協作的⾏動性與城市空間實踐：以WeMo Scooter共享電動機⾞為例

Abstract

媒介研究領域已有豐富成果指出，智慧型手機在促成人際溝通之時，亦促成個人空間經驗變化。本文認為，進入行動時代後，智慧型手機應用範圍已不再僅作為人際溝通之用，在物聯網發展趨勢下，智慧型手機可與其他日常物件連動，逐漸廣泛地介入日常生活，成為個人進行日常活動所仰賴的終端管理裝置。因此智慧型手機所帶來的城市空間變動已不只在個人經驗層次，社會空間生成的物質向度亦因其介入而產生改動。\n本文以智慧型手機與電動機車連動共構的ＷeMo Scooter共享機車為例，試圖理解這個需由媒介中介的行動性體系如何構成，及其介入城市空間生成的過程。循「空間轉向」（the spatial turn）思潮，本文首先指出城市空間乃是物質實體與社會關係的共構產物，且城市空間處於持續生成的動態過程中；在此認識基礎上，本文進一步援引「行動性典範」（mobilities paradigm）以掌握行動性體系的構成要素，並說明行動性體系如同城市空間皆處在持續生成的動態過程中，且兩者相互影響各自生成。\n同時，由於本文欲探究的共享機車系統必須經智慧型手機中介方得運作，因此本文以媒介介入城市空間的歷史補充說明，在城市空間的生成過程當中，媒介亦扮演重要角色，到今日行動時代亦然，其幅度甚至更深且廣。由此本文認為無論是行動性體系或是媒介體系，皆在城市空間生成的過程中展現其「政治性」。\n在前述基礎上，本文認為行動性體系與行動媒介兩者皆可視為「社會—技術—文化」共構產物，據此，本文進一步說明在日常生活逐漸朝向編碼化的進程中，行動性體系（電動機車）與行動媒介（智慧型手機）的彼此接合共構出了新型態的行動性體系，本文將其定義為「協作行動性」（collaborative mobility），其乃促成媒介實踐與移動實踐無法二分的技術系統，並由此介入城市空間的生成。\n本文所指涉的「協作行動性」以有別於過往的型態介入城市空間生成，關鍵環節在於其構成與運作皆必須仰賴智慧型手機，且必須以常民實踐為本方得以持續完成。故本文緊接著從實踐角度，探討常民參進協作行動性體系的實踐過程，說明常民實踐並不僅在象徵意義層面轉化了個人生活空間的意涵，具物質向度的城市空間紋理與行動性體系自身，乃至常民日常生活，皆因常民具協作性質的移動／媒介實踐而得以持續變動生成。\n研究發現，協作行動性在台北市區浮現與運作的過程，確實展現為一種「社會—技術—文化」動態過程，並且分別在這三方面展現出新意。在技術層面，智慧型手機與電動機車接合而成的協作行動性因促成媒介實踐與移動實踐的不可二分，因此有別於既有的編碼化行動性體系；同時，協作行動性展現出一種「擬個人」特性，不僅因其可模擬個人自有運具，提供同等的移動便利性，更因其在運作過程中，以「數據化個人」的使用行為數據，將個人轉化為擬個人。\n在社會文化層面，由於協作行動性符應當前智慧城市發展趨勢，其亦進一步反映出智慧城市所需之「智慧精神」治理形構；這種以數據為本的治理形構要求一種「好市民」主體形構，而此種主體形構在「擬個人」的運作基礎上，展現為混雜了技術客體與兼及個人認知與身體主體的新型態「機靈」主體形構。同時，協作行動性亦反映出一種新的監視型態：一方面，使用者並非單向被監視，其亦施展監視並據此進行移動實踐，且其可以逃逸甚至缺席於技術體系監控；另一方面，不同於過往監視相關討論，在協作行動性運作過程中，使用者可有能力在物質向度實質改動空間關係。\n由於行動性典範並未深論媒介實踐環節，同時媒介實踐研究領域中亦缺乏與移動實踐相關的討論，本文認為，以ＷeMo Scooter共享機車服務為例探索本文所提出的協作行動性之構成，不僅有助於理解行動時代中的城市空間生成過程，亦可在理論層次上為行動性研究與媒介研究兩個領域做出研究視野上的延伸與補充。

Numerous media studies have argued that people’s temporal–spatial experiences can be modified and transformed through human-to-human communication using mobile media. However, human interaction is not the only function that mobile media has in the mobile era. Today, mobile media devices such as smartphones can be involved in human–machine and machine–machine interactions, making the Internet of Things (IoT) possible. This new style of communication may transform urban space as well as people’s temporal–spatial experiences in an entirely new fashion.\n\nTo study this new style of communication and new temporal-spatial experiences, the mobilities paradigm is insufficient and media studies lack discussion of movement. Therefore, this study is an interdisciplinary attempt to fill these research gaps.\n\nThis study focused on the example of WeMo Scooter, which connects smartphones and electric scooters and makes them work together, and explored how this mediated mobility system is assembled as well as how it embeds itself in and transforms people’s everyday lives; furthermore, this study explored the becoming process of urban space.\n\nAccording to the spatial turn, an intellectual movement founded by Henri Lefebvre, (urban) space is a set of social relations and forms between things, and it is always in the process of becoming. In the mobilities paradigm inherited from the spatial turn movement, mobility systems are also always in the process of becoming. Furthermore, because mobility systems must occupy social space and self-adjust in accordance with spatialities, social space and mobility systems affect each other during their becoming processes.\n\nBased on this premise, I attempted to redefine mediated mobility systems such as WeMo Scooter as “collaborative mobility,” treating this as a social–technical–cultural assemblage. Thus, I analyzed how smartphones and scooters are assembled socially, technically, and culturally to form a new style of mobility system. Furthermore, I analyzed how it is involved in the becoming process of urban space.\n\nUrban space becomes continuously through the operation of collaborative mobility, and collaborative mobility is affected by urban space at the same time. Moreover, collaborative mobility operates through media practice and movement practice simultaneously, which are inseparable. In this process, collaborative mobility not only reflects a contemporary governance formation called “smartmentality” but also creates new cultural formations, such as new hybrid subjectivity and new surveillance.