Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/29383
標題: 以景觀生態原理探討台灣土地開發案土地規劃配置與策略之研究
A Study on the configuration and strategies of land use planning through Landscape Ecological Principle in Taiwan land-development case.
作者: 陳坤佐
Chen, Kun-Tso
關鍵字: 物種移動最低成本模型
Species move least-cost model
景觀結構指數
物種生態評估指數
環境影響評估
Landscape Structure Index
Ecology Assessment Index
Environmental Impact Assessment
出版社: 園藝學系所
引用: 中文: 1. 中部科學工業園區開發籌備處。2006。中部科學工業園區第三期發展區(后里基地--后里農場部分)開發計畫環境影響說明書(0940431A)。 2. 中華民國戶外遊憩學會。2009。高雄園區生態保護用地棲地管理計畫。南部科學工業園區管理局。 3. 方偉達、陸國先、張尊國。2005。應用池景指標規劃水田候鳥渡冬棲地。2005 農業工程研討會論文集。台北。 4. 王明盛、黃俊翔、韓伯君。2007。中部科學工業園區台中基地滯洪池工程特色之介紹。中華技術。73:100-109。 5. 王敏先。2005。景觀生態概念與指標應用於景觀規劃之探討。碩士論文。中國文化大學景觀學系研究所。台北。 6. 台中市政府。2009。擬定中部科學工業園區台中基地附近特定區計畫(台中市轄區部分)細部計畫(草案)。 7. 台中市政府。2009。擬定中部科學工業園區台中基地附近特定區計畫(台中縣轄區部分)細部計畫(草案)。 8. 台中市政府。2009。擬定中部科學工業園區台中基地附近特定區計畫書(主要計畫) (草案)。 9. 台南市野鳥協會。2008。南部科學工業園區97年生態調查報告。南部科學工業園區管理局。 10. 台南縣政府。2007。變更台南科學工業園區特定區計畫(科學園區部分)(第一次通盤檢討)。 11. 台南縣政府。2008。變更台南科學工業園區特定區計畫(不含科學園區部分)(第一次通盤檢討)。 12. 台南縣政府。2010。變更台南科學工業園區特定區計畫(南科液晶電視及產業支援工業區)細部計畫(土地使用分區管制要點)。 13. 史瓊雯。2003。應用景觀生態計量方法探討集水區河川沿岸土地利用變遷—以德基水庫集水區為例。碩士論文。中國文化大學地學研究所。台北。 14. 江彥政、張俊彥。2004。景觀生態中塊區結構指數與鳥類物種歧異度相關性之研究。興大園藝。29(4):94-110。 15. 行政院國家科學委員會。1996。台南科學工業園區開發計畫環境影響評估報告書(0850102A)。 16. 行政院國家科學委員會。2002。台南科學工業園區路竹基地(第二次變更)環境影響說明書(0900681A)。 17. 行政院國家科學委員會。2003。中部科學工業園區台中基地開發計畫環境影響說明書(0920211A)。 18. 行政院國家科學委員會中部科學工業園區管理局。2010。中部科學工業園區第三期發展區(后里基地--七星農場部分)開發計畫環境影響說明書(0950081A)。 19. 李吳嘉。2006。應用景觀安全格局、中性景觀模型與滲透理論探討大肚溪口之景觀變遷。碩士論文。東海大學景觀學系。台中。 20. 李吳嘉、薛怡珍、賴明洲。2005。台灣地區景觀變遷研究發展現況與進展。景觀論壇-永續景觀論文集。pp.47-76。台中:中華民國景觀學會、東海大學景觀學系。 21. 李佩芳。2007。陽明山國家公園景觀安全格局之研究。碩士論文。東海大學景觀學系。台中。 22. 李明傑。1997。地理資訊系統技術輔助環境影響評估可行性之研究。碩士論文。國立臺灣大學農業工程學系。台北。 23. 李惠森。2010。高爾夫球場環境影響評估之環境監測成效探討。碩士論文。國立中央大學環境工程研究所。桃園。 24. 周大慶。2011。大冠鷲(Spilornis cheela hoya)活動範圍與棲地選擇。博士論文。臺灣大學生態學與演化生物學研究所。台北。 25. 周彥瑜。2005。以景觀生態觀點探討台灣鄉村地區樹籬廊道與鳥類族群相關性之研究-以竹北地區為例。碩士論文。國立中興大學園藝學系。台中。 26. 林士強。2006。利用景觀生態指數分析墾丁國家公園土地利用變遷之研究。碩士論文。逢甲大學土地管理學系研究所。台中。 27. 林木興。2011。我國政策環境影響評估制度之研究-以工業區設置為例。碩士論文。國立台北大學法律學系。台北。 28. 林哲民。2006。開發行為對環境影響評估審查結論及承諾的履行之探討:以中部科學工業園區台中基地為例。碩士論文。國立中興大學環境工程學系所。台中。 29. 林裕彬、鄧東波、張尊國。2004。以景觀生態方法分析桃園台地埤塘變遷之研究。桃園大圳水資源暨營運管理學術研討會論文集。pp.307-344。桃園:祧園農田水利會。 30. 林憲德。2007。(更新版)。城鄉生態。詹氏出版社。 31. 俞孔堅。1998。景觀生態戰略點識別方法與理論地理學的表面模型。地理學報。53:11-20。 32. 俞孔堅。1999。生物保護的景觀生態安全格局。生態學報。19(1):8-15。 33. 俞孔堅、李迪華、段鐵武。2001。敏感地段的景觀安全格局設計及地理信息系統應用—以北京香山滑雪場為例。中國園林。1:11-16。 34. 俞孔堅、李偉、李迪華、李春波、黃剛、劉海龍。2005。快速城市化地區遺產廊道適宜性分析方法探討-以台州市為例。地理研究。2005(1):69-76。 35. 科學工業園區管理局。1999。新竹科學工業園區四期擴建用地竹南基地環境影響說明書(0880741A)。 36. 科學工業園區管理局。2003。新竹科學工業園區四期擴建用地竹南基地變更計畫暨其擴建計畫環境影響說明書(0920081A)。 37. 苗栗縣政府。2011。新竹科學園區竹南基地暨周邊地區特定區(不含原新竹科學園區竹南基地)(配合行政院「劃地還農」專案讓售政策指示)細部計畫。 38. 苗栗縣政府。2011。新竹科學園區竹南基地暨周邊地區特定區(原新竹科學園區竹南基地)細部計畫。 39. 徐明麒。1998。以棲地評價程序進行鳥類生態影響評估-以關渡地區為例。碩士論文。國立東華大學自然資源管理研究所。花蓮。 40. 翁雅瑩。2005。以景觀生態安全格局觀點探討農村環境規劃-以嘉義縣朴子溪流域為例。碩士論文。樹德科技大學建築與古蹟維護研究所。高雄。 41. 高雄市政府。2011。南科高雄園區特定區計畫(執行中)。 42. 高雅力。2004。都會區生態廊道規劃之研究-以台南市為例。碩士論文。國立成功大學都市計劃學系。台南。 43. 國立臺灣大學。2010。環境影響評估制度問題之探討。台北:行政院研究發展考核委員會。 44. 張俊彥、洪佳君、曾心嫻編譯。Dramstad, W. E., Olson, J. D., Forman R. T. T.著。2001。