Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/128915
|
| Title: | 臺北市非正式住宅之成因與對策
Informal Housing in Taipei–Causes and Measures |
| Authors: | 趙家涓
Chao, Chia-Chuan |
| Contributors: | 林子欽
Lin, Tzu-Chin
趙家涓
Chao, Chia-Chuan |
| Keywords: | 非正式住宅
違章建築
公共選擇理論
Illegal building
Informal housing
Public choice theory |
| Date: | 2019 |
| Issue Date: | 2020-03-02 11:24:12 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 違章建築多年來一直與雜亂無髒的建築印象、貧民窟、不文明象徵掛上等號。
而在許多國家中，社會菁英、中產階級或是學生等也會居住於該建築之中。因其
擁有政府提供不完全或不及提供之社會功能，許多國外文獻不會將它們歸類為
“非法建築”，而是以“非正式住宅”來稱呼。本研究把臺北市違章建築現象放
置國際討論並分析，可以發現同樣高度發展的城市，如：香港、倫敦，因人口快
速增長對住宅供應產生直接衝擊、遷移居民沒有能力承租或購買等問題，迫使人
民開始興建或居住於非正式建築，然更多的是隱蔽在合法建物中，造成即便有公
共安全疑慮但政府卻無從查起，而臺北市文獻及法規仍以負面意涵之違章建築為
主要稱呼。
本研究將對臺北與各國非正式住宅類型進行分類，並歸納出已開發國家特有
之非正式住宅現象，再以公共選擇理論切入，探討臺北市政府針對違章建築政策
之實行原因。研究中將違章建築決策的行為者分為政府部門、政治人物與利益團
體，研究結果發現臺北市政府相較於西方國家，對於部分違章建築抱持肯定其存
在的態度並允許最低生活活動，但卻直接否定未來合法的可能，其中影響臺北市
違章建築拆除的行動者又以政府部門為主。
For many years, illegal buildings have been identified with cluttered, dirty, slums, or uncivilized symbols. But in many countries, social elites, middle class or students also live in those buildings. However, due to the social functions that the government provides incomplete or unreachable, many foreign papers do not classify them as “illegal buildings” but as “informal houses”. This study puts the informality in Taipei into an international discussion and analysis, and finds the same phenomenon in highly developed cities. The rapid population growth has a direct impact on housing supply, forcing people to start building or living in Informal buildings. More of them are concealed in legal construction, causing the government to fail to check even if there are public security concerns. Even, the regulations and literature in Taipei still call them “the illegal buildings”.
Based on this, this study will classify the informal housing types in Taipei and other
countries, and summarize the phenomenon of informal housing unique to developed countries, and explore the reasons for the implementation of the informal housing policy by the Taipei government from the public choice theory. In the study, the actors were divided into government departments, politicians and interest groups. The research found that the Taipei City Government has a certain attitude towards certain illegal buildings and allows them for minimum living activities but negates the possibility of legality in the future directly. |
| Reference: | 一、中文參考文獻
陳小紅、周鳳，1987，「臺北路邊洗車業之研究，以非正式部門觀」，『建築與
城鄉研究學報』，1（3）：167-178。
莫永榮，2004，「政府服務委託外包的理論與實務：臺灣經驗」，『行政暨政策
學報』，39：75-104。
郭昱瑩，2008，「政府職能與財政政策之析論」，『研考雙月刊』，32（2）：30-
40。
曾鵬光、江哲銘、陳肇堯，2010，「違章建築現象分類與其對外部環境衝擊之研
究—以臺南市為例」，『住宅學報』，19（2）：59-80。
曾鵬光、陳佳欣，2012，「建蔽率與容積率管制誘發開發商建築違建現象之探討
─臺南市新建透天住宅之實證分析」，『住宅學報』，21（1）：19-36。
黃麗玲，2015，「違章建築社區的再思考」，『全國律師』，19（1）：18-27。
二、英文參考文獻
Arrow, Joseph, K., 1963, “Social Choice and Individual Values”, New York：Wiley. Bowen, Howard R., 1943, “The Interpretation of Voting in the Allocation of Economic
Resources”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 58（1）：27-48.
Calor, I. and Alterman, R., 2017, “WHEN ENFORCEMENT FAILS: The legal and planning responses to non-compliant development in two advanced-economy countries”, Journal of Law in the Built Environment, 9（3）：207-239.
