Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/34412
標題: 土石流防災社區承受度評估之研究
Assessment of Communities Resilient Capacity for Debris Flow Disasters
作者: 吳亭燁
Wu, Ting-Yeh
關鍵字: 承受度
resilient capacity
風險評估
FLO-2D
風險地圖
risk assessment
Flo-2D
risk map
出版社: 水土保持學系所
引用: 1. 于鳳娟(2001),「危機管理」,五南出版社。 2. 柯勇全、陳樹群(2005),「中日奧天然災害危險區劃定之異同」,第三屆土地研究學術研討會。 3. 酒井隆(2005),「問卷設計、市場調查與統計分析分析與實務入門」,博誌文化出版社。 4. 陳樹群、王俞婷、吳亭燁(2005),「坡地災害高風險縣市之村里耐災程度評估」,中華水土保持學報,36(4):323-337. 5. 陳樹群、柯勇全、吳俊毅、馮智偉、吳俊鋐、吳亭燁(2005),「坡地災害風險評估模式」,94年度防救災專案計畫成果研討會論文集。 6. 蔡誌崇(2004),「FLO-2D模式應用於土石流災害管理之研究」,國立中興大學水土保持學系碩士論文。 7. 日本總務省消防廳(2003),「地方公共団体の地域防災力・危機管理能力評価指針の策定—調查報告書」,日本總務省消防廳出版。 8. 國土交通省河川局水政課、砂防部砂防計劃課(2003),「土砂災害防止法令の解說」,全國治水砂防協會出版。 9. Odeh David J., 2002, ‘‘Natural Hazards Vulnerability Assessment for Statewide Mitigation Planning in Rhode Island,” Natural Hazards Review, 4: 177-187. 10. Godschalk David R., T. Beatley, P. Berke, D. J. Brower, E. J. Kaiser, C. C. Bohl, R. Matthew Goebel, 1999, Natural Hazard Mitigation, Island Press, pp. 378-379. 11. Dai F.C., C.F. Lee, Y.Y. Ngai, 2002, ‘‘Landslide risk assessment and management: an overview,” Engineering Geology, 64: 65-87 12. Zêzere J. L., 2002, ‘‘Landslide susceptibility assessment considering landslide typology. A case study in the area north of Lisbon (Portugal),” Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 2: 73-82. 13. Hall Jim W., Ian C. Meadowcroft, Paul B. Sayers, Mervyn E. Bramley, 2003, ‘‘Integrated flood risk management in England and Wales,” Natural Hazard Review, 4(3): 126-135. 14. Jon David, 1999, “Vulnerabilities Assessment-Part 1. Vulnerability Basics,” Network Security, pp. 16-18. 15. Pearce Laurie, 2005, ‘‘The value of publicipation during a hazard, impact, risk and vulnerability (HIRV) analysis,” Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 10: 411-441. 16. Anderson-Berry Linda, David King, 2004, ‘‘Mitigation of the impact of tropical cyclones in northern Australia through community capacity enhancement,” Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 10: 367-392. 17. Flax Lisa K., Russell W. Jackson, David N. Stein, 2002, ‘‘Community vulnerability assessment tool methodology,” Natural Hazards Review, 3(4): 163-176. 18. Hayes Michael J., Olga V. Wilhelmi, Cody L. Knutson, 2004, “Reducing drought risk: Bridging theory and practice,” Natural Hazards Review, 5(2): 106-113. 19. Bell R., T. Glade, 2004, “Quantitative risk analysis for landslides – Examples from B´ıldudalur, NW-Iceland,” Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 4: 117–131. 20. Archetti Renata, Alberto Lamberti, 2003, ‘‘Assessment of risk due to debris flow events,” Natural Hazards Review, 4(3): 115-125. 21. Olshansky Robert B., Yueming Wu, 2004, “Evaluating earthquake safety in Mid-American communities,” Natural Hazards Review, 5(2): 71-81. 22. Liu Xilin, Junzhong Lei, 2003, “A method for assessing regional debris flow risk: an application in Zhaotong of Yunnan province (SW China),” Geomorphology, 52: 181-191.
摘要: The main propose of the study is to establish the assessment model of community resilient capacity, and discuss the items which should be included. In this research, we evaluate several communities such as Nangang, Tongfu, Jhongyang, Laiyuan, Cingfu, Sinsheng, Shangan and Jyunkeng villages to get their resilient capacity. Firstly, the Analytic Hirarchy Process (AHP) is used to evaluate the community resilient capacity, which has been suggested to include the community resource for preventing from disasters and the ability of residents to resist natural hazard. The former is evaluated by check lists to examine the village heads, and the latter is done by questionnaire for the residents. After summing up these two parts, the community resilient capacity has been evaluated. Besides, we find that the above two parts are similar in their weights. It shows that they are equally important when the resilient capacity is evaluated, Sinsheng, Shangan and Jyunkeng villages are higher resilient capacity than the other villages. This is because that the residents of the three had more disaster experience and has had a good education about debris flow. Secondary, the hazard analysis proceeds by Flo-2D software to simulate the submerged range of debris flow. Then, according to the depth and velocity of deposition, the submerged range is divided into several risky levels. Finally, the vulnerability is classified according to their land-use types. To sum up, the capacity, hazard and vulnerability are integrated to assessment debris flow risk of each village. As the result, the risk map is established, and by the recognition of the resilient capacity, countermeatures against debris flow hazard to reduce risk will be expected.
本研究旨在建立社區承受度評估的模式,並探討承受度應包含的項目。利用對社區之評估而得出承受度,並考慮災害之危害度以及易致災性因子,以評估一山坡地社區之風險。研究對象包括南港村、同富村、中央里、萊園村、慶福里、新生村、上安村以及郡坑村等八個村里。 首先,評估社區承受度採用層級分析法將社區承受度分為社區抵抗災害資源以及居民抵抗災害能力等兩類,在社區抵抗災害資源方面採用的評估方式是針對村里長的檢核表;而居民抵抗災害能力採用的評估方式是使用針對居民的問卷調查,本文以這兩項調查結果經過權重計算後代表社區承受度之大小,並得到此兩項具有正相關性,顯示承受度的好壞必須同時著重在居民對抗災害能力以及社區抵抗災害資源兩部分。在承受度分析結果方面,以新生村、上安村以及郡坑村所得到的分數最高。此三個村里共同特徵為擁有較頻繁的災害經歷以及居民參與防災相關活動較為踴躍。其次危害的分析是透過FLO-2D軟體模擬土石流潛勢溪流可能之淹沒範圍,並依照流動深度及速度,將淹沒範圍劃分出不同的危害度。最後,易致災性的分析是依照土地利用的不同給予分類。綜合承受度、危害度以及易致災性三項,便得到各社區土石流災害的風險值分布。本研究利用計算出之風險值繪製風險地圖,並期望藉由風險地圖瞭解承受度對風險的影響,以供未來進行風險研究時,了解消減風險之方式。
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/34412
其他識別: U0005-2207200615341500
Appears in Collections:水土保持學系

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.