景觀建築及土地使用計畫之景觀生態原則(Landscape ecology principles in landscape architecture and land-use planning)。台北:地景企業股份有限公司。 45. 許玉玲。2009。通霄地區台灣鼬貛(Melogale moschata subaurantiaca)之活動範圍、活動模式與棲地利用。碩士論文。國立屏東科技大學野生動物保育研究所。屏東。 46. 陳朝圳、陳正華。2003。以地景生態理論探討東北季風對南仁山森林生態系之影響。中華林學季刊。36(4):389-396。 47. 陳瀅茹。2008。泥岩地區農塘景觀結構與生物群聚關係之研究。碩士論文。國立中興大學水土保持學系。台中。 48. 曾家宏。2006。環境影響評估制度民眾參與機制之研究-以國道東部公路蘇澳花蓮段為例。碩士論文。國立臺灣大學地理環境資源學研究所。台北。 49. 黃偉銘。2006。台灣鄉村地區鳥類族群多樣性評估模式之建置。碩士論文。國立中興大學園藝學系研究所。台中。 50. 黃國平。2002年。景觀安全格局理論在風景區規劃中的應用—以湖南省武陵源風景名勝區為例。碩士論文。北京大學人文地理學研究所。北京。 51. 葉玉君。2004。花蓮兆豐農場台灣環頸雉活動範圍、活動模式與棲地利用之研究。碩士論文。臺灣大學生態學與演化生物學研究所。台北。 52. 鄔建國。003。景觀生態學:格局、過程、尺度與等級。台北:五南圖書。 53. 趙筱青、王海波、楊樹華、徐曉雅。2009。基於GIS支持下的土地資源空間格局生態優化。生態學報。29(9):4892-4901。 54. 劉少陽。2003。空間分析應用於海岸地區土地利用規劃之研究─以花蓮溪口水鳥保護區規劃為例。碩士論文。國立東華大學自然資源管理學研究所。花蓮。 55. 蔡志舜。2009。政府政策環境影響評估制度落實於國體計畫體系之研究。碩士論文。國立東華大學環境政策研究所。花蓮。 56. 鄭曉昀。2003。鄉村景觀資源評估與規劃-以平溪、雙溪地區為例。碩士論文。臺灣大學地理環境資源學研究所。台北。 57. 蕭文瑋。2008。校園綠覆形式對都市綠網結構與綠覆品質之影響。碩士論文。朝陽科技大學建築及都市設計研究所。台中。 58. 環保署。2011。動物生態評估技術規範。台北:環保署。 59. 簡炯欣、馮豐隆。2002。關刀溪長期生態試驗地之地景格局代表性分析,特有生物研究。4(1):75-85。 60. 魏彤竹。2004。運用地景生態學原則在評估東華大學校園空間規劃-以環頸雉為例。碩士論文。國立東華大學自然資源管理研究所。花蓮。 61. 羅宏銘。2002。農地景觀生態廊道建構之研究-以得子口溪流域平原農地為例。碩士論文。國立臺灣大學園藝學研究所。台北。 外文: 62. Baguette, M., G. Mennechez, S. Petit, and N. Schtickzelle. 2003. Effect of habitat fragmentation on dispersal in the butterfly Proclossiana eunomia. C R biologies. 326:200-209. 63. Beier, P. 1995. Dispersal of juvenile cougars in fragmented habitat. J. wildl. Manage. 59(2): 228-237. 64. Bellamy, P. E., N. J. Brown, B. Enoksson, L. G. Firbank, R. J. Fuller, S. A. Hinslley, and A. G. M. Schotman. 1998. The influences of habitat, landscape structure and climate on local distribution patterns of the nuthatch. Oecologia. 115:127-136. 65. Bennett, A. F. 1990. Habitat Corridors: Their Role inWildlifeManagement andConservation. Department of Conservation and the Environment. Victoria. 66. Chetkiewicz, C. L. B., and M. S. Boyce. 2009. Use of resource selection functions to identify conservation corridors. J. appl. ecol. 46(5):1036-1047. 67. Cornelis, J., and M. Hermy. 2004. Biodiversity relationships in urban and suburbanparks in Flanders. Landsc. urban plan. 69(4):385-401. 68. Diamond, J. M. 1975. The island dilemma: lessons of modern biogeographic studies for the design of natural reserves. Biol. conserv. 7(2):129-146. 69. Ferguson-lees, J., and D. A. Christie. 2001. Crested Serpent-Eagle. Raptors of the World, pp. 457-759. Christopher Helm, London. 70. Fernandes, M. R., F. C. Aguiar, and M. T. Ferreira. 2011. Assessing riparian vegetation structure and the influence of land use using landscape metrics and geostatistical tools. Landsc. urban plan. 99(2):166-177. 71. Fernandez-Juricic, E. 2000. Avifaunal use of wooded streets in an urban landscape. Conservation biology. 14(2):513-521. 72. Forman, R. T. T. 1995. Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. CambridgeUniversity Press. 73. Forman, R. T. T., and M. Godron. 1986. Landsc. ecol. John Wiley. New York. 74. Freudenberger, D. 1999. Guidelines for enhancing grassy woodlands for the Vegetation Investment Project. Canberra: A report commissioned by Greening Australia. CSIRO Wildlife and Ecology. 