都市更新不曾發生：台北市的上流化政策分析

Urban Renewal Did Not Take Place: Policy Analysis of Urban Gentrification in Taipei

近年來台北市最重要的都市政策就是都市更新，都市更新就是上流化政策、都市再發展的一種形式。經由容積獎勵政策引導，強大的社會與經濟動員力量使得台北市區內隨處可見的都更狂潮，在許多美好的政策宣傳和慾望想像的背後，卻越來越忽視伴隨上流化（gentrification）配套的社會結構取代（displacement）效果。本文將先分析都市更新論述與政策形成的主要論述資源，芝加哥學派的有機功能論述，重新連結上流化政策與取代和社會排除的關係，並且重新建立適合的研究方法，以底層長時間的紀錄敘事，拓展取代的定義，並拉近都市更新政策研究與社會實踐的距離。本文透過四種個案經驗資料，歸納出以產權和更新範圍劃界的雙重邏輯作為分類的基礎，揭示社會排除和取代在都市更新計畫執行的不同階段，分別以不同的形式出現，更甚者在更新計畫實施前，社會排除和取代現象早已真實的發生。最後，作者在結論中提出，都市更新體制有如「圍城」，更新地區猶如被圍困的城堡，我們必須看見裡面正在進行的以土地所有權為核心價值的清洗整理工作。追求城市生活的尊嚴與改善生活環境，是一種基本的城市權（right to the city）因此，我們需要突破土地所有權的侷限以及更新範圍劃設邏輯的利益框架，看見不同差異的彼此，並在過程中合作，重新構築都市公共性論述與社會實踐的機會。

”Urban Renewal” has been the most important urban policy for Taipei city in recent years, and it is one of the types of gentrification policy. People can see that, under the guidance floor area bonus policy, the power of social and economic mobilize the fanatical wave of urban renewal is ubiquitous in almost every block in Taipei city, and people have gradually become neglectful of the effects of gentrification applied with displacement, all thanks to the fancy policy propaganda and the imagination of the desires. This article first analyzes the main discourse resources formed by the urban renewal and policies and the organic functional discourse from Chicago School, and reconnects the relationship between gentrification and social exclusion, and then recreates appropriate research methods and narrative from the bottom of the society for a long periods, and unfolds the definition of displacement and bridges the gap between urban renewal policy research and social practice. Furthermore, this article sorts the empirical data from 4 cases based on the demarcation logic of property and renewal boundary making and finds that actually existing social exclusion and displacement even before renewal plans are put into execution. Finally, the author proposes in the conclusion that the urban renewal regime is like ”fortress besieged”, the area being renewed is like a castle under siege, and there are land-ownership washing process taking place inside it. The dignity of living and the improvement of the living environment in a city are a cry and a demand, as well as a right to the city. Therefore, we need to break the limitation of the land-ownership and the profit framework of the urban renewal boundary making demarcation logic, in order to see the differences of each others, and to work together to reclaim the public discourse and public practice that belong to the people.