鄰避與風險社會：新店安坑掩埋場設置的個案分析

Abstract

在現代化與都市化的過程中，許多集體消費之必要公共設施與非集體消費之生產設施，均面臨了因設施之外部性擴散，而引起設施週邊民眾反對與抗爭之現象，此一現象一般以鄰避稱之。過去探討鄰避的相關文獻大都是以問題解決的觀點看待鄰避現象：鄰避被定調成不要在我家後院的自私說法。對少數的受害者以補償、回饋等手段來降低不滿的情緒。然而這樣的看法基本上同意以及強化鄰避現象是社會必要之惡。鄰避現象的領域問題、專家政治與問題解決模式是現代化之下的觀點。在另一種現代化風險社會的觀點之下，鄰避現象呈現出截然不同的面貌。首先風險社會強調風險無所不在，風險的分佈並不會限定於某種空間或階級的領域之內；其次，風險社會批判專家政治在現代化的資本主義生產方式下，科學與資本主義已結合成巨大的結構，主導社會的發展。這樣的結合，壟斷了決策，也排除一般人的參與，因此鄰避現象事實上是建構在現代化概念的社會現象。本文以新店安坑掩埋場的設置為例，探討風險社會對鄰避現象的另一種詮釋。本文指出選址於新店不是在最小抵抗策略下的考量，反省性的現代化有跡可循。地方的抗爭可以驗證貝克的看法，以次政治的動員打破非政治的迷思。

In the process of industrialization and urbanization, collective consumption public facilities as well as private productive facilities are often in the face with people's demonstration caused by suffering from the externalities made by the facilities. This is called ‘Nimby, not-in-my-back-yard’. Normally, Nimby is dealt with a problem-solving point of view and seen as a selfish act. The sufferers are to be compensated to ease their dissatisfaction. However, this viewpoint actually takes Nimby as a necessity and reinforces Nimby. Nimby, under modernization perspective, is characterized as a territorized issue, an elitism and problem-solving model. Nevertheless Nimby would be quite different in another modernization. Risk society, firstly, points out that risk is everwhere, not belonging to some spaces and classes only. Secondly, elitism under modern capitalism should be criticized for it combines science and capitalism to social development, monopolizes decision-making and excludes people from participation. Nimbly is therefore resulted from modernization. Taking the landfill at Hsintien for instance, the paper puts Nimby into the risk society framework. In addition, the paper points out that the siting of the Hsintien landfill was not because of the least resistance path. Reflexive modernization happens in the case. Beck's theory is supported by the case study that sub-politics mobilization would undermine the myth of non-politics.