Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/111507
|
| Title: | 居住正義－從城市權談起
Housing Justice: from the right to the city |
| Authors: | 楊明瑜
Yang, Ming-Yu |
| Contributors: | 陳起行
Chen, Chi-Shing
楊明瑜
Yang, Ming-Yu |
| Keywords: | 城市權
居住正義
David Harvey
Henri Lefebvre
Right to the city
Housing justice
David harvey
Henri lefebvre |
| Date: | 2017 |
| Issue Date: | 2017-07-31 11:13:45 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 居住為人的基本需求。近年來，房價高漲的議題逐漸受到重視，許多人無法負擔高昂的房價與租金，只能住在擁擠的房子或流離失所，或因為背負著鉅額的房屋貸款或租金而犧牲生活品質。因此在選舉時居住正義成為候選人的競選政見之一，國內也發生以居住正義為口號而發起的許多社會運動。一般而言，學界通常會以聯合國《經濟社會與文化權利國際公約》第11條以及針對該公約的第7號一般性意見作為闡述居住權內涵的文本內容，以及憲法第15條關於財產權保障的角度討論居住權。惟法律研究鮮少針對資本社會進行背後脈絡的剖析。
本研究希望先藉由爬梳在資本社會中資本運轉的邏輯是什麼，並以城市權(right to the city)理論發展居住正義的內涵。故本研究分二部分，第一部分利用新馬克斯主義地理學者David Harvey的資本循環理論以及掠奪式積累作為詮釋資本社會的核心，以及使用價值與交換價值矛盾的現象解釋反思的房地產市場。第二部分則以城市權理論探討居住正義的意涵，並據以回應2012年發生於臺北市士林區文林苑的都市更新爭議中所遇到的困境。
最後，本研究認為處理房價高漲的關鍵，在於房地產不適合作為一般商品販賣。房價與城市剩餘價值的分配密切相關，剩餘價值不應由所有權人獨享。因此本質上是政治、經濟以及社會的集體問題。城市權理論本身重視住民與城市互動的政治關係，此為集體的關係，並強調找回城市的使用價值，避免交換價值凌駕城市的發展。故以此理論發展的思維框架將有助於我們扭轉房價高漲的困境，達成居住正義的目標。
Residing somewhere is one of the basic needs of people. In recent years, the high house prices had become important topic in public opinion. During the election period, it was one of the candidates’ political reviews to deal with this problem. Many social movements dedicated to Housing Justice also arose from civil society. In general, academics often discuss the right to housing in the context of “article 11 of the United Nations International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights” and “general comment No. 7 on the Convention” as a textual expression on the meaning of it. Moreover, to discuss it in the context of Article 15 of the Constitution on the protection of property rights. Nevertheless, there are few legal researches focus on the logic of capital society.
The purpose of this study is to find out what the logic of capital operation in the capital society is, and to develop the connotation of housing justice with the theory of “Right to the City”. The first part of this study uses the new Marxist geographer David Harvey`s theory of “circuits of circulation” and “accumulation by dispossession” as the core of the interpretation of capital society. Further, using the contradictions between use value and exchange value to reflect the real estate market. The second part discusses the meaning of Housing Justice with the theory of the “Right to the City” and responds to the dilemma faced in the urban renewal dispute in Wenlinyuan, Shihlin District, Taipei.
Finally, the study argues that the key to high house prices is that real estate is not suitable for general merchandise trafficking. The price is closely related to the distribution of the city`s surplus value, and the surplus value should not be exclusive for the owners. Hence, the high house prices is essentially a political, economic and social collective issue. Theory of the “Right to the City” emphasizes the political relationship between residents and urban, which is a collective relationship, stresses the use value of the city, and avoids the exchange value dominating the city`s development. Therefore, the theoretical framework will help us to reverse the plight of housing prices, and to achieve the goal of housing justice. |
| Reference: | 一、英文部分
Attoh, K. A. (2011). What Kind of Right is the Right to the City? Progress in Human Geography, 35(5), 669-685.
Banerjee, A. V., & Duflo, E. (2011). Poor Economics: A Radical Rethinking of the Way to Fight Global Poverty: Public Affairs.
Brown, A. (2013). The Right to the City: Road to Rio 2010. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(3), 957-971.
Brown, A., & Kristiansen, A. (2009). Urban Policies and the Right to the City.
Butler, C. (2009). Critical Legal Studies and the Politics of Space. Social & Legal Studies, 18(3), 313-332.
Byrne, J. P., & Diamond, M. (2007). Affordable Housing, Land Tenure, and Urban Policy: The Matrix Revealed. Fordham Urb. LJ, 34, 527.
Cohen, J., & Fung, A. (2004). Radical Democracy. Swiss journal of political science, 10(4), 23-34.
Collins, S. D. (2006). Aristotle and the Rediscovery of Citizenship: Cambridge University Press.
De Souza, M. L. (2001). The Brazilian Way of Conquering the “Right to the City” Successes and Obstacles in the Long Stride towards an “Urban Reform”. disP-The Planning Review, 37(147), 25-31.
