:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:地方文化資產保存運動的共識動員分析:以苗栗護窯運動為借鏡
書刊名:臺灣社會研究季刊
作者:吳翠松 引用關係吳季昕
作者(外文):Wu, Tsui-sungWu, Chi-hsin
出版日期:2014
卷期:97
頁次:頁63-110
主題關鍵詞:護窯運動共識動員地方文化資產保存運動地方社會運動構框苗栗縣政府The protection movement of the Brick KilnsConsensus mobilizationLocal cultural heritage preservation movementLocal social movementFramingMiaoLi County Government
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(2) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:2
  • 共同引用共同引用:77
  • 點閱點閱:100
本文欲以苗栗護窯運動為釋例,探討目前台灣文化情境下,地方文資保存運動者在建構認同的過程中,通常提出什麼論述、行動及儀式以形成集體共識?地方政府又是透過何種機制與論述去消解社運者欲喚起的共識認同?窯盟的共識動員過程,又在哪些地方出了問題? 研究結果發現,在拆除古窯前的論述構框交鋒部分,窯盟主打三座窯(包仔窯、四方窯和八卦窯)的稀有性,並籲請苗栗縣政府在原預定的高鐵興建區內成立古窯人文生態博物館,以創造文化觀光雙贏局面。縣府則以審議委員會決議「窯不具稀有性」與辦理都市計畫變更將嚴重影響高鐵苗栗站的「開發」時程反應;在拆窯後,窯盟將論述構框在地方與中央相關官員的究責與質疑文資審議機制的缺失,並要求「原址保留」地下煙道,重建古窯;縣府則強調一切「依法行政」,並依事後補正的審議委員會議決議,將地下煙道「移地」保存。綜觀來看,窯盟共識動員過於強調理性認知層次,缺乏感性情緒層次,難創造動員潛力,另過於重視拆除古窯的究責,缺乏在地互動與議題結合,致使在地民眾投入度不高,再加上文化保存議題本身的理想性,難以製造一般民眾利益參與的誘因,而縣府拆窯迅速,造成後續目標變動與無專業解決方案,亦是造成此文化保存運動難以動員的原因之一。
This article tried to use the Protection Movement of the Brick Kilns in MiaoLi to be an example to explore the respective consensus mobilization process for actor of local cultural heritage preservation movement and Local Government in contemporary Taiwan situation. In this study , we adopt text analysis and interview to be researchmethods. We analyze 50 news reports , relative government documents and interview 13 participamts of the Protection Movement of Brick Kilins. For analyzing convenience , the whole protection movement of the Brick Kilns was divided into two different phase–before and after demolition. The results showed that before the demolition of the Kilns, the discourse framing of the association for the Protection Movement of the Brick Kilns was focused on the rarity of the Kiln, and call on government to establish the Kiln Museum of human ecology in order to create a win-win situation; then MioLi County Government stressed the Kiln is not a rare cultural heritage through Resolution of the of Cultural Heritage Committee, and the changes of urban planning process will seriously affect the “developmental” schedule of high-speed rail MiaoLi station. After demolition of the kiln, kiln Association’s discourse framed on the illegal and responsibility of the local and central government and appealed to reserve the underground flue pipes according their original place ; MioLi County Government stressed that they are the “administration according to law”, and moved the underground flue pipes to other place. In short, it is too emphasized the rational cognitive level and lacked of emotional level of discourse framing for the Kiln Association in mobilizing consensus to difficult to attract participants; and lack in interactive or combination of issues with local affair , resulting in the low sense of involvement for local people; in addition that kiln body was demolition too quickly by the MioLi County Government to react immediately, all of these were the reasons of failure for this cultural preservation movement .
