Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/67166
|
| Title: | 容積移轉接受基地居住環境品質改變認知與政策滿意度之研究－以新北市中和地區為例
A Study of Cognitive and Policy Satisfaction of the Residential Environment Quality Changes in the Transfer Development Right Receiving Area - A Case Study of Zhong He District in New Taipei City |
| Authors: | 高筱菁
Kao, Hsiao Ching |
| Contributors: | 邊泰明
Ben, Tai Ming
高筱菁
Kao, Hsiao Ching |
| Keywords: | 居住環境品質
容積移轉
接受基地
滿意度
結構方程模式
Residential Environment Quality
Transferable Development Rights
Receiving Area
Satisfaction
Structural Equation Modeling |
| Date: | 2013 |
| Issue Date: | 2014-07-01 12:16:54 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 在都市發展環境當中，居住環境品質取決於居住者本身之感受程度，可分為內部環境及外部空間結構，內部環境係指針對居住者本身所在的生活圈裡，外部空間結構則多半為公共設施的鄰近程度、交通便利性及嫌惡設施等因素，世界衛生組織曾於1961年世界衛生報告中提出理想居住環境為安全性、健康性、便利性、舒適性等基本理念，經由探索性、驗證性因素，分析彙整出解釋社區居民對居住環境品質之衡量著力點在於實體性、社區服務與管理、現代化等三大方面，因此居民感受度是與前開四種基本理念相呼應的。
在針對居住環境品質與社區滿意度相關文獻探討後發現，居住環境品質多與社區滿意度有關聯，顯示在建構生活品質模式應先將領域分群，透過客觀、認知及評估因子，即可呈現各領域的滿意度。
為解決公共設施保留地取得、歷史建築物保存及公共開放空間之提供等議題，我國開始實施容積移轉制度，主要目的為追求環境寧適、健全實質建設、保留彈性立法規則及民眾參與，惟接受基地在注入原基準容積後，其鄰近居民之居住環境品質是否受到影響及衝擊，為本研究所關注之重點；本研究係探討容積移轉制度實行迄今，接受基地容積移轉案件在興建完成後，對週邊土地所帶來之影響。
本研究以容積移轉接受基地興建前後對居住環境品質之問卷調查，以新北市中和地區之接受基地周邊住民作為受訪對象，以因素分析、結構方程模式為分析方法，以五大變數－接受基地興建前既有環境滿意度、接受基地興建後正面環境改善、接受基地興建後負面改變影響、容積移轉政策修正建議及其政策滿意度進行模式驗證；研究結果發現既有環境滿意度對負面改變影響、政策修正建議呈正向影響，對正面環境改善、政策滿意度呈負向影響，另負面改變影響、政策修正建議則具有著之中介效果，該研究可作為未來推動容積移轉制度辦理之修正建議。
In the urban development environment, living environment quality depends on how residents feel. It can be divided into internal and external spatial structure environments. The internal environment refers to living areas where the residents themselves reside; the external spatial structures are mostly the proximity, accessibility and distaste factors of public facilities. The World Health Organization’s 1961 World Health Report proposed the basic concept of the ideal living environment for safety, health, convenience, comfort, etc. They compiled an analysis of the environmental community to explain the measure of the quality of living through exploratory, confirmatory factors. The analysis compiled an explanation of the way community residents measure environmental quality. The focal point lies in the three aspects of modernization: physical properties, community service and management. Therefore residents` susceptibility echoes the former four basic philosophies.
In regards to the quality of living environment and community satisfaction, after disscussing relevant literature, we found that the quality of living environment correlate with community satisfaction interaction. This shows that during the construction of life quality models, domain clustering should first take place, then go through the analysis of objective factors, perceived factors, evaluated factors before presenting various domains of satisfaction.
However, to address topics on land reserved for the public infrastructure, topics on historical building preservation and public open space topics, Taiwan began to implement transferable development rights control. The main goal of this system was to pursue environmental quality, improve substantive construction, maintain the flexibility of legislative rules and promote public participation. However, the main concern of this study is whether or not the environmental living quality of nearby residents` was affected after the development rights of the receiving area received incremental development rights and built high-rise buildings. This study mainly dicusses ways to implement the so far accepted transferable development rights case after construction is complete, and the effects brought on by the surrounding land.
This study looks at environmental quality before and after transferable development rights acceptance and construction. A questionnaire was designed for this study and was administered to local residents of the Zhong-he, New Taipei City development rights receiving area as target respondents. This study was conducted by way of factor analysis and structural equation modeling analysis. Five variables were proposed, which are variables of nearby residents of the development rights receiving area regarding environmental satisfaction before construction; variables of nearby residents having positive evaluation after construction; variables of nearby residents having negative evaluation after construction; variables of nearby residents regarding transferable development rights policy amendment; variables of nearby residents regarding transferable development rights policy satisfaction, to conduct a model confirmatory.
