Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/89266
標題: 社區民眾對社區植樹綠美化態度之研究─以雲林縣口湖鄉社區為例
Attitude of Community Residents on Community Tree Planting and Green Beauty ─ A Case Study at Kouhu Township, Yunlin County
作者: Chen-En Tsai
蔡承恩
關鍵字: 社區植樹綠美化;態度;因素分析;量化研究;質化研究;Community Tree Planting and Green Beauty;attitude;factor analysis approach;quantitative research;qualitative research
引用: 口湖鄉公所網站 (2013) 口湖鄉歷史沿革 (http://www.kouhu.gov.tw/) 方怡蓁 (2004) 民眾參與解說活動動機、滿意度與願付價格之研究:以荒野保護協會為例。國立台中教育大學環境教育研究所碩士論文,共122頁。 田秀蘭 (1988) Thurstone式態度量表法之研究。輔導與測驗86:1670-1674。 司徒懿 (2009) 簡明質性研究法分析。韋伯文化國際,共154頁。 余伯泉、李茂興 (2003) 社會心理學。弘智出版社,共720頁。 何清幼 (2010) 醫療工作人員的病人安全認知、態度與行為間關係之探討-以臺北某醫院為例。臺灣大學醫療機構管理研究所碩士學位論文,共255頁。 吳秉恩 (1994) 企業國際化歷程與人力資源管理策略關係之研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告,共181頁。 吳月招 (2002) 公私部門協力參與社區總體營造之研究-以九二一重建區為例。東海大學公共事務碩士學程在職進修專班,共224頁。 吳坤銘 (2004) 林業走入社區-從朝陽國家步道整建談起。台灣林業30(4):38-43。 宋晨寧、蕭英倫、林喻東 (2006) 社區植樹綠美化政策宣導及政策參與之研究。臺大實驗林研究報告20(4):285-297。 宋晨寧 (2007) 社區主事者對推動植樹綠美化政策認知、態度、參與之評估。國立嘉義大學農學院林業暨自然資源研究所碩士論文,共97頁。 沈銘彥 (2005) 社區協力、社區發展與目的地形象之研究-規劃者、執行者、觀光客與當地居民認知結構差異。國立成功大學碩士論文,共80頁。 林暉月 (2001) 居民的社區意識與社區公共事務參與態度及方式關係之研究─以台南市為例。國立中山大學碩士論文,共182頁。 林本源 (2002) 中小學體育態度量表之研究。國立體育學院體育研究所論文,共111頁。 林喻東、羅紹麟 (2004) 簡介小規模林業。台灣林業30(4):18-23。 林振春 (2004) 社區大學與台灣社區學習文化的深耕。2004兩岸社區大學經營理念與運作實務研討會論文集,共20頁。 林金定、嚴嘉楓、陳美花 (2005) 質性研究方法:訪談模式與實施步驟分析。身心障礙研究3(2):122-136。 林務局網頁 (2010) 社區林業計畫補助須知 (www.forest.gov.tw)。 林務局 (2012) 社區配合植樹綠美化申請手冊。行政院農委會林務局南投林區管理處,共33頁。 邱皓政 (2006) 量化研究與統計分析。五南圖書出版公司,共624頁。 徐震 (1994) 社區與社區發展,台北:正中書局,共388頁。 徐震 (2004) 社區工作教學與實務結合。東吳社會工作學報 12:1-18。 宮崎清 (1996) 內發性的鄉鎮建設。人心之華,pp.49-52。 翁徐得、宮崎清 (1997) 日本社區總體營造的理念與實例。台灣省手工業研究所,共147頁。 張春興、楊國樞 (1969) 心理學。臺北市 : 三民書局,共614頁。 張春興 (1987) 心理學。臺北市 : 臺灣東華書局,共706頁。 張宛綺 (2004) 七股濕地遊憩體驗與環境認知之研究─以國小學童為例。台中朝陽科技大學休閒事業管理系碩士論文,90頁。 張紹勳 (2004) 研究方法。滄海書局,147頁。 張惠真、高德錚(2006) 從整合鄉村社區資源探討展社區型休閒農業可行性織研究。台中區農業改良研究彙報90:1-10。 張世佳、劉雅文、蔡燿宇 (2009) 社區綠美化效益與決定因素之研究。北商學報15:103-120。 莊嘉坤 (1991) 科學態度的評量。國教天地 90:76-86。 陳英豪、李坤崇、葉懋堃、李明淑與邱美華 (1991) 國小學生科學態度量表及其相關因素之研究。台南師院學報24:1-26。 陳淑涓 (1994) 態度的認知取向。國教輔導 33(5):4-10。 陳傳康 (1996) 區域旅遊資源的調查研究途徑。地理與國土研究 2(4):5-46。 陳昺麟 (2001) 社會科學質化研究之紮根理論實施程序與實例之介紹。勤益學報19:327-342。 陳向明 (2002) 社會科學質的研究。五南圖書出版股份有限公司,共696頁。 陳明川 (2003) 社區居民對生態旅遊衝擊認知與發展態度之研究─以嘉義縣山美村為例。國立中興大學園藝學系研究所碩士論文,共114頁。 陳孟絹 (2006) 民眾對健康社區認知與態度之研究-以台中市為例。朝陽科技大學建築及都市設計研究所碩士論文,共150頁。 陳美惠、李來錫、林晉戎 (2006) 社區領導人對於社區林業計畫執行影響之研究。臺大實驗林研究報告20(4):227-241。 陳仲賢、何湘梅 (2007) 推動平地景觀造林及綠美化計畫執行成果。農政與農情192:32-37。 陳宜敏、廖天賜 (2009) 社區環境綠美化植栽之調查評估 (西部地區) 計畫。行政院農業委員會林務局委託研究計畫系列98-00-5-15。 曾孟蘭 (2002) 消費者對行動廣告態度之研究。國立中山大學傳播管理研究所碩士論文,共87頁。 黃世輝、宮崎清 (1996) 從地方文化的再生看台灣社區總體營造的發展與課題。留日學人學術研討會論文集,pp.103-114。 黃俊英 (1999) 企業研究方法。國立編譯館,共470頁。 黃裕星 (2001) 平地及海岸綠美化造林。台灣林業27(2):3-6。 黃源協 (2004) 社區工作何去何從:社區發展? 社區營造?社會發展季刊 107:78-88。 黃雅萍 (2009) 社區民眾和學生參與社區林業之認知、態度、滿意度之研究-以曲溪社區為例。國立嘉義大學碩士論文,共104頁。 楊國樞 (1984) 當前大學生的價值觀念與思想行為。台北黎明文化事業公司,共324頁。 楊國樞、文崇一、吳聰賢、李亦園 (1989) 社會及行為科學研究法。東華出版社,共396頁。 楊中芳 (1994) 廣告心理原理:探討廣告背後的心理歷程。遠流出版社,共416頁。 詹雪梅 (2003) 永樂社區發展協會推動社區總體營造之參與學習研究。中正大學成人及繼續教育研究所碩士論文,共167頁。 葉美智、羅紹麟 (2007) 社區林業應用於租地造林地之探討─以大雪山社區為例。林業研究季刊 29(3):61-74。 劉峻榮 (2004) 義大利冰淇淋之市場區隔研究。國立台北大學企業管理學系碩士論文,共94頁。 潘慧玲 (1996) 教育研究。教育導論,黃光雄 (主編)。台北:師大書苑,pp.341-368。 潘淑滿 (2003) 質性研究理論與應用。台北:心理出版社,共406頁。 蔡秀美 (2002) 社區終身學習篇。中華民國農業經營管理學會編。富麗農村工作手冊,pp.146-157。 嚴秦和 (2004) 金控法架構下銀行跨業銷售保險態度與現況之研究。世新大學經濟學系碩士論文,共89頁。 賴兩陽 (2004) 社區發展協會推動福利社區化的策略分析。社區發展季刊 106:60-79。 關羽彤 (2004) 太魯閣國家公園旅客旅遊滿意度之研究。中華大學科技管理研究所碩士論文,共94頁。 