期刊論文
1.何明修(20100300)。誰的家園、哪一種願景?--發展主義陰影下的社區運動。臺灣民主季刊,7(1),1-30。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.監察院(2009)。公告糾正苗栗縣政府辦理「擬定高速鐵路苗栗車站特定區」都市計畫,未確實審酌查核所轄之傳統古窯區位,致遭拆除,又執意採「移地保存」方式處理,亦將導致傳統古窯毀壞殆盡,核有重大違失案。監察院公報,2665,3-9。  延伸查詢new window
3.Analiese, R.、Daromir, R.(2009)。Economies of affect。Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (N.S.),15,57-77。  new window
4.Shilling, C.(2001)。Embodiment, experience and theory: In defense of the sociological tradition。The Sociological Review,49(3),327-344。  new window
5.夏鑄九(19920900)。現階段古蹟保存之重要課題。造園季刊,11,19-24。  延伸查詢new window
6.許育典、李惠圓(20061100)。多元文化國下建築文化資產保存的建構。臺灣土地研究,9(2),75-96。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.葉乃齊(19950800)。臺灣古蹟保存運動的過去與未來。臺灣史料研究,6,169-185。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.Steinberg, Marc W.(1998)。Tilting the Frame: Considerations on Collective Action Framing from a Discursive Turn。Theory and Society,27(6),845-872。  new window
9.Williams, Rhys H.(1995)。Constructing the Public Good: Social Movements and Cultural Resources。Social Problems,42(1),124-144。  new window
10.Klandermans, B.(1984)。Mobilization and participation: Social psychological expansion of resource mobilization theory。American Sociological Review,49(5),583-600。  new window
11.Benford, Robert D.、Snow, David A.(2000)。Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment。Annual Review of Sociology,26(1),611-639。  new window
12.何明修(20041200)。文化、構框與社會運動。臺灣社會學刊,33,157-199。new window  延伸查詢new window
13.Snow, David A.、Rochford, Edmund Burke Jr.、Worden, Steven K. Jr.、Benford, Robert D.(1986)。Frame Alignment Processes, Micromobilization, and Movement Participation。American Sociological Review,51(4),464-481。  new window
會議論文
1.林彥斌(2011)。新聞再現與真實:從三等縣看苗栗縣意象之建構。2011年佛光大學第三屆傳播與發展學術研討會。宜蘭。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.賴子儀(2010)。文化資產的社會建構(碩士論文)。雲林科技大學。  延伸查詢new window
2.林秀茹(2005)。公共論域做為文化資產保存機制之研究--以清水鎮大楊油庫為例(碩士論文)。朝陽科技大學,台中縣。  延伸查詢new window
3.洪菀蔆(2009)。挑戰捷運:橋頭糖廠與樂生療養院的保存運動比較研究(碩士論文)。南華大學。  延伸查詢new window
4.謝雨潔(2004)。空間的歷史再書寫--「蔡瑞月舞蹈研究社」的保存運動(碩士論文)。國立臺灣大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.苗栗縣文化局(1996)。窯業•陶瓷•影像。苗栗:苗栗縣政府文化局。  延伸查詢new window
2.苗栗縣文化局(1997)。蔡川竹陶藝遺作集。苗栗:苗栗縣政府文化局。  延伸查詢new window
3.郭景萍(2008)。情感社會學:理論.歷史.現實。上海:上海三聯書店。  延伸查詢new window
4.Porta, D. D.、Diani, M.、苗延威(1999)。社會運動概論。台北:巨流。  延伸查詢new window
5.Illouz, Eva(2007)。Cold Intimacies: The making of emotional capitalism。Polity Press。  new window
6.鄧淑慧(2001)。苗栗的傳統古窯:一個生態博物館的雛形。苗栗:苗栗縣政府文化局。  延伸查詢new window
7.何明修(2005)。社會運動概論。臺北:三民書局。  延伸查詢new window
8.趙鼎新(20070000)。社會運動與革命:理論更新和中國經驗。臺北:巨流。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.TenHouten, W. D.(2007)。A general theory of emotions and social life。Routledge。  new window
其他
1.苗栗縣政府(2007)。高鐵特定區主要計畫書及(第一期發展地區)細部發展計畫書,http://urbanplanning.miaoli.gov.tw/upmiaoli/FileSender.aspx?cfg=urbanplanDataFolder&file=S002.PDF&id=233, 2013/02/15。  延伸查詢new window
2.王俊秀(20090303)。沒有文化 哪來創意。  延伸查詢new window
3.李信宏(20100226)。林振豐轉任故宮南院「全力以赴」。  延伸查詢new window
4.李乾朗(20090301)。四角窯高明之處。  延伸查詢new window
5.胡蓬生(20090221)。搶救古窯遺骸 覓地重建。  延伸查詢new window
6.胡蓬生(20090314)。川竹古窯被拆 監委進行調查。  延伸查詢new window
7.苗栗縣政府(20081223)。縣府回應後龍四方窯保存爭議。  延伸查詢new window
8.苗栗縣政府(20090109)。縣府說明四方、八卦窯經文化資產審議委員審議結果不予保存。  延伸查詢new window
9.張世賢(20090108)。剷除苗栗文物。  延伸查詢new window
10.張雅文(20110228)。陶子挺故鄉 請大家到苗栗走走。  延伸查詢new window
11.陳尹宗,陳慧貞(20110226)。陶子未開發論惹火苗栗人。  延伸查詢new window
12.陳光軒(20140205)。只有地皮 沒有土地。  延伸查詢new window
