Policy of the Re-use of Vacant Space
In 1994, the Council for Cultural Affairs (CCA) mentioned “vacant buildings” for the first time in a project related to the “Supplementation Project for the Cultural Hardware and Software of Provincial (Municipal), County (City), Towns, Townships and Neighborhood” in accordance with the “Twelve Construction Projects” planned by the Executive Yuan. During this stage, the so-called “vacant space” mainly referred to those that were ill-managed and expected to be supplemented with hardware and software to satisfy local demands for venues of artistic and cultural exhibitions and performances. In 1995, the Taipei City Government proposed the “lifting of martial law for space,” and conducted an investigation about vacant spaces in Taipei City. The city government subsequently released two historical buildings, namely the “Mayor’s Residence” (now The Mayor’s Residence Art Salon) and the Zhongzheng Second Precinct (now Guling Street Avant-garde Theatre), to become cultural venues and be shared byopened to citizens. At the same time, the Zhongshan Hall, the Red House in Ximen District, the Grass Mountain Chateau, and the Museum of Drinking Water were re-purposed as well. In 1997, following the construction and conception of the “Huashan Arts and Cultural District” and the “Art Network of Railway Warehouses” by the Provincial Government’s Cultural Department, discussions about the “re-use of vacant space” were re-kindled.
In 2001, following the polices related to community empowerment and establishment of international art villages, the CCA began actively promoting the “re-use of vacant space,” for which seven test sites and six pilot sites were designated, for example, the Dasyueshan (Great Snow Mountain) Forest Farm in Taichung County, the Fangliao Station in Pingtung County, etc., along with seven artist-in-residence programs in vacant spaces, including the Taipei Artist Village (Taipei), the Safulak Art Village (Hsinchu), the Meishan Living Art Village (Chiayi), the Anping Art Village (Tainan), the Tsung-Yeh Arts and Cultural Center (Tainan), the Pier-2 Art Center (Kaohsiung), and the Kio-A-Thau Sugar Refinery Artist Village (Kaohsiung). In the “Implementation Guidelines for the Re-use of Vacant Space,” the so-called “vacant space” is defined as “an existing building or space that has been legally designated as a historic monument, registered as a historic building or undesignated, which is not in use, structurally sound, and can be re-used for promoting cultural and artistic value.” The guidelines also emphasize on the continuation of the spirit of such a site, as well as the construction of collective memory and the coagulation of local consciousness.
After 2002, the CCA no longer accepted applications for subsidies, and combined related projects with the policy of “local cultural halls” in the second-stage mission of the community empowerment. In Evaluation of Implemented Cultural Policies by the Council for Cultural Affairs in Recent Two Years inof 2003, the publication of the homonymous project directed by HSUEH Pao-Shia, Hsueh pointed out that vacant spaces should not be limited to artists. If the hardware renovation budget for vacant spaces could be joined with the budget for local cultural halls allocated for the planning and arrange of software, the later operators of these vacant spaces would be benefited in terms of the goal of sustainable operation.
In the 2008 meeting of “Lifting of Martial Law for Space VS. Installation Art: Re-use of Vacant Space” co-organized by the National Cultural Association and Artist, the challenges faced by the policy were pointed out; for example, schools closed down due to lower birth rate will gradually become a source of increasing vacant spaces following the trend of decreasing births. Hsueh asserts that the policy of the re-use of vacant space “has created an inseparable connection with the arts and cultural environment, and specific participating communities have produced a developmental, contextual construction in terms of their relationship with society and places.” After the governmental funding is poured into vacant spaces, which later become privately operated, these spaces will need to pay attention to the issue of self-raised funding in order to achieve sustainable operation. At the same time, they will need to heed the local needs for spaces by differentiating the purposes and qualities of different venues to avoid the crisis of homogenization. (Text/Li Kuei-Pi/2021)
Reference
In 2001, following the polices related to community empowerment and establishment of international art villages, the CCA began actively promoting the “re-use of vacant space,” for which seven test sites and six pilot sites were designated, for example, the Dasyueshan (Great Snow Mountain) Forest Farm in Taichung County, the Fangliao Station in Pingtung County, etc., along with seven artist-in-residence programs in vacant spaces, including the Taipei Artist Village (Taipei), the Safulak Art Village (Hsinchu), the Meishan Living Art Village (Chiayi), the Anping Art Village (Tainan), the Tsung-Yeh Arts and Cultural Center (Tainan), the Pier-2 Art Center (Kaohsiung), and the Kio-A-Thau Sugar Refinery Artist Village (Kaohsiung). In the “Implementation Guidelines for the Re-use of Vacant Space,” the so-called “vacant space” is defined as “an existing building or space that has been legally designated as a historic monument, registered as a historic building or undesignated, which is not in use, structurally sound, and can be re-used for promoting cultural and artistic value.” The guidelines also emphasize on the continuation of the spirit of such a site, as well as the construction of collective memory and the coagulation of local consciousness.
