Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/89222
標題: 農塘景觀績效評估
Assessing Landscape Performance of Farm Ponds in Chiayi County
作者: Yu-Hsuan,Chi
紀又瑄
關鍵字: 景觀績效
農塘
Landscape Performance
Farm Pond
引用: 1. 王坤連,(2010),遊客對日月潭纜車站及周邊景觀滿意度探討,碩士論文,逢甲大學景觀與遊憩學程,台中。 2. 丘昌泰,(2000),公共管理-理論與實務手冊,台北。 3. 戎航,(2007),當代景觀工程項目管理之前期策劃研究,碩士論文,南京林業大學城市規劃與設計研究所,大陸。 4. 李佳容、林進財、譚醒朝、張曉芬,(2010),台灣地區財團法人醫院財務績效之評估 ,健康管理學刊,8(2),199-208 5. 林俊昇,(2005),不同類型遊客的遊憩動機與滿意度對重遊意願之關聯性分析-以度假型休閒農場為例,戶外遊憩研究,18(2),25-47 6. 許富雄,(2001),鳥類資源的調查方法,特有生物研究,3,81-90 7. 許慧娟,(1994),顧客滿意度、服務品質與服務價值關係之研究-零售產業之實證,中原大學企業管理研究所,桃園。 8. 侯錦雄、姚靜婉,(1997),市民休閒生活態度與公園使用滿意度之相關研究,戶外遊憩研究,10(3),1-17。 9. 吳全成、鄧國陞,(2008),外籍勞工工作生活品質與績效:以電子科技公司為例,T&D飛遜,76,1-26 10. 吳輝龍等,(2005),水土保持手冊,行政院農業委員會水土保持局 11. 徐仁輝,(2004),績效評估與績效預算,國家政策季刊,3(2),21-36 12. 陳信安、陳虹羽,(2009),建構景觀工程之品質效益評估架構—以彰化石牌里休閒公園為例,中華民國建築學會第21屆第2次建築研究成果發表會論文集,中華民國建築學會 13. 陳冠璋,(2012),埤塘生態觀光維護站選址研究—以桃園縣觀音鄉為例,碩士論文,中原大學室內設計學系研究所,桃園 14. 翁志成、張照宏,(2013),三連埤再造—北埔農塘新美地,營建知訊,364,4-12 15. 郭信成,(2003),施工績效評估工具之建立,碩士論文,成功大學土木工程學系研究所,台南 16. 張行道等,(2002),建置公共工程施工績效評估機制,行政院公共工程委員會研究報告,行政院公共工程委員會 17. 雲林縣政府,(2011),雲嘉南聚落型農塘文化園區計畫,雲林。 18. 景觀環境學會,(2012),嘉義縣境內農塘環境資源調查技術服務案,嘉義。 19. 黃皓珽,(1997),以土地使用限制補償觀點探討桃園埤塘資源保存維護策略之研究,碩士論文,台北科技大學建築與都市設計學系研究所,台北 20. 黃麗如,(2005),施工績效評估實證,碩士論文,成功大學土木工程學系研究所,台南。 21. 詹智勝,(2007),景觀空間涵構對景觀偏好與注意力恢復之影響,碩士論文,逢甲大學景觀與遊憩學程,台中。 22. 薛惠元,(2008),綠建材應用於景觀公共工程之研究,碩士論文,成功大學建築學系研究所,台南。 英文文獻 1. Anderson, E. W., & Sullivan, M. W. (1993). The antecedents and consequences of customer satisfaction for firms. Mark. Sci., 12, 125-143. 2. Carroll, S. J. and Schneier, C. E. (1982). Performance appraisal and development of performance in organizations. Glenview Illionis: Scott, Foresman. 3. Canfield, J. & Yang, B. (2014). Reflections on Developing Landscape Performance Case Studies. Landscape Research Record, 1, 310-317. 4. Delaney, J. T. & Huselid, M. A. (1996). The Impact of Human Resource Management Practice on Perceptions of Organization Performance. Academy in Management Journal, 39(4), 949-969. 5. Kozak, M. (2001). Repeaters' behavior at two distinct destinations. Annals of Tourism Research, 28, 784-807. 6. Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center. (2009). Guidelines And Performance Benchmarks. United States Botanic Garden. 7. Lu, M. (1999). Determinants of Residential Satisfaction: Ordered Logit vs. Regression Models. Growth and Change, 30, 264-287. 8. Russell, J. & Cohn, R. (2012). Landscape Engineering. United Kingdom Bookvika. 9. Robinson, R.B. & J.A. Pearce. (1988). Planned Patterns of Strategic Behavior and The Relationship to Business Unit Performance. Strategic Management Journal, 9, 43-60. 10. Turkoglu, H. D. (1997). Residents' satisfaction of housing environments: the case of Istanbul, Turkey. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69, 55-67. 11. Modi, S. K. (2014). Perspectives on environmental landscape performance indicators and methods: Learning from landscape architecture foundation's case study investigation program. Landscape Architecture, The University of Texas at Arlington, TX 參考網站 1. American Society of Landscape Architects. (2005). The Sustainable Sites Initiative. At: http://www.sustainablesites.org/about/.Accessed 23 December 2013. 2. American Society of Landscape Architects. (2005). Land News. At: http://asla.org/land/LandNewsletter.aspx.Accessed 21 December 2013. 3. Landscape Architecture Foundation. (2010). Landscape Performance Series. At:http://www.lafoundation.org/research/landscape-performance-series/.Accessed 23 December 2013. 4. 休閒農業苗栗旅遊網. (2010). news. At: http://www.miaolifun.com.tw/index.php?menu=2&id=7470.Accessed 4 June 2014. 5. 行政院環境保護署. (2011). 動物生態評估技術規範.At: http://atftp.epa.gov.tw/announce/100/E0/08620/%B0%CA%AA%AB%B5%FB%A6%F4%B3W%BDd%AD%D7%ADq100.07.pdf 6. 行政院農委會林務局. (2009). 鳥類監測標準作業手冊.At: http://conservation.forest.gov.tw/public/Data/022510432571.pdf