Allport, F. H. (1953) The effect of segregation and the consequences of desegregation: A social science statement. Minnesota Law Review 37:429-440. Allport, G. W. (1964) Taking Stock of America's Attitudes on Cultural Diversity: An analysis of Public Deliberation on Multiculturalism, Assimilation and Intermarriage. Journal of Comparative Family Studies 3:164-195. Brehm, S. S. and S. M. Kassin (1996) Social Psychology. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.p. 59-77. Bradley, J. C., T. M. Waliczek and J. M. Zajicek (1999) Relationship BetweenEnvironmental Knowledge and Environmental Attitude of High School Students. Journal of Environmental Education. Vintage Books, New York, 583pp. Campbell, D. T., and D. W.Fiske (1959) Convergent and discriminant validation by themultitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin 56(2):81-105. Creswell, J. W., V. L. Plano Clark,M. L. Gutmann and W. E. Hanson (2003) Advanced mixedmethods research designs. In A. Tashakkori and C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods inSocial and Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. p. 209-240. Creswell, J. W.and V. L. Plano Clark (2007) Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. p. 164-172. Denzin, N. K. (1978) TheResearch Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Method.New York: McGraw-Hill.p. 337-354. Denzin N. K., and Y. S. Lincoln (1994) Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousands sand Oaks: Sage. p. 1-17. Eagly A.H. and S.Chaiken (1993) The Psychology of Attitudes. Orlando, Florida:Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers. p. 237-240. Elliott, R. and R. J.Dolan (1998) Neural response during preference and memory judgments for subliminally presented stimuli: A functional neuroimaging study. Journal of Neuroscience 18:4697-4704. Fishbein, M. and I. Ajzen (1980) Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 278pp. Fisher, J. D., P. A. Bell and A. Baum (1984) Environmental Psychology. New York: CBS College. p.18-57. Guttman, L. (1950) The basis for scalogram analysis.The American Soldier Vol. IV. New York: Wiley. p. 60-90. Glaser B. G. and A. L. Strauss (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine. 271pp. Greene, J. C., V. J. Caracelli and W. F.Graham (1989) Toward a conceptual framework formixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 11(3):255-274. Guba E. G., and Y. S.Lincoln (1990) Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage. p. 105-117. Greene, J. C. and V. J.Caracelli (1997) Defining and describing the paradigm issue in mixed-methodevaluation. In Greene J. C. and V. J. Caracelli (Eds.), Advances in Mixed-method Evaluation: Thechallenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms. New Directions for Evaluation 74:5-18.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. p. 16-18. Gilchrist, A. (2004) The Well-Connected Community – A NetworkingApproach to Community Development. Bristol: Polity Press. 