After 2002, the CCA no longer accepted applications for subsidies, and combined related projects with the policy of “local cultural halls” in the second-stage mission of the community empowerment. In Evaluation of Implemented Cultural Policies by the Council for Cultural Affairs in Recent Two Years inof 2003, the publication of the homonymous project directed by HSUEH Pao-Shia, Hsueh pointed out that vacant spaces should not be limited to artists. If the hardware renovation budget for vacant spaces could be joined with the budget for local cultural halls allocated for the planning and arrange of software, the later operators of these vacant spaces would be benefited in terms of the goal of sustainable operation.
In the 2008 meeting of “Lifting of Martial Law for Space VS. Installation Art: Re-use of Vacant Space” co-organized by the National Cultural Association and Artist, the challenges faced by the policy were pointed out; for example, schools closed down due to lower birth rate will gradually become a source of increasing vacant spaces following the trend of decreasing births. Hsueh asserts that the policy of the re-use of vacant space “has created an inseparable connection with the arts and cultural environment, and specific participating communities have produced a developmental, contextual construction in terms of their relationship with society and places.” After the governmental funding is poured into vacant spaces, which later become privately operated, these spaces will need to pay attention to the issue of self-raised funding in order to achieve sustainable operation. At the same time, they will need to heed the local needs for spaces by differentiating the purposes and qualities of different venues to avoid the crisis of homogenization. (Text/Li Kuei-Pi/2021)
Reference
- HSU, Sheng-Chieh. “Lifting of Martial Law for Space VS. Installation Art: Re-use of Vacant Space.” Artist, no. 393, 2008.2, pp. 132-7.
- TUNG, Wei-Hsiu. “The Texture of History: An Introduction to the Re-use of Vacant Spaces in Taiwan.” Windows of Culture, no. 82, 2005.12, pp. 22-6.