摘要: 'Farm ponds' are exclusive to villages in Chiayi County. As farm development progresses and residents' need for a better environment arises, landscape construction has been carried out for optimal environmental, social and economic functions. However, little quantitative research on landscape performance indexes and measurements of which exists. The purpose of this study is to propose farm pond landscape assessment indexes, and evaluate farm pond landscape performance through quantitative data collection and analysis. In this study, 56 international cases where landscape performance evaluation has been conducted will be analyzed to collect evaluation indexes in environmental, social, and economical evaluation aspects. Then the most appropriate indexes and measuring methods for farm pond evaluation will be brought forth. What follows is a thorough analysis on three farm ponds' environment, ecosystem investigation, and public opinion surveys in these aspects: storm water management, water quality, biodiversity, energy utilization, carbon sequestration and reduction, leisure and social values, cultural preservation, health and well-being, social security, educational value, landscape and visual quality, convenience, property value and overall economic value. Last, comparison and analysis on San-Ko farm pond landscape performance will be conducted. Results of this study show the farm pond with landscape construction perform better in landscape performance in terms of environmental, social, and economical performance. The farm pond without landscape construction have more natural environments, especially rich in bird and frog species. It is also conclude in this study that plants play vital roles in farm ponds landscape performance. In storm water management aspect, Mimosa Branch, Sankoh, Euphorbiaceae, Kojo camphor wood perform better; In carbon sequestration and reduction aspect, Rosaceae, Salicaceae, Taxodiaceae, Ulmaceae, Apocynaceae, Bombacaceae, Ziwei families perform better; In energy utilization, property value and the overall economic value aspects, Oleaceae, Sankoh, Combretaceae, Kojo neem wood perform better. Overall, this subject compares farm ponds with and without landscape construction using landscape performance indexes and justifies the vital roles plants play in landscape performance. The indexes and measuring methods built in this study may be applied to the evaluation of environmental construction in Taiwan.
「農塘」是嘉義縣境內各村落中大部分存有的地景,隨著地方發展與居民生活需求,許多農塘已實施景觀工程,期望改善成兼具環境、社會和經濟功能。但,目前較少研究針對景觀工程績效的衡量項目與績效表現進行量化的研究。本研究的目的在於提出農塘景觀績效評估指標,並透過量化數據的蒐集與計算,評估不同農塘景觀工程施作程度之績效差異。 本研究以嘉義三口農塘景觀工程為研究對象。首先進行56個國外已進行景觀績效評之案例分析,整理出環境、社會和經濟面之評估指標。進而選出適合檢核農塘景觀工程績效之項目與測量方式。接著進行現第三口農塘現地環境、生物及民眾意見調查,分別進行暴雨水管理、水質、族群與物種豐富度、能源利用、碳封存與減量、休閒與社會價值、文化保存、健康福祉、社會安全、教育價值、風景及視覺品質、便利性、財產價值及整體經濟價值分析,最後進行三口農塘的景觀績效差異比較。 研究結果顯示農塘景觀工程的環境、社會及經濟績效,以實施過農塘景觀工程的績效最高,而未實施景觀工程的農塘由於環境自然度較高,因此於鳥類與蛙類物種豐富度最高。 本研究同時發現,植物於農塘景觀績效上扮演重要角色,在暴雨水管理上,含羞草科、桑科、大戟科、樟科喬木具有較高的績效值;碳封存與減量則是以薔薇科、楊柳科、杉科、榆科、夾竹桃科、木棉科、紫微科具有較高的績效值;能源利用、財產價值及整體經濟價值皆是以木犀科、桑科、使君子科、楝科喬木具有較高的績效。整體而言,本研究以農塘為對象,運用景觀績效指標驗證有無施作景觀工程之景觀績效差異性,並發現植物於景觀工程績效上之重要性。本研究所建構的方法,未來可運用於台灣景觀工程實施後之績效評估。
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/89222
其他識別: U0005-2608201503335400
文章公開時間: 10000-01-01
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.