De Souza, M. L. (2010). Which Right to Which City? In Defence of Political-Strategic Clarity. Interface, 2(1), 315-333.
Dikeç, M. (2002). Police, Politics, and the Right to the City. GeoJournal, 58(2-3), 91-98.
Dikeç, M., & Gilbert, L. (2002). Right to the City: Homage or a New Societal Ethics? Capitalism Nature Socialism, 13(2), 58-74.
Engle, E. (2006). Universal Human Rights: a Generational History. Ann. Surv. Int`l & Comp. L., 12, 219-268.
Fernandes, E. (2007). Constructing the Right to the City`in Brazil. Social & Legal Studies, 16(2), 201-219.
Friendly, A. (2013). The Right to the City: Theory and Practice in Brazil. Planning Theory & Practice, 14(2), 158-179.
Harvey, D. (1992). Social Justice, Postmodernism and the City. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 16(4), 588-601.
Harvey, D. (2003). The New Imperialism: Oxford University Press, USA.
Harvey, D. (2005a). A Brief History of Neoliberalism. London: Oxford University Press.
Harvey, D. (2005b). Spaces of Neoliberalization: Towards a Theory of Uneven Geographical Development (Vol. 8): Franz Steiner Verlag.
Harvey, D. (2007). A Brief History of Neoliberalism: Oxford University Press, USA.
Harvey, D. (2008). The Right to the City. The City Reader, 6, 23-40.
Harvey, D. (2010a). Social Justice and the City (Vol. 1): University of Georgia Press.
Harvey, D. (2010b). A companion to Marx`s Capital (Vol. 1). Verso Books.
Harvey, D. (2011). The Enigma of Capital: and the Crises of Capitalism: Profile Books.
Harvey, D. (2012). Rebel Cities: From the right to the city to the urban revolution. London: Verso.
Harvey, D. (2014). Seventeen Contradictions and the End of Capitalism: Oxford University Press (UK).
He, S. (2015). Right to the City: A Liberal-Democratic Perspective. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.).
Hickel, J. (2012). A Short History of Neoliberalism (and How We Can Fix It). New Left Project.
Hohfeld, W. N. (1917). Fundamental Legal Conceptions as applied in judicial reasoning. The Yale Law Journal, 26(8), 710-770.
Knudsen, A.-M. (2007). The Right to the City: Spaces of Insurgent Citizenship among Pavement Dwellers in Mumbai, India.
Lefebvre, H. (1996). The Right to the City. Writings on cities, 63-181.
Leonardo, A. (2002). Democracy and the public space in Latin America. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Locke, J. (1994). Two Treaties of Government. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Marcuse, P. (2008). The Housing Change We Need. Shelterforce, Winter.
Marcuse, P. (2009). From Critical Urban Theory to the Right to the City. City, 13(2-3), 185-197.
Marcuse, P. (2012). A Critical Approach to Solving Housing Problem. Cities for People, not for Profit: Critical Urban Theory and the Right to the City. New York, London: Routledge, 215-321.
McCann, E. J. (2002). Space, Citizenship, and the Right to the City: A Brief Overview. GeoJournal, 58(2), 77-79.
Mitchell, D. (2003). The Right to the City: Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space: Guilford Press.
Mitchell, D., & Heynen, N. (2009). The Geography of Survival and the Right to the City: Speculations on Surveillance, Legal Innovation, and the Criminalization of Intervention. Urban Geography, 30(6), 611-632.
Parnell, S., & Pieterse, E. (2010). The ‘Right to the City’: Institutional Imperatives of a Developmental State. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 34(1), 146-162.
Pindell, N. (2006). Finding a Right to the City: Exploring Property and Community in Brazil and in the United States. Vand. J. Transnat`l L., 39, 435.
Ponce, J. (2010). Affordable Housing as Urban Infrastructure: A Comparative Study from a European Perspective. The Urban Lawyer, 223-245.
Purcell, M. (2002). Excavating Lefebvre: The Right to the City and Its Urban Politics of the Inhabitant. GeoJournal, 58(2-3), 99-108.
Purcell, M. (2003). Citizenship and the Right to the Global city: Reimagining the Capitalist World Order. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27(3), 564-590.
Purcell, M. (2013). The Right to the City: the Struggle for Democracy in the Urban Public Realm. Policy & Politics, 41(3), 311-327.
Purcell, M. (2014). Possible Worlds: Henri Lefebvre And The Right To The City. Journal of Urban Affairs, 36(1), 141-154. doi: 10.1111/juaf.12034
Van Deusen, R. (2005). Urban Design and the Production of Public Space in Syracuse, NY. Rights to the City. International Geographical Union, Home of Geography Publication Series, 3, 87-103.
White, A. M. (2013). Market Price, Social Price, and the Right to the City: Land Taxes and Rates for City Services in Brazil and the United States. The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review, 313-335.
二、中文部分
丁仁方（1999）。威權統合主義：理論、發展與轉型。臺北：時英出版社。
王曉冬（譯）（2005）。資本的秘密：為什麼資本主義在西方成功，在其他地方失敗？（原作者：De Soto, H.）臺北市：經濟新潮社（原著出版年：2000）。
王增勇（2011）。以住宅「社會化」對抗貧窮「污名化」。臺灣社會研究季刊（81），頁 489-497。
邱瑛琦（2013）。華光社區法律考。司法改革雜誌， 96，頁 51-53。
柯于璋、林建君（2016）。我國都市更新利益與分配正義之分析。2016TASPAA線上學術研討會議。
夏傳位（2014）。新自由主義是什麼? 三種理論觀點的比較研究。台灣社會學（27），頁 141-166。
徐進鈺（2011）。市民城市權論述的建構: 找回城市的使用價值。台灣社會研究季刊（81），頁 469-476。
徐進鈺（2013）。台灣都市「產權-市民」之反思。司法改革雜誌（96），頁 61-63。
翁燕菁（2015）。適足居住權之可裁判性——初探國際人權法及其實踐。全國律師, 2015/01，頁 4-17。
張簡淑華（2015）。不動產交易實價登錄制度之問題探討。未出版之碩士論文論文，國立高雄應用科技大學財富與稅務管理系碩士在職專班，高雄。
陳怡伶、黎德星（2010）。新自由主義化, 國家與住宅市場臺灣國宅政策的演變。Journal of Geographical Sciences， 59，頁 105-131。
彭建文、林秋瑾與楊雅婷（2004）。房價結構性改變影響因素分析─ 以台北市, 台北縣房價為例。臺灣土地研究， 7（2），頁 27-46。
曾亦辰（2014）。居住正義－台灣社會住宅論述與政策分析。未出版之碩士論文，政治大學國家發展研究所碩士論文，台北。
黃得城（2013）。遺忘在歷史長河中的嘆息-華光社區的歷史與居住脈絡。司法改革雜誌（96），頁 54-57。
蔡志揚（2012）。從「文林苑」案看「都市更新條例」修法 。月旦法學雜誌， 206。
蔡英文（2005）。基進民主理論的政治思辨。政治科學論叢（23），頁 1-26。
王志弘、王玥民與徐苔玲/合譯（2010）。權力地景：從底特律到迪士尼世界（原作者：S. Zukin），台灣，群學出版社（原著出版年：1993）。
劉莘（譯）（2003）。當代政治哲學導論（原作者：Kymlicka, W.）臺灣：聯經出版（原著出版年：1990）。
三、網路資源
票選10大民怨 最恨高房價。蘋果日報。取自http://www.appledaily.com.tw/appledaily/article/headline/20091130/32127065/，最後瀏覽日期：2016/12/4。
Doris Hsu(2015)。有土斯有財，7成民眾支持「買房好」。MoneyDJ 財經知識庫。取自http://www.moneydj.com/KMDJ/Blog/BlogArticleViewer.aspx?a=09a03094-02b4-4eb1-8982-000000032954。最後瀏覽日期：2016/2/18。
「反台南鐵路東移自救會事後聲明稿」。苦勞網，取自http://www.coolloud.org.tw/node/75303，最後瀏覽日期2016/12/5。
中華民國內政部地政司，http://www.land.moi.gov.tw/chhtml/landfaq1.asp?fqid=811&cid=2。最後瀏覽日期：2016/12/5。
孫窮理(2013)。聚首論壇 直面新自由主義凱達格蘭成「農民之路」。苦勞網。取自http://www.coolloud.org.tw/node/72701。最後瀏覽日期：2016/12/6。
公視新聞議題中心，「江宜樺：違建戶居住權不受保障 華光住民激憤抗爭」，http://pnn.pts.org.tw/main/2013/03/15/%E6%B1%9F%E5%AE%9C%E6%A8%BA%EF%BC%9A%E9%81%95%E5%BB%BA%E6%88%B6%E5%B1%85%E4%BD%8F%E6%AC%8A%E4%B8%8D%E5%8F%97%E4%BF%9D%E9%9A%9C-%E8%8F%AF%E5%85%89%E5%B1%85%E6%B0%91%E6%BF%80%E6%86%A4%E6%8A%97%E7%88%AD/，最後瀏覽日期：2017/1/18。
江宜樺：違建戶居住權不受保障 華光住民激憤抗爭。公視新聞議題中心。取自http://pnn.pts.org.tw/main/2013/03/15/%E6%B1%9F%E5%AE%9C%E6%A8%BA%EF%BC%9A%E9%81%95%E5%BB%BA%E6%88%B6%E5%B1%85%E4%BD%8F%E6%AC%8A%E4%B8%8D%E5%8F%97%E4%BF%9D%E9%9A%9C-%E8%8F%AF%E5%85%89%E5%B1%85%E6%B0%91%E6%BF%80%E6%86%A4%E6%8A%97%E7%88%AD/。最後瀏覽日期：2017/1/18。
全國法規資料庫，http://law.moj.gov.tw/，最後瀏覽日期：2017/3/12。
四、法律文件
聯合國世界城市權憲章（World Charter for the Right to the City）
聯合國經濟社會文化權利國際公約（International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights） |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
法律學系
103651027 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0103651027 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [法律學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 102701.pdf | 1212Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 369 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
