工業發展使得社會得以持續發展，對於環境造成的影響也隨之而來。儘管污染整治的重要性不言而喻，但是污染整治往往伴隨著高度的技術門檻，甚至是過去前所未見的污染狀況，例如：熱處理與低溫分解技術，但這些技術伴隨著高成本與長周期的挑戰，這些都使得污染整治工作更加不易。
工業發展在促進社會經濟持續進步的同時，也對環境造成了深遠影響。其中，汞和戴奧辛污染因其高毒性、持久性以及廣泛分佈，已成為全球治理中的重大挑戰。汞污染源於工業排放、採礦活動及廢棄物處理不當，對生態系統和人體健康構成極大威脅；戴奧辛作為化學製造和廢棄物燃燒的副產物，其毒性極高且難以降解，被世界衛生組織列為全球性危害物質。
隨著多重污染問題的增加，治理難度顯著上升。尤其是發展中國家和歷史工業場址，因技術資源匱乏，污染整治進展緩慢。汞與戴奧辛的複合污染不僅損害環境和公共健康，還引發社會信任危機及經濟負擔，對治理策略提出了前所未有的挑戰。污染整治的重要性不僅在於解決當前問題，更在於減少污染對未來世代的持續影響，實現環境、社會與經濟的協調發展。
近年來甚至發現有些土地可能同時擁有多重污染，甚至是前所未見，進一步加劇了治理難度，面對如此難以克服的污染其整治工作的挑戰性更是巨大。為了要研究如何面對前所未見的污染整治工作，本研究採用個案研究，其原因如下：首先，中石化安順廠的污染整治個案具有典型性，該廠址因汞與戴奧辛的雙重污染被認為是世界少見的高難度治理廠址之一；其次，該個案展示了企業在面對技術選擇、內部管理與社會壓力時的應對策略，為研究多重污染廠址治理提供了豐富的實證基礎。
本研究從賦權理論出發，結合社會認同理論、制定理論與社會包容理論，探討企業如何在技術選擇、透明決策與社會互動中，實現治理效率與可持續發展的平衡。研究採用質性方法，透過訪談資料分析企業如何透過賦權機制，解決高技術門檻與社會信任危機的挑戰。
研究結果顯示，企業透過心理賦權提升員工對高風險技術(如熱處理與低溫分解技術)的適應性；資源賦權利用資訊科技的技術加強數據透明度與技術監控；透過結構賦權建立透明決策機制與社群合作框架，成功化解地方社區信任危機並穩定整治進程。本研究強調，技術選擇需兼顧短期成效與長期可持續性，而透明決策與社會包容是達成長期環境與社會效益的關鍵因素。
本個案展示了技術創新與多方合作在污染治理中的關鍵作用，並為高毒性污染場址的治理提供了可行經驗。污染整治不僅是環境保護的核心任務，也是社會責任與全球可持續發展的關鍵。未來研究應進一步探索透明化技術創新與跨國合作機制，以應對全球日益嚴峻的汞與戴奧辛污染挑戰，確保環境與社會的永續發展。未來研究可進一步探索不同國家與文化背景下，如何結合賦權理論、技術創新與政策制定，推進多重污染廠址的可持續治理實踐。

Industrial development has driven continuous societal progress, but its accompanying environmental impacts cannot be ignored. Although the importance of pollution remediation is self-evident, such efforts often involve high technical barriers and even unprecedented pollution scenarios, such as thermal treatment and low-temperature decomposition technologies. These technologies, however, come with high costs and long timelines, making pollution remediation even more challenging.

While industrial development has promoted sustained economic and social progress, it has also caused profound environmental impacts. Among these, mercury and dioxin pollution have become significant global challenges due to their high toxicity, persistence, and widespread distribution. Mercury pollution stems from industrial emissions, mining activities, and improper waste disposal, posing serious threats to ecosystems and human health. Dioxins, as byproducts of chemical manufacturing and waste incineration, are highly toxic and resistant to degradation, and are classified by the World Health Organization as globally hazardous substances.

With the increasing prevalence of multi-pollutant issues, the difficulty of remediation has risen significantly. This is particularly evident in developing countries and historical industrial sites, where limited technical resources hinder progress. Combined mercury and dioxin pollution not only damages the environment and public health but also triggers social trust crises and economic burdens, presenting unprecedented challenges for remediation strategies. The importance of pollution remediation lies not only in solving current problems but also in reducing long-term impacts on future generations and achieving a balanced development of the environment, society, and economy.

In recent years, some sites have been found to exhibit multi-pollution issues, including previously unknown scenarios, further complicating remediation efforts. Addressing such seemingly insurmountable pollution problems presents enormous challenges. To explore approaches to addressing these unprecedented pollution remediation tasks, this study adopts a case study approach for the following reasons: First, the Sinopec Anshun site’s remediation case is highly representative, as the site is recognized as one of the world’s most difficult to remediate due to its dual contamination with mercury and dioxins. Second, this case demonstrates corporate strategies in dealing with technological choices, internal management, and social pressures, providing rich empirical evidence for the remediation of multi-contaminated sites.

This study is based on empowerment theory, integrating social identity theory, enactment theory, and social inclusion theory to examine how enterprises achieve a balance between remediation efficiency and sustainable development through technological choices, transparent decision-making, and social interaction. Using qualitative methods, including interviews, document analysis, and secondary data, the study systematically analyzes how companies leverage psychological empowerment, resource empowerment, and structural empowerment to address high technical barriers and social trust crises.

The findings reveal that companies enhance employees’ adaptability to high-risk technologies (e.g., thermal treatment and low-temperature decomposition) through psychological empowerment. They improve data transparency and technical monitoring via resource empowerment and establish transparent decision-making mechanisms and community collaboration frameworks through structural empowerment, successfully alleviating local community trust crises and stabilizing remediation progress. The study emphasizes that technological choices must balance short-term effectiveness with long-term sustainability, while transparent decision-making and social inclusion are critical factors for achieving long-term environmental and social benefits.

This case highlights the critical role of technological innovation and multi-stakeholder collaboration in pollution remediation and provides practical insights into the remediation of highly toxic contaminated sites. Pollution remediation is not only a core task of environmental protection but also a critical aspect of social responsibility and global sustainable development. Future research should further explore mechanisms for transparent technological innovation and international collaboration to address the growing challenges of mercury and dioxin pollution, ensuring environmental and social sustainability. Additionally, future studies could investigate how empowerment theory, technological innovation, and policy formulation can be integrated across different national and cultural contexts to advance sustainable practices in multi-contaminated site remediation.

Alba, D. M., & Bertrand, P. (2007). Sustainability of industrial pollution cleanup technologies. Environmental Engineering Journal, 23(4), 211–225.
Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2013). Digital media and collective action: Social movements and participation. Communication Theory, 23(1), 33-45.
Blomqvist, K. (1997). The many faces of trust. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 13(3), 271–286.
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Chen, X., & Lin, Y. (2023). AI-based remediation decision systems. Environmental Technology & Innovation, 29, 102315.
Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. L. (2015).Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (4th ed.).
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Dernbach, J. C. (2003). Achieving sustainable development: The centrality and multiple facets of integrated decisionmaking. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 10(1), 247-285.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
Elliott, M., & Thomas, C. (2009). Environmental ethics: An introduction to environmental philosophy. Wadsworth.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245.
Gambetta, D. (1988). Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations. Basil Blackwell.
Giddings, B., Hopwood, B., & O’Brien, G. (2002). Environment, economy and society: Fitting them together into sustainable development. Sustainable Development, 10(4), 187-196.
Haslam, S. A. (2001). Psychology in organizations: The social identity approach. SAGE Publications.
Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. D. (2006). Stressing the group: Social identity and the unfolding dynamics of responses to stress. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(5), 1037-1052.
Hughes, A. L., & Palen, L. (2009). Twitter adoption and use in mass convergence and emergency events. International Journal of Emergency Management, 6(3-4), 248-260.
Hughes, A. L., & Palen, L. (2019). Social media in disaster response: Lessons from crisis informatics. Communications of the ACM, 62(3), 65-73.
Jenks, M., & Dempsey, N. (2007). Future forms and design for sustainable cities. Architectural Press.
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. SAGE Publications.
LeCompte, M. D., & Schensul, J. J. (2010). Designing & conducting ethnographic research: An introduction (2nd ed.). AltaMira Press.
Leong, C. M. L., Pan, S. L., Ractham, P., & Kaewkitipong, L. (2015). ICT-enabled community empowerment in crisis response: Social media in Thailand flooding 2011. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 16(3), 1.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
Majchrzak, A., & Markus, M. L. (2012). Technology affordances and constraints in management information systems. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 567–582.
Meuter, M. L., Ostrom, A. L., Bitner, M. J., & Roundtree, R. I. (2021). Delivering service in the digital age. Journal of Service Research, 24(1), 3-10.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Nathanson, J. A. (2003). Environmental site characterization and remediation design. Prentice Hall.
Orlikowski, W. J., & Gash, D. C. (2020). Technological frames: Making sense of information technology in organizations. MIS Quarterly, 44(3), 567-579.
Palen, L., & Liu, S. B. (2007). Citizen communications in crisis: Anticipating a future of ICT-supported public participation. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 727-736.
Palen, L., Vieweg, S., Liu, S. B., & Hughes, A. L. (2007). Crisis informatics: Studying crisis in a networked world. Third International Conference on E-Social Science.
Quarantelli, E. L. (1997). Problematical aspects of the information/communication revolution for disaster planning and research: Ten non-technical issues and questions. Disaster Prevention and Management, 6(2), 94-106.
Ragin, C. C. (1992). What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry. Cambridge University Press.
Rawal, N. (2008). Social inclusion and exclusion: A review. Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology, 2, 161-180.
Robert K. Yin. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Rowlands, I. H. (1996). Environmental sustainability and transparency in industrial projects. Environmental Policy and Management, 12(3), 149–165.
SAGE Journals (2021). Social identity and social integration: A meta-analysis exploring social inclusion. SAGE Journals.
Schmidt, E., & Cohen, J. (2013). The new digital age: Reshaping the future of people, nations and business. Knopf.
Silver, H. (1994). Social exclusion and social solidarity: Three paradigms. International Labour Review, 133(5-6), 531-578.
Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442-1465.
Spreitzer, G. M. (2018). Taking stock: A review of more than twenty years of research on empowerment. Journal of Management, 44(1), 175-192.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE Publications.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837-851.
Vieweg, S., Hughes, A. L., Starbird, K., & Palen, L. (2010). Microblogging during two natural hazards events: What Twitter may contribute to situational awareness. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1079-1088.
WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development). (1987). Our common future (The Brundtland Report). Oxford University Press.
Weick, K. E. (1969). The social psychology of organizing. McGraw-Hill.
Zimmerman, M. A. (1990). Taking aim on empowerment research: On the distinction between individual and psychological conceptions. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18(1), 169-177.
Zimmerman, M. A. (2000). Empowerment theory: Psychological, organizational, and community levels of analysis. In Rappaport, J., & Seidman, E. (Eds.), Handbook of community psychology (pp. 43-63). Springer.
陳志宏與黃文華 (2021)。台灣社群賦權的危機應對研究。《危機治理期刊》，8(3)，123-140。
鄭偉翔與黃文華 (2022)。結合生物修復的熱處理技術在污染治理中的應用與成本效益分析。《環境科技與管理學刊》，34(4)，56-72。
李建明與劉偉豪 (2020)。台灣南部廠址整治中微生物技術與土壤改良相結合之應用研究。《環境治理學刊》，28(2)，45-63。
陳志宏與林昱廷 (2023)。數字孿生技術在污染廠址治理中的應用與技術優化研究。《環境科技與創新研究》，20(3)，101-118。
黃宗翰與王怡君 (2022)。污染治理數字化平臺的應用：污染數據公開與透明度提升的研究。《環境管理與科技期刊》，28(3)，56-72。
楊智凱、陳佩儀、林俊杰 (2021)。數字孿生技術在污染治理中的應用：污染傳輸模擬與治理方案優化。《環境工程與管理學報》，39(4)，98-112。
吳建民、張怡婷、陳志華 (2023)。數字化資源與協作平臺在危機應對中的應用與賦權作用分析。《環境管理與科技學刊》，21(2)，56-72。
台南市政府環境保護局 (2021)。《中石化安順廠污染整治與治理進度報告》。台南市政府官網。
聯合國環境與發展世界委員會報告。《我們的共同未來》。
中國石油化學工業開發股份有限公司官網。《永續經營與環境報告》。https://www.sinopec.com.tw/
行政院環境保護署 (Environmental Protection Administration, Taiwan)。土壤及地下水污染整治政策報告。https://www.epa.gov.tw/