13.陳舒泰(20130906)。苗栗縣長德政挨批 傳取消免費營養午餐。  延伸查詢new window
14.陳信雄(20090304)。拆古窯 拆掉台灣文化特質。  延伸查詢new window
15.彭健禮(20081108)。後龍松興窯將拆 陶品清倉大拍賣。  延伸查詢new window
16.彭健禮(20081224)。古窯不保 藝文人士焚書抗議。  延伸查詢new window
17.彭健禮(20090109)。強調依法行政 縣府太官僚。  延伸查詢new window
18.彭健禮(20090225)。搶救四角窯大學師生做記錄。  延伸查詢new window
19.彭健禮,凌美雪(20090228)。搶救苗栗四角窯剩兩天。  延伸查詢new window
20.黃義雄(20090109)。拆除2古窯 苗縣府稱係經文化資產審議不保留,http://www.newstaiwan.com.tw/index.php?menu=newst&ms=4&nnid=39803, 2014/09/22。  延伸查詢new window
21.劉介修(20090323)。鄉親為什麼不看多明哥。  延伸查詢new window
22.傅潮標(20090311)。苗栗古窯殘跡 地下煙道決議移地保留。  延伸查詢new window
23.商周集團(20140416)。《商業周刊》揭露「台灣20縣市財政昏迷指數評比」,http://bw.businessweekly.com.tw/press/content.php?id=21672, 2014/04/18。  延伸查詢new window
24.傅潮標,李信宏(20091111)。擺脫三等縣 楊長鎮挑戰劉政鴻。  延伸查詢new window
25.苗栗縣政府(2004)。擬定高速鐵路苗栗車站特定區主要計畫書,http://urbanplanning.miaoli.gov.tw/HSR/pdf/pdf2.pdf, 2013/04/14。  延伸查詢new window
26.苗栗縣政府國際文化觀光局(20090109)。文化局針對中央客家學院公共論壇所提出的「高鐵特定區」古窯說明,https://app.box.com/shared/18qOlvdclz, 2013/04/14。  延伸查詢new window
27.徐嶔煌(20120702)。縣市誰先破產?高雄負債2136億冠全國苗栗每人負債七萬一超越台北,http://www.naipo.eom/Portals/1/web_tw/Knowledge_Center/Editorial/publish-33.htm, 2014/04/18。  延伸查詢new window
28.陶晶瑩(20110226)。苗栗之戰,http://www.babyou.com/imiex.php?cio=news&loc, 2013/05/02。  new window
29.梁庭豪(20110216)。大學生了沒,台北:野火娛樂事業有限公司。,https://www.youtube.com/watchPv-LF9MNoR39As, 2014/09/22。  延伸查詢new window
30.鄧淑慧(20081224)。焚書祭窯神之後:給關心搶救苗栗古窯的朋友們,http://rescueoldkiln.blogspot.tw/2008/12/blog-post_l062.html, 2013/04/14。  延伸查詢new window
31.鄧淑慧(20090220)。為何還要求「古窯」?,http://rescueoldkiln.blogspot.tw/2009/02/blog-post.html, 2013/04/14。  延伸查詢new window
32.黛盟(20081222)。搶救苗栗三大古窯,http://campaign.tw-npo.org/sign.php?id=2008122204193100, 2013/04/14。  new window
33.黛盟(20081223)。焚書祭窯神,請命保古窯,http://rescueoldkiln.blogspot.tw/2008/12/ blog-post_23.html, 2013/04/14。  new window
34.窯盟(20090114)。古窯頭七祭:窯出苗栗新文化--六項要求、兩項號召,http://rescueoldkiln.blogspot.tw/2009/01/blog-post_l4.html, 2013/04/14。  延伸查詢new window
35.窯盟(20090119)。文資「審議」變「座談」,苗栗古窯死得好冤枉!,http://rescueoldkiln.Wogspot.tw/2009/01/t)log-post_19.html, 2013/04/14。  延伸查詢new window
36.行政院文化建設委員會(20090108)。苗栗古窯拆除的問題癥結。  延伸查詢new window
37.行政院文化建設委員會(20090203)。有關自由時報3日刊載「文建會修文資法 懲民不懲官」一文,內容顯有誤解,本會特此澄清。  延伸查詢new window
38.行政院文化建設委員會(20090306)。文建會要求苗栗縣政府執行暫定古蹟程序正視苗栗磚窯產業設施保存。  延伸查詢new window
39.窯盟(20090106)。古窯化身黏土人,北上文建會:記者會採訪通知。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.Snow, D. A.、Benford, R. D.(1992)。Master frames and cycles of protest。Frontiers in Social Movement Theory。Yale University Press。  new window
2.DiMaggio, P.(2002)。Why cognitive (and cultural) sociology needs cognitive psychology。Culture in mind: Toward a sociology of culture and cognition。New York:Routledge。  new window
3.Tuner, R.(1981)。Collective behavior and resource mobilization as approaches to social movements: Issues and continuities。Research in social movements, conflicts and change。Princeton-Hall。  new window
4.Klandermans, B.(1992)。The social construction of protest and multi-organization fields。Frontiers in social movement theory。New Haven:Yale University Press。  new window
5.Snow, David A.、Benford, Robert D.(1988)。Ideology, frame resonance and participant mobilization。From Structure to Action: Social Movement Participation Across Cultures。Greenwich, CT:London:JAP Press。  new window
6.Hutchinson, John、Smith, Anthony D.(1996)。[Ethnicity] Introduction。Ethnicity。Oxford University Press。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE