1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Social Science
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 鹽埕地區再造與復興：以鹽埕第一公有市場青銀共市政策為例
Reconstruction and Revitalization of the Yancheng District: A Case Study of the Elderly-Youth Co-Market Policy in Yancheng 1st Public Market
作者 劉彥君
Liu, Yen-Chun
貢獻者 傅凱若
Fu, Kai-Jo
劉彥君
Liu, Yen-Chun
關鍵詞 協力治理
協力創新
傳統市場活化
青銀共市
地方復興
Collaborative governance
Collaborative innovation
Traditional market revitalization
Elderly-Youth co-market
Local revitalization
日期 2024
上傳時間 1-Nov-2024 11:06:17 (UTC+8)
摘要 近年來，台灣各城市面臨老城區衰退的挑戰，而高雄市鹽埕區作為典型的城市衰退案例，逐漸透過政策創新與再造計畫展現復興契機。本研究聚焦於鹽埕第一公有市場推動的「青銀共市」計畫，這項計畫藉由協力治理與協力創新理論框架，結合私部門與公部門以及青年攤商的合作，實現市場空間的活化與區域經濟的新發展機會；透過青銀共市計畫，傳統市場成為吸引青年創業的重要平台，不僅僅使得高雄的文化創意產業得以持續的在鹽埕地區進行擴張與深化，並解為傳統市場的發展帶來新的發展方式。 本研究以半結構式深度訪談法，對參與青銀共市計畫的參捌地方創生、高雄市政府死青年攤商等利益相關者進行訪談，並運用Lopes & Farias（2022）提出之協力創新理論模型，從行動者內部特徵、行動者間的關係、行動者的參與模式及管理者角色和領導方式實踐四大面向進行分析，並且結合Ansell & Gash（2008）所提出之協力治理循環的階段理論（初期、過程與成果階段），去分析本次個案在每個發展時序上的創新特徵。根據研究結果展示了政府與民間的緊密合作是政策成功的關鍵因素，並可作為未來高雄市及其他地方創生計畫可參考的實踐案例與發展建議。
In recent years, many urban areas in Taiwan have encountered significant decline, particularly in older districts. Yancheng District in Kaohsiung exemplifies this urban decay, where aging populations and economic downturns have exacerbated the problem. This study explores the revitalization of Yancheng’s 1st Public Market through the “Elderly-Youth Co-Market” policy. By integrating the frameworks of collaborative governance and collaborative innovation, this initiative facilitates cooperation between the elderly and younger generations to rejuvenate the market space. The policy not only transforms underutilized stalls into opportunities for young entrepreneurs to return to their hometowns but also revitalizes the local economy and reinvigorates the district's cultural identity. This research utilizes semi-structured, in-depth interviews with key stakeholders involved in the Co-Market policy, including government representatives, private sector partners, and young vendors. By applying the collaborative innovation model, the study examines four core dimensions: internal organizational characteristics, inter-organizational relationships, tools and strategies for citizen participation, and leadership roles. The findings highlight that close collaboration between the public and private sectors is a critical factor in the policy's success, offering valuable insights and practical recommendations for future urban regeneration and local revitalization efforts in other regions.
參考文獻 中文文獻 王志弘（2003）。台北市文化治理的性質與轉變，1967-2002。台灣社會研究季刊，52，121-186。 王志弘（2012）。新文化治理體制與國家－社會關係：剝皮寮的襲產化。世新人文社會學報，13，31-70。 林信華（2002）。文化政策新論建構臺灣新社會。揚智文化。 鈕文英（2016）。質性研究方法與論文寫作。雙葉出版社。 梁炳琨、張長義（2004）。地理學的文化經濟與地方再現。地理學報，35，81-99。 陳李綢（2010）。個案研究－理論與實務。心理出版社。 陳韋丞（2019）。舊城區再發展的文化治理：以高雄鹽埕為例〔未出版碩士論文〕。國立中山大學。 陳富德（2019）。從地方創生概念談小店家發展之策略研析。臺灣經濟研究月刊，42(8)，23-29。 陳敦源、張世杰（2010）。公私協力夥伴關係的弔詭。文官制度季刊，2(3)，17-71。 彭俊亨（2010）。協力創新在公部門應用之研究：文建會推動文化創意產業發展政策為例〔未出版博士論文〕。 曾冠球（2017）。良善協力治理下的公共服務民間夥伴關係。國土及公共治理季刊，5(1)，67-79。 黃建實（2020）。協力治理如何使得公部門創新？。公共行政學報，58，149-156。 葉啟政（2002）。生產的政治經濟學到消費的文化經濟學: 從階級做爲施爲機制的角度來考察。台灣社會學刊，28(9)，153-200。 劉俊裕（2011）。歐洲文化治理的脈絡與網絡：一種治理的文化轉向與批判。中興大學外國語文學刊，11(2)，25-35。 蔡明哲（2014）。以個案研究法介入高職餐旅群專題製作課程之行動研究〔未出版碩士論文〕 顏亮一、張耕蓉（2022）。文化治理及其不滿：新莊街之都市運動。文化研究，34，21-66。 羅育茵（2021）。協力治理與創新初探－以桃園市龍潭區菱潭街地方創生為例〔未出版碩士論文〕。 蘇偉業（2020）。「績效弔詭」是否為不夠「協力」之反映？對〈協力決策後的績效弔詭：以性別影響評估和生態度檢核表為例〉之回應與反思。公共行政學報，58，127-138。   英文文獻 Alexander, J. A., Comfort, M. E., & Weiner, B. J. (1998). Governance in public‐private community health partnerships: a survey of the community care network SM demonstration sites. Nonprofit management and leadership, 8(4), 311-332. Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of public administration research and theory, 18(4), 543-571. Beierle Thomas C, Long Rebecca J.. Chilling collaboration: The Federal Advisory Committee Act and stakeholder involvement in environmental decisionmaking, Environmental Law Reporter, 1999, vol. 29. Bentrup, G. (2001). Evaluation of a collaborative model: a case study analysis of watershed planning in theIntermountain West. Environmental management, 27, 739-748. Berry, F. S., & Berry, W. D. (2018). Innovation and diffusion models in policy research. Theories of the policy process, 253-297. Brown, A. J. (2002). Collaborative governance versus constitutional politics: decision rules for sustainability from Australia’s South East Queensland forest agreement. Environmental Science & Policy, 5(1), 19-32. Burger, J., Gochfeld, M., Powers, C. W., Waishwell, L., Warren, C., & Goldstein, B. D. (2001). Science, policy, stakeholders, and fish consumption advisories: Developing a fish fact sheet for the Savannah River. Environmental Management, 27, 501-514. Chrislip, D. D., & Larson, C. E. (1994). Collaborative leadership: How citizens and civic leaders can make a difference. Fuller, M., & Moore, R. (2017). An Analysis of Jane Jacobs's The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Macat Library. Futrell, R. (2003). Technical adversarialism and participatory collaboration in the US chemical weapons disposal program. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 28(4), 451-482. Goldsmith, S., & Eggers, W. D. (2005). Governing by network: The new shape of the public sector. Rowman & Littlefield. Granovetter, M. (1992) Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddness. In: Granovetter, M.and Swedberg, R. (eds.) The Sociology of Economic Life, Boulder: Westview, 53-81. Gray Barbara. (1989). Collaborating: Finding common ground for multi-party problems. CAJossey-Bass. Grotenbreg, S., & van Buuren, A. (2018). Realizing innovative public waterworks: Aligning administrative capacities in collaborative innovation processes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 171, S45-S55. Halvorsen, T., Hauknes, J., Miles, I., & Røste, R. (2005). “On the differences between public and private sector innovation”, Publin Report, D9. Hollander, J. B., Pallagst, K., Schwarz, T., & Popper, F. J. (2009). Planning shrinking cities. Progress in planning, 72(4), 223-232. Huxham, C. (2003). Theorizing collaboration practice. Public management review, 5(3), 401-423. Johnston, R. J. (2000) The Dictionary of Human Geography, Oxford: Blackwell. Koch, P., & Hauknes, J. (2005). On innovation in the public sector–today and beyond. Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. sage. Lopes, A. V., & Farias, J. S. (2022). How can governance support collaborative innovation in the public sector? A systematic review of the literature. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 88(1), 114-130. Loukis, E., Charalabidis, Y., & Androutsopoulou, A. (2017). Promoting open innovation in the public sector through social media monitoring. Governmentinformation quarterly, 34(1), 99-109. Moore, M., & Hartley, J. (2010). Innovations in governance. In The new public governance? (pp. 68-87). Routledge. Murdock, B. S., Wiessner, C., & Sexton, K. (2005). Stakeholder participation in voluntary environmental agreements: Analysis of 10 Project XL case studies. Science, technology, & human values, 30(2), 223-250. Relph, E. (1976). Place and placelessness (Vol.67). London: Pion. Rogers, T., Howard-Pitney, B., C. Feighery, E., G. Altman, D., M. Endres, J., & Roeseler, A. G. (1993). Characteristics and participant perceptions of tobacco control coalitions in California. Health Education Research, 8(3), 345-357. Ross, K., & Lefebvre, H. (1997). Lefebvre on the Situationists: An interview. October, 79, 69-83. Sayre, S. (2001). Qualitative methods for marketplace research . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Schneider, M., Scholz, J., Lubell, M., Mindruta, D., & Edwardsen, M. (2003). Building consensual institutions: networks and the National Estuary Program. American journal of political science, 47(1), 143-158. Scott, A. J. (2000). The cultural economy of cities: essays on the geography of image-producing industries. Sage Publications. Smith, Louis M. (1978) An Evolving Logic of Participant Observation, Educational Ethnography, and Other Case Studies.” Review of research in education. 6(1) , 316–377. Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2017). Metagoverning collaborative innovation in governance networks. The American Review of Public Administration, 47(7), 826-839. Stoker Gerry. Governance as theory: Five propositions, International Social Science Journal, 1998, vol. 50. Tett, L., Crowther, J., & O'Hara, P. (2003). Collaborative partnerships in community education. Journal of education policy, 18(1), 37-51. Torfing, J. (2013). Collaborative innovation in the public sector. In Handbook of innovation in public services (pp. 301-316). Edward Elgar Publishing. Wang, H., & Ran, B. (2023). Network governance and collaborative governance: A thematic analysis on their similarities, differences, and entanglements. Public management review, 25(6), 1187-1211.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
公共行政學系
111256016
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111256016
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 傅凱若zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Fu, Kai-Joen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 劉彥君zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Liu, Yen-Chunen_US
dc.creator (作者) 劉彥君zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Liu, Yen-Chunen_US
dc.date (日期) 2024en_US
dc.date.accessioned 1-Nov-2024 11:06:17 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 1-Nov-2024 11:06:17 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Nov-2024 11:06:17 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0111256016en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/154208-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 公共行政學系zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 111256016zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 近年來，台灣各城市面臨老城區衰退的挑戰，而高雄市鹽埕區作為典型的城市衰退案例，逐漸透過政策創新與再造計畫展現復興契機。本研究聚焦於鹽埕第一公有市場推動的「青銀共市」計畫，這項計畫藉由協力治理與協力創新理論框架，結合私部門與公部門以及青年攤商的合作，實現市場空間的活化與區域經濟的新發展機會；透過青銀共市計畫，傳統市場成為吸引青年創業的重要平台，不僅僅使得高雄的文化創意產業得以持續的在鹽埕地區進行擴張與深化，並解為傳統市場的發展帶來新的發展方式。 本研究以半結構式深度訪談法，對參與青銀共市計畫的參捌地方創生、高雄市政府死青年攤商等利益相關者進行訪談，並運用Lopes & Farias（2022）提出之協力創新理論模型，從行動者內部特徵、行動者間的關係、行動者的參與模式及管理者角色和領導方式實踐四大面向進行分析，並且結合Ansell & Gash（2008）所提出之協力治理循環的階段理論（初期、過程與成果階段），去分析本次個案在每個發展時序上的創新特徵。根據研究結果展示了政府與民間的緊密合作是政策成功的關鍵因素，並可作為未來高雄市及其他地方創生計畫可參考的實踐案例與發展建議。zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) In recent years, many urban areas in Taiwan have encountered significant decline, particularly in older districts. Yancheng District in Kaohsiung exemplifies this urban decay, where aging populations and economic downturns have exacerbated the problem. This study explores the revitalization of Yancheng’s 1st Public Market through the “Elderly-Youth Co-Market” policy. By integrating the frameworks of collaborative governance and collaborative innovation, this initiative facilitates cooperation between the elderly and younger generations to rejuvenate the market space. The policy not only transforms underutilized stalls into opportunities for young entrepreneurs to return to their hometowns but also revitalizes the local economy and reinvigorates the district's cultural identity. This research utilizes semi-structured, in-depth interviews with key stakeholders involved in the Co-Market policy, including government representatives, private sector partners, and young vendors. By applying the collaborative innovation model, the study examines four core dimensions: internal organizational characteristics, inter-organizational relationships, tools and strategies for citizen participation, and leadership roles. The findings highlight that close collaboration between the public and private sectors is a critical factor in the policy's success, offering valuable insights and practical recommendations for future urban regeneration and local revitalization efforts in other regions.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 4 第一節 研究背景與動機 4 第二節 研究目的與問題 11 第二章 文獻回顧與探討 14 第一節 協力治理相關理論 14 第二節 協力創新相關理論 20 第三節 當協力碰上文化經濟學 24 第三章 研究設計與方法 30 第一節 個案介紹 30 第二節 研究架構 33 第三節 研究方法 36 第四節 研究範圍 37 第四章 研究分析 40 第一節 協力治理與創新初期階段 40 第二節 協力治理與創新互動過程 50 第三節 協力治理與創新成果 57 第五章 研究結論與建議 68 第一節 研究結論 68 第二節 研究發現 70 第三節 政策建議 74 第三節 研究限制與未來研究建議 79 參考文獻 82 附錄ㄧ 訪談大綱 89zh_TW
dc.format.extent 7696313 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111256016en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 協力治理zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 協力創新zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 傳統市場活化zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 青銀共市zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 地方復興zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Collaborative governanceen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Collaborative innovationen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Traditional market revitalizationen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Elderly-Youth co-marketen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Local revitalizationen_US
dc.title (題名) 鹽埕地區再造與復興：以鹽埕第一公有市場青銀共市政策為例zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Reconstruction and Revitalization of the Yancheng District: A Case Study of the Elderly-Youth Co-Market Policy in Yancheng 1st Public Marketen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文文獻 王志弘（2003）。台北市文化治理的性質與轉變，1967-2002。台灣社會研究季刊，52，121-186。 王志弘（2012）。新文化治理體制與國家－社會關係：剝皮寮的襲產化。世新人文社會學報，13，31-70。 林信華（2002）。文化政策新論建構臺灣新社會。揚智文化。 鈕文英（2016）。質性研究方法與論文寫作。雙葉出版社。 梁炳琨、張長義（2004）。地理學的文化經濟與地方再現。地理學報，35，81-99。 陳李綢（2010）。個案研究－理論與實務。心理出版社。 陳韋丞（2019）。舊城區再發展的文化治理：以高雄鹽埕為例〔未出版碩士論文〕。國立中山大學。 陳富德（2019）。從地方創生概念談小店家發展之策略研析。臺灣經濟研究月刊，42(8)，23-29。 陳敦源、張世杰（2010）。公私協力夥伴關係的弔詭。文官制度季刊，2(3)，17-71。 彭俊亨（2010）。協力創新在公部門應用之研究：文建會推動文化創意產業發展政策為例〔未出版博士論文〕。 曾冠球（2017）。良善協力治理下的公共服務民間夥伴關係。國土及公共治理季刊，5(1)，67-79。 黃建實（2020）。協力治理如何使得公部門創新？。公共行政學報，58，149-156。 葉啟政（2002）。生產的政治經濟學到消費的文化經濟學: 從階級做爲施爲機制的角度來考察。台灣社會學刊，28(9)，153-200。 劉俊裕（2011）。歐洲文化治理的脈絡與網絡：一種治理的文化轉向與批判。中興大學外國語文學刊，11(2)，25-35。 蔡明哲（2014）。以個案研究法介入高職餐旅群專題製作課程之行動研究〔未出版碩士論文〕 顏亮一、張耕蓉（2022）。文化治理及其不滿：新莊街之都市運動。文化研究，34，21-66。 羅育茵（2021）。協力治理與創新初探－以桃園市龍潭區菱潭街地方創生為例〔未出版碩士論文〕。 蘇偉業（2020）。「績效弔詭」是否為不夠「協力」之反映？對〈協力決策後的績效弔詭：以性別影響評估和生態度檢核表為例〉之回應與反思。公共行政學報，58，127-138。   英文文獻 Alexander, J. A., Comfort, M. E., & Weiner, B. J. (1998). Governance in public‐private community health partnerships: a survey of the community care network SM demonstration sites. Nonprofit management and leadership, 8(4), 311-332. Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of public administration research and theory, 18(4), 543-571. Beierle Thomas C, Long Rebecca J.. Chilling collaboration: The Federal Advisory Committee Act and stakeholder involvement in environmental decisionmaking, Environmental Law Reporter, 1999, vol. 29. Bentrup, G. (2001). Evaluation of a collaborative model: a case study analysis of watershed planning in theIntermountain West. Environmental management, 27, 739-748. Berry, F. S., & Berry, W. D. (2018). Innovation and diffusion models in policy research. Theories of the policy process, 253-297. Brown, A. J. (2002). Collaborative governance versus constitutional politics: decision rules for sustainability from Australia’s South East Queensland forest agreement. Environmental Science & Policy, 5(1), 19-32. Burger, J., Gochfeld, M., Powers, C. W., Waishwell, L., Warren, C., & Goldstein, B. D. (2001). Science, policy, stakeholders, and fish consumption advisories: Developing a fish fact sheet for the Savannah River. Environmental Management, 27, 501-514. Chrislip, D. D., & Larson, C. E. (1994). Collaborative leadership: How citizens and civic leaders can make a difference. Fuller, M., & Moore, R. (2017). An Analysis of Jane Jacobs's The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Macat Library. Futrell, R. (2003). Technical adversarialism and participatory collaboration in the US chemical weapons disposal program. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 28(4), 451-482. Goldsmith, S., & Eggers, W. D. (2005). Governing by network: The new shape of the public sector. Rowman & Littlefield. Granovetter, M. (1992) Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddness. In: Granovetter, M.and Swedberg, R. (eds.) The Sociology of Economic Life, Boulder: Westview, 53-81. Gray Barbara. (1989). Collaborating: Finding common ground for multi-party problems. CAJossey-Bass. Grotenbreg, S., & van Buuren, A. (2018). Realizing innovative public waterworks: Aligning administrative capacities in collaborative innovation processes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 171, S45-S55. Halvorsen, T., Hauknes, J., Miles, I., & Røste, R. (2005). “On the differences between public and private sector innovation”, Publin Report, D9. Hollander, J. B., Pallagst, K., Schwarz, T., & Popper, F. J. (2009). Planning shrinking cities. Progress in planning, 72(4), 223-232. Huxham, C. (2003). Theorizing collaboration practice. Public management review, 5(3), 401-423. Johnston, R. J. (2000) The Dictionary of Human Geography, Oxford: Blackwell. Koch, P., & Hauknes, J. (2005). On innovation in the public sector–today and beyond. Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. sage. Lopes, A. V., & Farias, J. S. (2022). How can governance support collaborative innovation in the public sector? A systematic review of the literature. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 88(1), 114-130. Loukis, E., Charalabidis, Y., & Androutsopoulou, A. (2017). Promoting open innovation in the public sector through social media monitoring. Governmentinformation quarterly, 34(1), 99-109. Moore, M., & Hartley, J. (2010). Innovations in governance. In The new public governance? (pp. 68-87). Routledge. Murdock, B. S., Wiessner, C., & Sexton, K. (2005). Stakeholder participation in voluntary environmental agreements: Analysis of 10 Project XL case studies. Science, technology, & human values, 30(2), 223-250. Relph, E. (1976). Place and placelessness (Vol.67). London: Pion. Rogers, T., Howard-Pitney, B., C. Feighery, E., G. Altman, D., M. Endres, J., & Roeseler, A. G. (1993). Characteristics and participant perceptions of tobacco control coalitions in California. Health Education Research, 8(3), 345-357. Ross, K., & Lefebvre, H. (1997). Lefebvre on the Situationists: An interview. October, 79, 69-83. Sayre, S. (2001). Qualitative methods for marketplace research . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Schneider, M., Scholz, J., Lubell, M., Mindruta, D., & Edwardsen, M. (2003). Building consensual institutions: networks and the National Estuary Program. American journal of political science, 47(1), 143-158. Scott, A. J. (2000). The cultural economy of cities: essays on the geography of image-producing industries. Sage Publications. Smith, Louis M. (1978) An Evolving Logic of Participant Observation, Educational Ethnography, and Other Case Studies.” Review of research in education. 6(1) , 316–377. Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2017). Metagoverning collaborative innovation in governance networks. The American Review of Public Administration, 47(7), 826-839. Stoker Gerry. Governance as theory: Five propositions, International Social Science Journal, 1998, vol. 50. Tett, L., Crowther, J., & O'Hara, P. (2003). Collaborative partnerships in community education. Journal of education policy, 18(1), 37-51. Torfing, J. (2013). Collaborative innovation in the public sector. In Handbook of innovation in public services (pp. 301-316). Edward Elgar Publishing. Wang, H., & Ran, B. (2023). Network governance and collaborative governance: A thematic analysis on their similarities, differences, and entanglements. Public management review, 25(6), 1187-1211.zh_TW