166pp. Graue, E., E.Rauscher and M.Sherfinski (2009) The synergy of class size reduction and classroomquality. The Elementary School Journal 110(2):178-201. Jick, T. D. (1979) Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action.Administrative Science Quarterly 24(4):602-611. Johnson, R. B.and A. J.Onwuegbuzie (2004) Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whosetime has come. Educational Researcher 33(7):14-26. Kaiser, H. F. and J. Rice (1974) Little jiffy mark IV. Educational and Psychomertrika Meaurement 34:111-117. Lincoln, Y. S. and E. G. Guba (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA:Sage. 416pp. Maloney, M. P., M. P. Ward and G. N. Braucht (1975) Psychology in action : a revised scale for the measurement of ecological attitudes and knowledge. American Psychologist 30:787-790. Milta, T. H., M. Dermer and J. Knight (1977) Reversed facial images and the mere exposure hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35:597-601. Morse, J. M. (1991) Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological triangulation. NursingResearch 12(1):35-44. Morse, J. M. (2003) Principles of mixed methods and multimethod research design. In Tashakkori A.and C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. p. 189-208. Morgan, D. (1998) Practical strategies for combining qualitative and quantitative methods:Applications to health research. Qualitative Health Research 8(3):362-376. Mark, L. B., M. L. David and C. K. Timothy (2012) Basic business statistics. Pearson education limited, England. p. 313. Popper K. (1968) Conjectures and Refutations: the growth of scientific knowledge.Harper Torchbooks, New York. 431pp. Padgett, D.K. (1998) Qualitative Methods in Social Work Research: Challenges and Rewards.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage. 304pp. Patton, M. Q. (1990) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage. 532pp. Rosenberg, M. J. and C. I. Hovland (1960) Cognitive, affective, and behavioural components of attitudes. In Hovland, C. I. andM. J. Rosenberg (Ed.) Attitude Organisation and Change: An Analysis of Consistency Among Attitude Components, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. p. 1-14. Ramsey, C. E. and R. E. Rickson (1976) Environmental knowledge and attitudes. The Journal of Environmental Education 8(1):10-18. Shrigley, R. L. (1990) Attitude and behavior are correlates. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 27(2):97-113. Steven, P. F. and E. D. Mike (1997) Atlanta and the Olympic aone-year retrospective. Journal of the American Planning Association 63(3):379-390. Strauss A. and J. Corbin (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 312pp. Thurstone(1928)Attitudes can be measured.American Journal of Sociology33:529-544. Tashakkori, A.and C. Teddlie (2003) Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 768pp. Teddlie, C. and A.Tashakkori (2009) Foundations of Mixed Methods Research. Los Angeles, CA:Sage. 387pp. Wortzel, L. (1979) Multivariate Analysis, NJ: Prentice Hall. p. 234-242. Weber, A.L. (1991) Introduction to Psychology. HarperCollins College, New York. 327pp. Willson, R. A., (1996) Environmental education programs for preschool children. The Journal of Environmental Education 27(4):28-33. Zajonc, R. B. (1980) Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist 35:151-175. Zanna, M. P. and J. K. Rempel (1988) Attitudes: A new look at an old concept. In Bar-Tal D. and A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), TheSocial Psychology of Knowledge. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. p. 315-334. Zola-Morgan, S., L. R Squire, P. Alvarez-Royo and R. P. Clower (1991) Independence of memory functions and emotional behavior: separate contributions of the hippocampal formation and the amygdala. Hippocampus 1:207-220.
