。農友淚眼護田:別把我們當傻子一兩千人抗議政院版土地徵收條例「糟透了」夜宿凱到抗爭,經典好米到農因土徵被迫三遷「保護良田有怎麼難嗎」。  延伸查詢new window
10.(20110727)。公視新聞議題中心,http://pnn.pts.org.tw/main/? p=30116, 20120925。  new window
11.(20111213)。土徵條例亂過關民團批走回頭路,http://www.lihpao.com/7action-viewnews-itemid-113603, 20120925。  延伸查詢new window
12.(20111213)。土徵條例修法黑箱,痛批政院版「換湯不換藥」假修法、真騙票,農民三反凱道抗爭。  延伸查詢new window
13.(20110716)。農運再起,馬政府急滅火,營建署刊廣告耀政績。  延伸查詢new window
14.(20100420)。「土地徵收公共利益誰衡量」--地政及不動產學界建言。  延伸查詢new window
15.(20110825)。打造公義社會,馬宣示土地改市價徵收。  延伸查詢new window
16.(20111207)。住宅五法--馬下令本會期要過。  延伸查詢new window
17.(20110715)。相思寮聚落保留配置耕地,兼顧人民權益與公共利益。  延伸查詢new window
18.(20111213)。反土徵法農淚控政府搶地。  延伸查詢new window
19.(20111229)。假修法、金夭壽--沒有土地,哪來正義?。  延伸查詢new window
20.徐世榮(20110601)。土徵修法,回歸憲政體制。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE