Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/126589
題名: 從地方政治觀點看雲林地面型太陽光電的發展困境
The dilemma of Yunlin ground-type solar photovoltaic development: the perspective of local politics
作者: 周正履
Chou, Cheng-Lu
貢獻者: 王振寰
Wang, Jenn-Hwan
周正履
Chou, Cheng-Lu
關鍵詞: 能源轉型
太陽光電
地方政治
農地種電
地方能源
Energy transformation
Solar photovoltaic
Local politics
Solar photovoltaic on agricultural land
Local Energy
日期: 2019
上傳時間: 3-Oct-2019
摘要: 在台灣能源轉型的過程中,太陽光電扮演著舉足輕重的位置,但在大規模的開發案中,卻遇到不少問題,本文以雲林嚴重地層下陷不利耕作區作為分析對象,討論太陽光電專區發展面對的困境。筆者認為在專區發展的困境中,最為關鍵的因素乃是地方政治的影響。專區的開發會面對土地整合、社會共識、地方回饋金等問題,作為外來者的業者難以在地方上取得信任,縣政府因為缺乏誘因再加上在專區內沒有足夠的政治勢力,導致縣政府並未成為專區發展的中介者、媒合者,所以當業者需要解決以上問題時,就必須在地方上找尋地方關係良好的代理人。憑藉者代理人在地方上的社會網絡,雖可以有效的整合土地,但逢選舉期間,許多案場也因代理人之間的派系鬥爭導致案場胎死腹中。另一方面,專區的劃設方式讓地方上出現嚴重的利益分配不均,也是導致專區成為派系鬥爭的場域的重要原因。\n從專區的發展經驗可以得知,地方派系可以用四種方法影響專區發展,分別是:掌握地方的話語權、掌握饋線資訊、協調地方的回饋機制、影響專區的制度發展。而地方共識跟地方的利益分配為地方能源之基礎,在地方缺乏社會共識並出現利益分配不均的情況下,地方派系會激化這些問題,最後導致專區停擺。另外,本文也發現,基礎建設不足、中央與地方的資訊不對稱、地方上行政分工導致缺乏主責單位、地方行政能量不足等等,都是導致專區難以順利發展的原因。
In the process of Taiwan`s energy transformation, solar photovoltaic has been playing the role of pivotal. However, the large-scale power plant development has encountered with many problems. This paper takes the unfavorable farming area in the sinking area of the serious stratum of Yunlin as an example to discuss the development dilemma faced by the solar photovoltaic special area. The author believes that local politics is the most critical factor in a special area. The development of the special area will face problems such as land integration, social consensus, and financial reward. It is difficult for the energy enterprise as outsiders to gain trust at the local level. The county government lacked incentives and sufficient political power in the district to lead its inability to solve the problems, caused it did not become an intermediary and mediator for the development of the special area. Therefore, if the practitioner needs to solve the above problems, they must find an agent with good local relations. It is possible to rely on the agent`s social network to integrate the land effectively, but many cases are difficult to complete because of the factional struggle between the agents during the election period. On the other hand, the plan of the special area has caused an uneven distribution of local interests, which is also an important reason for the area to become a field of factional struggle.\nIt has been known from the development experience of the special area that local factions can influence the development of the special area by four methods: mastering the local discourse power, holding feeder information, coordinating the local feedback mechanism, and influencing the institutional development of the special area. Local consensus and profit sharing as the basis of local energy. In the absence of local social consensus and uneven distribution of benefits, local factions will intensify these problems and eventually lead to the suspension of the special area. In addition, this paper also finds the other reasons for the difficult development in the special area include the infrastructure shortage, the central and local information asymmetry, the lack of the main responsible unit in the local administrative division of labor and the lack of local administrative capacity.
參考文獻: 英文參考文獻\nBai, X. (2007). Integrating global environmental concerns into urban management: the scale and readiness arguments. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 11(2), 15-29.\nBulkeley, H., & Kern, K. (2006). Local government and the governing of climate change in Germany and the UK. Urban studies, 43(12), 2237-2259.\nBusch, H., & McCormick, K. (2014). Local power: exploring the motivations of mayors and key success factors for local municipalities to go 100% renewable energy. Energy, Sustainability and Society, 4(1), 5.\nChen, W. M., Kim, H., & Yamaguchi, H. (2014). Renewable energy in eastern Asia: Renewable energy policy review and comparative SWOT analysis for promoting renewable energy in Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. Energy Policy, 74, 319-329.\nEngel, K. (2006). State and local climate change initiatives: what is motivating state and local governments to address a global problem and what does this say about federalism and environmental law. Urb. Law., 38, 1015.\nGoldthau, A. (2014). Rethinking the governance of energy infrastructure: Scale, decentralization and polycentrism. Energy Research & Social Science, 1, 134-140.\nHoppe, T., Graf, A., Warbroek, B., Lammers, I., & Lepping, I. (2015). Local governments supporting local energy initiatives: Lessons from the best practices of Saerbeck (Germany) and Lochem (The Netherlands). Sustainability, 7(2), 1900-1931.\nHoffman, S. M., & High-Pippert, A. (2010). From private lives to collective action: Recruitment and participation incentives for a community energy program. Energy Policy, 38(12), 7567-7574.\nIPCC. (2014). Climate change 2014: synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (p. 151). IPCC.\nKunze, C., & Becker, S. (2014). Energy democracy in Europe: A survey and outlook. Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung.\nMey, F., Diesendorf, M., & MacGill, I. (2016). Can local government play a greater role for community renewable energy? A case study from Australia. Energy Research & Social Science, 21, 33-43.\nReusswig, F., Braun, F., Heger, I., Ludewig, T., Eichenauer, E., & Lass, W. (2016). Against the wind: Local opposition to the German Energiewende. Utilities Policy, 41, 214-227.\nRogers, J. C., Simmons, E. A., Convery, I., & Weatherall, A. (2008). Public perceptions of opportunities for community-based renewable energy projects. Energy Policy, 36(11), 4217-4226.\nSeyfang, G., Hielscher, S., Hargreaves, T., Martiskainen, M., & Smith, A. (2014). A grassroots sustainable energy niche? Reflections on community energy in the UK. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 13, 21-44.\nWarren, C. R., & McFadyen, M. (2010). Does community ownership affect public attitudes to wind energy? A case study from south-west Scotland. Land use policy, 27(2), 204-213.\nWüstenhagen, R., Wolsink, M., & Bürer, M. J. (2007). Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept. Energy policy, 35(5), 2683-2691.\nWirth, S. (2014). Communities matter: Institutional preconditions for community renewable energy. Energy Policy, 70, 236-246.\nWalker, G., Devine-Wright, P., Hunter, S., High, H., & Evans, B. (2010). Trust and community: Exploring the meanings, contexts and dynamics of community renewable energy. Energy Policy, 38(6), 2655-2663.\n\n\n\n\n \n中文參考文獻\n丁仁方、趙卿惠、李依霖(2018)。民進黨地方侍從體制與台灣基層民主轉型-台南經驗的啟示。臺灣民主季刊,15(1),45-78.\n王永慈、游進裕、林碧亮(2013)。淹水對沿海地層下陷區之貧窮家庭的社會影響-以台灣西海岸漁村為例。臺灣社會工作學刊,(11),81-114。\n王金壽(2004)。瓦解中的地方派系:以屏東為例。台灣社會學,7,177-207。\n王金壽(2007)。政治市場開放與地方派系的瓦解。選舉研究,14(2),25-51。\n王振寰(1993)。臺灣新政商關係的形成與政治轉型。台灣社會研究季刊,14,123-163。\n王振寰(1996)。誰統治台灣?:轉型中的國家機器與權力結構。台北:巨流圖書公司。\n何俊頤、王冠棋(2012)。雲林地層下陷危機與地下水抽取的政治經濟分析〉,蕪土吾民:2012年文化研究會議。台北:台灣大學霖澤館,2012年1月7-8日\n李依霖(2019)。民主鞏固下侍從體制的機制與影響: 2010-2018 台南市與嘉義縣的經驗比較。國立成功大學政治學系碩士論文 1-101\n李彥璋(2012)。我國再生能源政策執行之研究─以屏東縣養水種電計畫為例。台北:臺灣大學政治學研究所學位論文。\n杜慶承(2005)。中央政權輪替對地方派系的影響-彰化縣個案研究。選舉研究,12(1),117-145。\n汪志忠、曾稚尹(2016)。地方產業永續轉型的社會資本與政府效能:屏東縣養水種電個案分析。政治科學論叢,67,91-132。\n周桂田(2013)。全球化風險挑戰下發展型國家之治理創新—以台灣公民知識間度決策為分析。政治與社會評論,44,65-148。\n周桂田、林子倫(2016)。臺灣能源轉型十四講(2016年度風險分析報告)。台北:巨流出版。\n周桂田、張國暉(2017)。[2017年度風險報告]【能】怎麼轉:啟動臺灣能源轉型鑰匙。台北:巨流出版。\n林子倫、李宜卿(2017)再生能源政策在地實踐之探討:以高雄市推動屋頂型太陽光電為例。公共行政學報,52,39-80。\n林振祿(2016)。政黨政治發展與臺南地區地方勢力變遷 (2005~ 2014). 臺灣大學政治學研究所學位論文, 1-158.\n林淑惠(2017)。因應氣候變遷的在地協力調適行動—以屏東養水種電及光采濕地的推動經驗為例(2010–2016)。台南:成功大學建築學系學位論文。\n施奕任(2011)。全球暖化與台灣的氣候政治-以《溫室氣體減量法》為例。台北:政治大學國家發展研究所學位論文。\n范玫芳(2013)。 能源決策困境與參與式科技評估之展望。國家發展研究,,13(1),1-40。\n徐禎瑜(2013)。制度變遷與地方派系之關係-以台南縣市合併升格為例. 成功大學政治經濟研究所學位論文, 1-101.\n涂靖昀(2016)。地方能源治理:以台南市推動家戶太陽光電為例。台北:臺灣大學政治學研究所學位論文。\n張文亮(2009)。八八水災。台灣月刊,98(10)。\n張文貞(2014)。氣候變遷納入環境影響評估的全球實踐:驅力的比較分析。收錄於氣候變遷的制度因應:決策,財務與規範。國立臺灣大學出版中心。\n陳明通 (1995)。派系政治與台灣政治變遷。台北,月旦。\n陳東升(1995)。金權城市:地方派系,財團與台北都會發展的社會學分析。台北:巨流圖書。\n陳惠萍(2012)。綠能科技的在地使用:屏東「養水種電計畫」案例分析。2012台灣社會學會年會。台中:東海大學社會學系。\n陳穎峰(2018)。社區能源的正義課題。收錄於周桂田、張國暉(主編),轉給你看-開啟台灣能源轉型。台北,秀威資訊科技。\n曾友嶸(2015)。臺灣能源轉型困境分析-以 2008-2015 年為例。台北:臺灣大學國家發展研究所學位論文:。\n黃柏叡(2016)。漁會侍從連結的變遷 (1985-2016)-以基隆區漁會 為例. 臺灣大學政治學研究所學位論文, 1-121.\n鄒智純(2011)。我國再生能源發展條例立法過程與法案內容之研究。台北: 國立臺灣大學政治學研究所碩士論文。\n趙永茂(1978)。台灣地方派系與地方建設之關係。高雄市:德馨室出版社。\n趙永茂(2002)。台灣地方政治的變遷與特質。台北市:翰蘆圖書。\n劉明德、徐玉珍(2012)。台灣亟需有遠見的再生能源政策與做法—德國經驗的啟示。公共行政學報(國立政治大學),43,127-150。\n蔡育軒、陳怡君、王業立(2007)。社區發展協會,選舉動員與地方政治。東吳政治學報,25(4),93-135。\n盧信宏(2011)。誰取代了侍從主義? 政治分歧與選制變遷下雲林縣政治連結的持續與變遷。台北:臺灣大學政治學研究所學位論文。\n蘇俊豪(2004)。雲林縣地方派系變遷及其與選舉關係之研究。台北:銘傳大學公共事務學系碩士論文。
描述: 碩士
國立政治大學
國家發展研究所
103261010
資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1032610102
資料類型: thesis
Appears in Collections:學位論文

Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat
010201.pdf1.97 MBAdobe PDF2View/Open
Show full item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.