75. Frondoni, R., B. Mollo, and G. Capotorti. 2011. A landscape analysis of land cover change in the Municipality of Rome (Italy): Spatio-temporal characteristics and ecological implications of land cover transitions from 1954 to 2001. Landsc. urban plan. 100(1-2):117-128. 76. Gilpin, M. E., and I. Hanski. 1991. Metapopulation dynamics: empirical and theoretical investigations. San Diego: Academic Press. 77. Goncalves, A. B. 2010. An extension of GIS-based least cost path modelling to the location of wide paths. Int. j. geogr. inf. Sci. 24(7):983-996. 78. Hanski, I., and M. Gilpin. 1997. Metapopulation Biology: Ecology, Genetics, and Evolution. Academic Press. California. 79. Hardt, R. A., and R. T. T. Forman. 1989. Boundary from effect on woody colonization of reclaimed surface mines. Ecology. 70(5):1252-1260. 80. Hargis, C. D., J. A. Bissonette, and J. L. David. 1998. The behavior of landscape metrics commonly used in the study of habitat fragmentation. Landsc. Ecol. 13:167-186. 81. Harris, L. D. 1984. The FragmentedForest: Island Biogeography Theory and Preservation of Biotic Diversity .University of Chicago Press:, Chicago, IL. 82. Hietala-Koivu, R. 1999. Agricultural landscape change: a case studyin Ylane, southwest Finland. Landsc. urban plan. 46(1-3):103-108. 83. Hostetler, M. E., and C. S. Holling. 2000. Detecting the scales at which birds respond to structure in urban landscapes. Urban Ecosystems. 4(1):25-54. 84. Hostetler, M., and K. Knowles-Yanez. 2003. Land use, scale, and bird distributions in the Phoenix metropolitan area. Landsc. urban plan. 62(2): 55-68. 85. Huslshoff, R. M. 1995. Landscape indices describing a Dutch Landscape. Landsc. Ecol. 10:101-111. 86. Joan, P., R. Ferran, R. Josep, and P. Xavier. 2000. Landscape structure and bird species richness: implications for conservation in rural areas between natural parks. Landsc. urban plan. 49:35-48. 87. Kareiva, P. 1990. Population dynamics in spatially complex environments: theory and data. Philos. trans. R. Soc. Lond. pp.175-190. 88. Kautz, R., R. Kawula, T. Hoctor, J. Comiskey, D. Jansen, D. Jennings, J. Kasbohm, F. Mazzotti, R. McBride, L. Richardson, and K. Root. 2006. How much is enough? Landscape-scale conservation for the Florida panther. Biol. conserv. 130(1):118-133. 89. Kindall, J. L., and F. T. Van Manen. 2007.Identifying habitat linkages for American black bears in North Carolina, USA. J. wildl. manage. 71(2):487-495. 90. Klar, N., M. Herrmann., M. Henning-Hahn, B. Pott-Dorfer, H. Hofer, and S. Kramer-Schadt. 2012. Between ecological theory and planning practice: (Re-) Connecting forest patches for the wildcat in Lower Saxony, Germany. Landsc. urban plan. 105(4): 376-384. 91. Knaapen, J.P., M. Scheffer, and B. Harms. 1992. Estimating habitat isolation in landscape planning. Landsc. urban plan. 23(1):1-16. 92. Li, H., and J. F. Reynolds. 1994. A simulation experiment to quantify spatial heterogeneity in categorical maps. Ecology. 75(8):2446-2455. 