英文摘要 |
As an actor in the ''Humanity Innovation and Social Practice (HISP)'' project, the project team often faces internal disputes over routes when conceiving and promoting action plans. It can be regarded as the difference between ''community construction'' and ''regional revitalization''. In terms of current policy trends, regional revitalization is given the role of ''surpassing'' community construction, and regarded as a more integrated concept. That dispute also occurred how Tunghai University conceived the action plan for Taichung city and Taichung Second Public Retail Market. This article is a reflection that was born in this practice process. As far as action research is concerned, actions can advance the possibilities of research, but we also need clear concepts to guide actions. Therefore, this article is not a policy analysis, but focuses on the social meaning of those concepts. First I sort out the recent discussions of ''regional revitalization'', and reveal how regional revitalization semantically construct the legitimacy of the concept that is different from and superior to community construction. Secondly, by reviewing the recent discussions of ''community construction'', I try to provide a basis for further discussion. Furthermore, this article attempts to demonstrate that the two concepts are based on different normative foundations, which are difficult to reduce and surpass each other. With the help of Erik O. Wright's discourse on eroding capitalism, it reveals the key differences between the values behind the two concepts. Finally, I return to the case of Taichung Second Public Retail Market to explain how we made the decisions about the action plan. |