- HOU, Shur-Tzy. “The Policy for the Re-use of Vacant Spaces and the Future of Huashan.” Architect, no. 367, 2005.7, pp. 108-15.
閒置空間再利用政策（Policy of the Re-use of Vacant Space）
1994年文化建設委員會（以下簡稱文建會）配合由行政院擬定的「十二項建設計畫」，在「充實省（市）、縣（市）、鄉鎮及社區文化軟硬體設施計畫」的相關計畫中首次提及「閒置建築物」。該階段所指的「閒置空間」多以管理不當的空間為主，期望藉由充實軟硬體，滿足地方對於藝文展演的空間需求。1995年台北市政府提出「空間解嚴」的概念，對台北市的閒置空間進行調查，並且釋出「台北市長官邸」（今市長官邸藝文沙龍）、「中正二分局」（今牯嶺街小劇場）兩建物成為市民共享的文化場所，同時重新規劃「中山堂」、「西門紅樓戲院」、「草山行館」、「自來水博物館」的空間。1997年隨著省政府文化處對於「華山藝文特區」與「鐵道藝術網絡」的建置與構想，開啟對於「閒置空間再利用」的討論。
2001年隨著社區總體營造與國際藝術村的相關政策，「閒置空間再利用」成為文建會積極推動的項目之一，共進行了七個試辦點，六個先期規劃點，如：台中縣大雪山林場、屏東縣枋寮火車站等，與七個藝術家進駐閒置空間的計畫，如：國際藝術村（台北）、沙湖壢藝術村（新竹）、梅山生活藝術村（嘉義）、安平藝術村（台南）、總爺藝文中心（台南）、駁二藝術特區（高雄）、橋頭糖廠藝術村（高雄）。在「試辦閒置空間再利用實施要點」中，將閒置空間定義為：「係依法指定為古蹟、登錄為歷史建築或未經指定之舊有閒置之建物或空間，在結構安全無虞，仍具有可再利用以推展文化藝術價值者。」 強調延續場所的精神，與對於集體記憶的建構與地方意識的凝聚。
2002年之後，文建會不再續接受補助申請，並且將相關計畫併入視為社區總體營造第二階段任務的「地方文化館」政策。在2003年薛保瑕主持的《文建會近兩年文化政策之執行面評估》中，認為閒置空間不應侷限於為藝術家所使用，若能以閒置空間的預算修繕硬體，同時銜接地方文化館的預算在軟體規畫與配置上，將有助於後續經營者的永續經營。
在2008年由國家文化總會與《藝術家》合辦的「空間解嚴VS.裝置藝術：閒置空間再利用」會議上，指出了該政策所面臨的挑戰，如因為少子化所關閉的校園，將隨著少子化的趨勢，逐漸成為閒置空間增加的源頭。薛保瑕認為閒置空間再利用的政策，「［…］與藝文環境產生一種不可分離的連結，以及所謂的特定參與族群，與社會、地方性的關係做一種所謂開發式脈絡的建構。」在政府經費挹注，並且轉為民營後，必須關注自籌經費的問題，才能夠永續經營。同時也必須注意地方對於空間的需求，區分不同場館與空間的屬性，避免造成同質化的危機。（文／李奎壁／2021）
參考文獻
2001年隨著社區總體營造與國際藝術村的相關政策，「閒置空間再利用」成為文建會積極推動的項目之一，共進行了七個試辦點，六個先期規劃點，如：台中縣大雪山林場、屏東縣枋寮火車站等，與七個藝術家進駐閒置空間的計畫，如：國際藝術村（台北）、沙湖壢藝術村（新竹）、梅山生活藝術村（嘉義）、安平藝術村（台南）、總爺藝文中心（台南）、駁二藝術特區（高雄）、橋頭糖廠藝術村（高雄）。在「試辦閒置空間再利用實施要點」中，將閒置空間定義為：「係依法指定為古蹟、登錄為歷史建築或未經指定之舊有閒置之建物或空間，在結構安全無虞，仍具有可再利用以推展文化藝術價值者。」 強調延續場所的精神，與對於集體記憶的建構與地方意識的凝聚。
2002年之後，文建會不再續接受補助申請，並且將相關計畫併入視為社區總體營造第二階段任務的「地方文化館」政策。在2003年薛保瑕主持的《文建會近兩年文化政策之執行面評估》中，認為閒置空間不應侷限於為藝術家所使用，若能以閒置空間的預算修繕硬體，同時銜接地方文化館的預算在軟體規畫與配置上，將有助於後續經營者的永續經營。
在2008年由國家文化總會與《藝術家》合辦的「空間解嚴VS.裝置藝術：閒置空間再利用」會議上，指出了該政策所面臨的挑戰，如因為少子化所關閉的校園，將隨著少子化的趨勢，逐漸成為閒置空間增加的源頭。薛保瑕認為閒置空間再利用的政策，「［…］與藝文環境產生一種不可分離的連結，以及所謂的特定參與族群，與社會、地方性的關係做一種所謂開發式脈絡的建構。」在政府經費挹注，並且轉為民營後，必須關注自籌經費的問題，才能夠永續經營。同時也必須注意地方對於空間的需求，區分不同場館與空間的屬性，避免造成同質化的危機。（文／李奎壁／2021）
參考文獻
- 徐升潔整理，〈空間解嚴VS.裝置藝術：閒置空間再利用〉，《藝術家》，393期，頁132-137，2008.2。
- 董維琇，〈歷史的質感：概論台灣的閒置空間再利用〉，《文化視窗》， 82期，頁22-26，2005.12。
- 侯淑姿，〈由閒置空間再利用政策看華山的未來〉，《建築師》，367期，頁108-115，2005.7。