Downs, Anthony, 1957, “An Economic Theory of Democracy”, New York：Harper and Row.
Durst, N.J. and Wegman, J., 2017, “Informal Housing in the United States”, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 41（2）：282-297.
Forte, F., 2014, “Illegal Buildings and Local Finance in New Metropolitan Perspectives”, Advanced Engineering Forum, 11：600-606.
Harris, R., 2018, “Modes of Informal Urban Development A Global Phenomenon”,
Journal of Planning Literature, 33（3）：267-286.
Kapoor, M. and Blanc, D.L., 2008, “Measuring risk on investment in informal （illegal） housing: Theory and evidence from Pune, India”, Regional Science and Urban Economics, 38：311-329.
Lai, L.W.C., 2015, “Squatting by the privileged? A Hong Kong study on the
innovations and ambiguity of property rights of irregular development”, Habitat
International, 50：317-325.
Lombard, M. B., 2019, “Informality as structure or agency? Exploring shed housing in the UK as informal practice.” International Joural of Urban and Research.
Macey, J.R., 1989, “Public Choice: The Theory of the Firm and the Theory of Market Exchange”, Cornell Law Review, 74（1）：43-61.
McChesney, Fred, S., and William, F. Shughart II., 1995, “The Causes and Consequences of Antitrsust： The Public Choice Perspective”, Chicago：The
University of Chicago Press.
Mendez, P. and Quastel, N., 2015, “Subterranean Commodification: Informal Housing and the Legalization of Basement Suites in Vancouver from 1928 to 2009”, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 39（6）：1155-1171.
Merry, M., 2012, “Lessons of the illegal structures controversy”, in Law Lectures for Practitioners 2011.
Niskanen, W., A., 1971, “Bureaucracy and Representative Government”, Chicago：
Aldine Atherton.
Pennington, M., 2000, “Public choice theory and the politics of urban containment:
voter-centred versus special-interest explanations”, Environment and Planning C:
Government and Policy, 18：145-162.
Qiao, S., 2017, “Dealing with Illegal Housing: What Can New York City Learn from
Shenzhen?”, Fordham Urban Law Journal, 43（3）：743-769.
Olson, M., 1971, “The Logic of Collective action：Public Goods and the Theory of
Groups”, Mass：Harvard University Press.
Shirgaokar, M. and Rumbach, A., 2018, “Investigating housing tenures beyond
homeownership: a study of informal settlements in Kolkata, India”, Housing Study,
33（1）：117-139.
Tanasescu, A. and Chiu, E.W. and Smart, A., 2010, “Tops and bottoms: State tolerance of illegal housing in Hong Kong and Calgary”, Habitat International, 34：478-484.
Tullock, G., Seldon, A., and Gordon L. Brady, 2000, “Government Whose Obedient
Servant? A Primer in Public Choice”, London：The Institute of Economic Affairs.
Tullock, G., 1993, “Rent Seeking”, Aldershot, Hants, England；Brookfield, Vt., USA：E. Elgar.
Turner, J.C., 1968, “Housing Priorities, Settlement Patterns, and Urban Development in Modernizing Countries”, Journal and the American Institute of Planners, 34（6）：354-363.
Wegman, J. and Bell, J.P., 2016, “The Invisibility of Code Enforcement in Planning
Praxis: The Case of Informal Housing in Southern California”, City and Regional
Planning, 13（1）：20-29.
Wegman, J. and Mawhorter, S., 2017, “Measuring Informal Housing Production in
California Cities”, Journal of the American Planning Association, 83（2）：119-
130.
Yau, Y. and Chiu, S.M., 2015, “Combating building illegality in Hong Kong: A policy
Delphi study”, Habitat International, 49：349-356.
Yau, Y. and Ho, D.C.W., 2017, “Exploring policy options to combat illegal microapartments in Hong Kong”, Urbani Izziv, 28（2）：83-95.
Zhao, P. and Zhang, M., 2018, “Informal suburbanization in Beijing: An investigation of informal gated communities on the urban fringe”, Habitat International, 77：130-142.
Zhao, S.（2018, January 22）. Re：One in four Hong Kong properties has illegal
structures, but most owners get away with their misdeeds [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from：https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-crime/article/2129906/one-fourhong-kong-properties-has-illegal-structures-most. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
地政學系
106257026 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106257026 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| DOI: | 10.6814/NCCU202000353 |
| Appears in Collections: | [地政學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 702601.pdf | 2513Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