93. Li, H., D .Li., T. Li., Q. Qiao., J. Yang, and H. Zhang. 2010. Application of least-cost path model to identify a giant panda dispersal corridor network after the Wenchuan earthquake—Case study of Wolong Nature Reserve in China. Ecol. Model. 221(6):944-952. 94. Linehan, J., M. Gross, and J. Finn. 1995. Greenway planning: Developing a landscape ecological network approach. Landsc. urban plan. 33(1-3): 179-193. 95. Liu, J., F. Cubbage, and H. R. W. Pulliam. 1994. Ecological and economic effects of forest landscape structure and rotation length: simulation studies using ECOLECON. Ecological Economics. 10(3):249-263. 96. MacArthur, R. H., and E. O. Wilson. 1967. The theory of island biogeography. Princeton: PrincetonUniversity Press. 97. Manserg, I. M., and D. J. Scotts. 1989. Habitat continuity and social organizationof the mountain pygmy-possum restored by tunnel. J. wildl. Manage. 53(3):701-707. 98. Marzluff, J. M., and K. Ewing. 2001. Restoration of fragmented landscapes for theconservation of birds: a general framework and specific recommendationsfor urbanizing landscapes. Restor. Ecol. 9(3):280-292. 99. Matsushita, B., M. Xu, and T. Fukushima. 2006. Characterizing the changes in landscape structure in the Lake Kasumigaura Basin, Japan using a high-quality GIS dataset. Landsc. urban plan. 78(3):241-250. 100. McGarigal, K., and B. J. Marks. 1995. FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure. USDAForest Service General Technical Report PNW-GTR- 351. 101. McGarigal, K., S. A. Cushman, M. C. Neel, and E. Ene. 2002. FRAGSTATS: Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for Categorical Maps. Computer software program produced by the authors at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Available at the following web site: www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html 102. Merriam, G. 1984. Connectivity: a fundamental characteristic of landscape pattern. In Brandt, J. and P. Agger, eds., Proceedings of the first International Seminar on Methodology in Landcape Ecological Research and Planning(Vol.1) Roskilde, (pp.5-15).Denmark: Roskilde Universitetsfolag GeoRuc. 103. Mortberg, U., and H.-G. Wallentinus. 2000. Red-listed forest bird species in an urban environment -- assessment of green space corridors. Landsc. urban plan. 50(4):215-226. 104. Nikolakaki, P. 2004. A GIS site-selection process for habitat creation: estimating connectivity of habitat patches. Landsc. urban plan. (68)1:77-94. 105. Parker, K., L. Head, L. A. Chisholma, and N. Feneley. 2008. A conceptual model of ecological connectivity in the Shellharbour Local Government Area, New South Wales, Australia. Landsc. urban plan. 86(1):47-59. 106. Pellissier, V., M. Cohen, A. Boulay, and P. Clergeau. 2012. Birds are also sensitive to landscape composition and configuration within the city centre. Landsc. urban plan. 104(2): 181-188. 107. Phama, H. M., Y. Yamaguchia, and T. H. Bui. 2011. A case study on the relation between city planning and urban growth using remote sensing and spatial metrics. Landsc. urban plan. 100(3):223-230. 108. Pino, J., F. Rod, J. Ribas, and X. Pons. 2000. Landscape structure and bird species richness: implications for conservation in rural areas between natural parks. Landsc. urban plan. 49(1-2):35-48. 109. Prato, T. 2000. Multiple attribute evaluation of landscape management. J. environ. manage. 60, 325-337. 110. Pullinger, M. G., and C. J. Johnson. 2010. Maintaining or restoring connectivity of modified landscapes: evaluating the least-cost path model with multiple sources of ecological information. Landsc. ecol. 25(10):1547-1560. 111. Ray, N., A. Lehmann, and P. Joly. 2002. Modeling spatial distribution of amphibian populations: a GIS approach based on habitat matrix permeability.Biodiversity and Conservation. 11:2143-2165. 112. Richard, Y., and D. P. Armstrong. 2010. Cost distance modelling of landscape connectivity and gap-crossing ability using radio-tracking data. J. appl. ecol. 47(3): 603-610. 113. Riiters, K. H., R. V. O''Neill, C. T. Hunsaker, J. D. Wickham, D. H. Yankee, S. P. Timmins, B. Jones, and B. L. Jackson. 1995. A factor analysis of landscape pattern and structure metrics. Landsc. Ecol. 10:23-39. 114. Shoyama, K., and A. K. Braimoh. 2011. Analyzing about sixty years of land-cover change and associated landscape fragmentation in ShiretokoPeninsula, Northern Japan. Landsc. urban plan. 101(1): 22-29. 115. Singleton, P. H., W. L. Gaines, and J. F. Lehmkuhl. 2002. Landscape permeability for large carnivores in Washington: a geographic information system weighted-distance and least-cost corridor assessment. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland. 116. Sun, R., and L. Chen. 2012. How can urban water bodies be designed for climate adaptation? Landsc. urban plan. 105(1–2):27-33. 117. Tenga, M., C. Wua, Z. Zhoua, E. Lorda, and Z. Zheng. 2011. Multipurpose greenway planning for changing cities: A framework integratingpriorities and a least-cost path model. Landsc. urban plan. 103(1): 1-14. 118. Troll, C. 1939. Luftbildplan und okologische Bodenforschung. In: Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft fur Erdkunde zu Berlin. 7/8. S: pp. 241-298. 119. Villard, M.-A., M. K. Trzcinski, and G. Merriam. 1999. Fragmentation Effects on Forest Birds: Relative Influence of Woodland Cover and Configuration on Landscape Occupancy. Conservation Biology. 13(4):774-783. 120. Walker, R., and L. Craighead.1997.Least-cost-path corridor analysis: analyzing wildlife movement corridors in Montana using GIS. In: Proceedings of the ESRI user’s conference, San Diego. 121. Yu, K.-J. 1995. Security Patterns in Landscape Planning with a Case Study in South China. Doctorial Thesis, Graduate School of Design, Harvard University, MA. USA. 122. Yu, K.-J. 1995. Ecological Security Patterns in Landscapes and GIS Application. Geogr. inf. Sci. 1(2):88-102. 123. Yu, K.-J. 1996. Security patterns and surface model and in landscape planning. Landsc. urban plan. 36(5): 1-17. 124. Yu, K.-J. 1997. Security patterns: a defensive approach toward landscape and environmental planning. In, T. Sellis and D. Georgoulis (eds.), Proceedings, Athens International Conference , Urban Regional Environmental Planning and Informatics to Planning in An Era of Transition. (pp.453-463).National Technical University of Athens, Faculty of Architecture Dept. of Urban and Regional Planning. 125. Zetterberg, A., U. A. Mortberg, and B. Balfors. 2010. Making graph theory operational for landscape ecological assessments, planning, and design. Landsc. urban plan. 95(4):181-191. 126. Zomeni, M., J. Tzanopoulos, and J. D. Pantis. 2008. Historical analysis of landscape change using remote sensing techniques: An explanatory tool for agricultural transformation in Greek rural areas. Landsc. urban plan. 86(1): 38-46. 網路資料: 127. 台灣野生動物資料庫查詢系統,http://www.tbn.org.tw/twd97/。 128. 后里園區環境監測計畫網,http://web.ctsp.gov.tw/temp/web/index.html。 129. 國科會統計資料庫,https://nscnt12.nsc.gov.tw/WAS2/sciencepark/AsScienceParkReport.aspx?quyid=tqland01。 130. 新竹科學工業園區竹南園區施工/營運階段環境品質監測成果網,http://pavo.sipa.gov.tw/monitor/Jhunan/。
摘要: 目前台灣的土地開發案,在對生態環境的維護層面上,環境影響評估作業似乎是唯一的把關制度,因此本研究嘗試以景觀生態的角度進行分析,找出景觀生態專業在此制度下可參與的內容與扮演的角色。本研究首先從文獻回顧尋找景觀生態學中關於土地規劃之相關研究與理論,藉此探討景觀生態理論運用於大型土地開發案的可行性,包括物種移動最低成本模型、景觀結構指數、物種生態評估指數、景觀生態學原則等,並進而擬定一可行的操作流程,以提供後續開發應用,。以過去眾多的環評報告書為基礎,經由篩選後,選擇竹科竹南園區、中科台中園區、中科后里園區、南科台南園區、南科高雄園區共五個園區為研究基地。 在鳥類物種的變動評估部份,由鳥類多樣性、均勻度指數的分析可發現,基地開發已漸趨穩定者,包括竹南、台中、台南、高雄,兩指數的趨勢皆是升高或平穩的情形,景觀結構較佳或生態環境維持較佳的竹南、台南園區,兩指數呈現上升的趨勢,而后里兩園區,由於尚處於未開發完成的變動期,因此兩指數相當不平穩而變動劇烈,因此可知,多樣性、均勻度指數對於了解基地的生態恢復是否達到平衡狀態、基地環境結構是否有利於鳥類物種棲息,是有效的監測指標。 藉由五個基地物種移動最低成本模型的操作,可以確認以景觀尺度進行分析的可行性,在本研究中,由竹南園區的物種移動最低成本模型變化,得以解釋重要棲地消失對大型族群的顯著影響;而台中園區的景觀變化,幾乎完全改變了原有的格局走向,雖然經過時間的恢復,鳥類物種已逐漸穩定,但組成已較偏向親近人類的普遍種;台南園區雖然格局有所變化,但因為保育區劃設的策略與其綠地系統的完整性,讓恢復後的環境對鳥類族群的數量、多樣性有正向的幫助,但鳥種因為棲息環境的限制而集中於某些區塊的情形顯得相當明顯。由本研究的操作結果,可以確認物種移動最低成本模型對於基地生態環境具有預測效果,並且亦是提出改善建議的可行工具。 由景觀指數的計算結果,可以讓規劃者了解開發前後景觀變化的重要數據,藉由聚集度、連接度的改變,可以事先預測或驗證物種變化的結果。 最後依據本研究擬定的流程步驟,實際以基地原有規劃配置進行操作,並在不影響空間機能、場區建蔽率等條件下,提出公園綠地的配置建議。由於所提出的建議,都是依循物種移動最低成本、景觀生態原則下進行,因此所提出的配置決策,相信對於景觀生態的恢復應有實質的幫助,且可提供環評審查上,足夠的生態考量理論基礎。
Of all the current land development projects in Taiwan, Environmental Impact Assessment seems to be the only monitoring system when it comes to the maintenance aspect of ecological environment. Therefore, this study attempted to examine from the point of view of landscape ecology, identify the contents and role of landscape ecology professionals could participate in this system. This study explored land planning related studies and theories through literature review, in order to examine the possibility of using landscape ecology theories on large scale land development projects, including species move least-cost model, landscape structure index, species ecology assessment index, and landscape ecology principles, and then come up with a feasible operational process for subsequent development application. Based on numerous EIA reports from the past and through selection, this study has chosen Hsinchu Science Park Jhunan Science Park, Central Taiwan Science Park Taichung Science Park, Central Taiwan Science Park Houli Science Park, Southern Taiwan Science Park Tainan Science Park and Southern Taiwan Science Park Kaohsiung Science Park as the five study sites. When assessing of changes in bird species, we found that from diversity index and evenness index analysis, site development of Jhunan, Taichung, Tainan and Kaohsiung Science Parks have become more stable, and both indexes were either rising or constant. Both indexes of Jhunan and Tainan Science Park, which have better landscape structure or maintenance of ecological environment, appeared to be rising, and because Houli Science Park is still in the changing period of developing phase, the two indexes were very unstable and changes rigorously. Therefore, diversity index and evenness index are effective monitoring indicators in understanding whether if a site’s ecological restoration has reached equilibrium state, or if the site’s environmental structure is conducive to bird species habitat. Through the species move least-cost model of the five study sites, the possibility of examine from landscape sale is confirmed. In this study, Jhunan Science Park’s species move least-cost model changes were able to explain the disappearance of important habitat significantly affected large populations. Landscape changes in Taichung Science Park almost changed the original natural pattern entirely, and even it recovered through time and bird species were eventually stabilized, the composition, however, has tend to become ubiquitous species that are familiar to human. Although the pattern were changed in Tainan Science Park, the strategy of designated conservation area and integrity of greenbelt system allowed the recovered environment positively assisted in increasing the number and diversity of the bird population; but due to the limits of habitat environment, it is obvious that bird species were concentrated in certain areas. From these results, it is certain that species move least-cost model can predict ecological environment of a site, and it also is a viable tool for suggesting improvements. The results of landscape indicators are important data for planners to understand the landscape changes before and after a development. It can predict or verify the result of species change through the variation of aggregation and connectivity. Finally, actually carry out the original planning of the site according to the prepared procedure of this study, and at the same time under the condition of not affecting spatial function and building coverage ratio of the area, propose design recommendations for parks and green spaces. Because all the proposed recommendations are based on species move least-cost and landscape ecology principles, we believe these design policies will assist substantially in recovering landscape ecology, and provide enough ecological theory groundwork for EIA review.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/29383
其他識別: U0005-2408201214091700
文章連結: http://www.airitilibrary.com/Publication/alDetailedMesh1?DocID=U0005-2408201214091700
Appears in Collections:園藝學系

文件中的檔案:

取得全文請前往華藝線上圖書館



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