The results show that environmental satisfaction variables have a positive impact on negative evaluation variables and policy amendment variables, but have a negative impact on positive evaluation variables and policy satisfaction. In addition, negative evaluation variables have indirect effects on policy amendments. This study can be used as a reference for the implementation of the transferable development rights system in handling amendments in the future. |
| Reference: | Earl Babbie著、劉鶴群．林秀雲．陳麗欣．胡正申．黃韻如譯，2005，『社會科學研究方法』初版（原文十二版），台北：新加坡商聖智學習亞洲私人有限公司台灣分公司。
Edward J. K., David R. G., and Chapin F. S.合著、李瑞麟譯，2000，『都市土地使用規劃』初版2刷，台北：黃氏出版社。
丁慧華，2008，「容積移轉接收基地對其周邊地區公共設施環境承載力之探討」，逢甲大學都市計畫學系碩士在職專班論文：台中。
于明誠，2004，『都市計畫概要』，再版17刷，台北，詹氏書局。
王怡勛，2000，「由都市外部空間觀點檢視大直重劃區居住環境之研究」，國立臺北大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文：台北。
王瑞興，1997，「從美國移轉發展權之辦理經驗－探討我國實施移轉發展權之可能性」，『臺灣地政』，134：15-21。
李永展、吳孟芳，2005，「台北市主管生活品質之衡量」，『都市與計劃』，32(3)：387-420。
林惠玲、陳正倉合著，2001，『統計學-方法與應用（上冊）』，2版修訂，台北，雙葉書廊有限公司。
林惠玲、陳正倉合著，2001，『統計學-方法與應用（下冊）』，2版修訂，台北，雙葉書廊有限公司。
林莉婷，2000，「建構容積移轉接收基地選址之研究」，國立台北科技大學建築與都市設計研究所碩士論文：台北。
邱皓政，2006，『量化研究與統計分析－SPSS中文視窗版資料分析範例解析』，第三版2刷，台北，五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
邱皓政，2011，『結構方程模式-LISRED/SIMPLIS原理與應用』，第二版1刷，台北，雙葉書廊有限公司。
施鴻志，1997，『都市規劃』，初版，新竹，建都文化事業股份有限公司。
孫青雯，1994，「台中市居民對生活環境品質認知分析」，『臺灣地政』，99：42-49。
張瑞雲，2007，「我國容積移轉法制之研究－兼與日本容積移轉制度之比較」，國立政治大學地政學系、私立中國地政研究所碩士論文：台北。
陳順宇著，2004，『多變量分析』，3版，台北，華泰書局。
陳玫秀，2005，「都市地區居住環境品質對居民居住滿意度影響之研究」，國立台灣大學園藝學研究所碩士論文：台北。
陳登輝，2002，「土地整體開發方式評選－多屬性決策方法之應用」，國立中山大學公共事務管理研究所碩士在職專班論文：高雄。
曾國雄、曹勝雄、廖耀東，1992，「台北都會區土地使用型態與環境品質之研究」，『都市與計劃』，19(1)：33-52。
黃芳銘，2010，『結構方程模式-理論與應用』，五版3刷，台北，五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
新北市政府城鄉發展局，2011，「變更大漢溪以南城鄉發展地區主要計畫（通盤檢討）書（草案）」，台北，新北市政府。
廖耀東，1999，「從美國移轉發展權之辦理經驗－探討我國實施移轉發展權之可能性」，『臺灣地政』，155：23-26。
蔡碧雲，1999，「容積移轉接收區劃設之研究─以公共設施用地為例」，國立成功大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文：台南。
蔡勇美、章英華著，2002，『臺灣的都市社會』初版3刷，台北：巨流圖書有限公司。
劉松癸，2002，「居住環境品質概念性模式與量表的建構」，南華大學環境管理研究所碩士論文：嘉義。
邊泰明，2008，『土地使用規劃與財產權－理論與實務』，初版2刷，台北，詹氏書局。
Arthurson, K., 2012, “Social Mix, Reputation and Stigma: Exploring Residents’ Perspectives of Neighbourhood Effects”, Neighbourhood Effects Research:New Perspectives, 101-119.
Brown, L. A., and Moore, E. G., 1970, “The Intra-Urban Migration Process: A Perspective”, Geografiska Annaler, 52: 1-13.
Carp, F., Zawadski, R., and Shokron, H., 1976, “Dimensions of Urban Environmental Quality”, Environment and Behavior, 8: 239-265.
Daisy, D., 2008, “Urban Quality of Life: A Case Study of Guwahati”, Soc Indic Res, 88: 297-310.
Elsa, S. T., 2009, “Urban Quality of Life and Its Spatial Distribution in Addis Ababa: Kirkos sub-city”, Published master`s dissertation, Department of Urban Planning and Management, International Institute for GEO-Information Science and Earth Observation Enschede, the Netherlands.
Elsa, S. T., Martinez, J. A., and Verplanke, J. J., 2009, “Variability of Quality of Life at Small Scales: Addis Ababa, Kirkos sub-city”, Soc Indic Res, 98: 73-88.
John, H., 2010, “What is the ‘Neighbourhood’ in Neighbourhood Satisfaction? Comparting the Effects of Structural Characteristics Measured at the Micro-neighbourhood and Tract Levels”, Urban Studies, 47（12）: 2517-2536.
Kearns, A., and Parkinson, M., 2001, “The Significance of Neighbourhood”, Urban Studies, 38: 2103-2110.
Karim, H. A., 2012, “Low Cost Housing Environment: Compromising Quality of Life?”, Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 35: 44-53.
Lee, B. A., Oropesa, R. S., and Kanan, J. W., 1994, “Neighborhood Context and Residential Mobility”, Demography, 31:249-270.
Matthieu, P., Gideon, B., and Maarten, V. H., 2011, “Determinants of Neighbourhood Satisfaction and Perception of Neighbourhood Reputation”, Urban Studies, 48（5）:977-996.
Mohan, J., and Twigg, L., 2007, “Sense of Place, Quality of Life and Local Socioeconomic Context: Evidence From the Survey of English Housing”, Urban Studies, 44: 2029-2045.
Marans, R. W., and Rodgers, W., 1975, “Toward an understanding of community satisfaction”, pp.299-352, in Nonmetropolitan America in Transition, edited by Hawley A., Mazie S. M., Chapel Hill, NC: Uniersity of North Carolina Press.
Marans, R. W., 2012, “Quality of Urban Life Studies: An overview and Implications for Environment-Behaviour Research”, Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 35: 9-22.
Parkes, A., Kearns, A., and Atkinson, R., 2002, “What Makes People Dissatisfied With Their Neighbourhoods?”, Urban Studies, 39: 2413-2438.
Permentier, M., Ham, M. Van., and Bolt, G., 2007, “Behavioural Responses to Neighbourhood Reputations”, Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 14:199-213.
Permentier, M., Ham, M. V., and Bolt, G., 2008, “Same Neighbourhood ... Different Views? A Confrontation of Internal and External Neighbourhood Reputations”, Housing Studies, 23: 833-855.
Ross, L. M., 2011, “The Impact of Housing Vouchers on Renters’ Neighbourhood Satisfaction: Understanding the Perceptions and Constraints among Assisted and Unassisted Renters”, Published master`s dissertation, Department of Sociology, Temple University, Washington.
Rezvani, M. R., Mansourian, H., and Sattari, M. H., 2012, “Evaluating Quality of Life in Urban Areas （Case Study: Noorabad City, Iran）”, Soc Indic Res （DOI 10.1007/s11205012-0048）.
Sirgy, M. J., and Cornwell, T., 2002, “How Neighborhood Features Affect Quality of Life”, Social Indicators Research, 59: 79-114.
St John, C., and Bates, N. A., 1990, “Racial Composition and Neighborhood Evaluation”, Social Science Research, 19: 47-61.
Speare, A., 1974, “Residential Satisfaction as an Intervening Variable in Residential Mobility”, Demography, 11: 173-188.
Tabachnick, B. G., and Fidell, L. S., 2007, “Using Multivariate Statistics （Fifth Edtion.）”, Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Teck, H. T., 2012, “Housing satisfaction in medium- and high-cost housing: The case of Greater Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia”, Habitat International, 36: 108-116。
Taylor, M., 1998, “Combating the Social Exclusion of Housing Estates”, Housing Studies, 13: 819–832.
Wacquant, L., 1993, “Urban Outcasts: Stigma and Division in the Black American Ghetto and the French Periphery”, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 19: 366-383.
Wolpert, J., 1966, “Migration as An Adjustment to Environmental Stress”, Journal of Social Issues, :92-102.
Yusof, Y., Ibrahim, Y., Muda, M. S., Amin, W. A. A. W. M., 2012, “Community Based Tourism and Quality of Life”, Review of Integrative Business & Econimics Research, 1（1）: 335-345。
司法院大法官網站，2012，釋字第336號解釋文，http://www.judicial.gov.tw/constitutionalcourt/p03_01.asp?expno=336，取用日期：2012年10月28日。
立法院全球資訊網，2012，立法院法律系統。http://lis.ly.gov.tw/lgcgi/lglaw?@109:1804289383:f:NO%3DE01161*%20OR%20NO%3DB01161$$11$$$PD%2BNO，取用日期：2012年10月28日。
新北市政府全球資訊網，2012，電子法規查詢系統，http://web.law.ntpc.gov.tw/Scripts/Query4A.asp?FullDoc=all&Fcode=C0150015，取用日期：2012年10月28日。
維基百科-自由的百科全書網站，2012，世界衛生組織，http://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-tw/%E4%B8%96%E7%95%8C%E5%8D%AB%E7%94%9F%E7%BB%84%E7%BB%87，取用日期：2012年10月28日。
世界衛生組織官方網站，2012，http://www.who.int/en/index.html，取用日期：2012年10月28日。
新北市土地使用分區城鄉服務網，2012，中和都市計畫，http://urbanbook.planning.ntpc.gov.tw/TPC_urbanbook/，取用日期：2012年10月13日。 |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
地政學系碩士在職專班
100923021
102 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0100923021 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [地政學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 302101.pdf | 1382Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 285 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