摘要: 
為供林業管理機關做為未來推動社區植樹綠美化之參考建議,本研究擬針對二大項目進行:一、將研究地雲林縣口湖鄉社區分為三類別社區,並進行量化研究態度問卷調查,以求得不同類別社區之間的回答上差異;二、就問卷調查之結果,以質化研究訪談方式來加以說明造成這些差異的原因與內涵。
量化研究態度問卷調查結果:將三類社區分別進行比較,首先先進行因素分析法萃取共同的態度構面,總共35個問項分為5個態度構面,分別為'參與過程中的奉獻與收穫'、' 提升社區競爭力'、'政策推動的困難點'、'社區植樹綠美化帶來的益處'及'自我社區的認同',其Cronbach's α值皆在0.83以上,累積解釋變異量達 63.82 %,而在政策推動的困難點構面上樣本之間均產生顯著差異。
T檢定的結果在不同樣本之間均有產生顯著差異,多數產生差異的問項均集中在政策推動的困難點上,其餘的則是在自我社區的認同與提升社區競爭力上。從結果上面顯示,整體民眾對於社區綠美化問卷的回答上,均有普通到滿意程度的感受,且有實施社區綠美化社區相對於未實施者,其居民了解且參與社區活動及社區意識應相對較高,而對於社區活動的意願也較高,推動上的困難相對較少。
質化研究訪談結果:以量化研究有產生顯著差異的問項為主擬定訪談內容,並對社區核心行動者進行訪談,了解他們對於量化研究差異產生的原因背後的內涵,結果大多與當地社區實際狀況和投入社區活動程度有關。相較於未實施綠美化之社區,有實施的社區在想法上較偏向務實的層面,如實際進行之後的改變,進行綠美化後對社區整體情感的提升、改變民眾的觀念、凝聚社區意識、帶動上級機關的重視、以及給予民眾能'見'的社區改變等。模範社區與其他社區的差異在於民眾的參與配合度較高,社區發展團體與村民之間的互助合作關係也相當好。隨著社區公眾事務參與的投入程度不同,有較高投入程度的社區其民眾參與的意願也會較高。
整體來說,多數社區對於社區植樹綠美化是給予肯定的態度,然透過本研究可更深入發現社區實際上需要幫助的方向,如改善金錢補助方式、簡化土地提供門檻、獎勵審查制度公開化、提供金錢補助以外的方法等等,這些改進的方向均可作為未來推動社區植樹綠美化管理單位之參考。

To offer the reference of promoting community tree planting and green beauty for forestry management authorities in the future, we directed at two objective to study: First, The research community in Yunlin County is divided into three categories, and investigated quantitative research attitude survey to understand the differences of answer between different types of communities; Second, explain the reasons and connotations for these differences according to the survey investigation to qualitative research interviews.
The results of quantitative research: the three types of communities were conducted to compare, the factor analysis approach first extracts a common attitude dimensions, total 35 items divided into five attitude dimensions, to 'participate in the process of dedication and harvest', 'to enhance the competitiveness of the community', 'difficulties in implementation', ' benefits of community tree planting and green beauty ' and 'community self-identity', its Cronbach's α values are above 0.83, total variance explained of 63.82 percent, there are significant differences between the samples were produced in ' difficulties in implementation '.
T-test results were produced in significant differences between the different samples, most items are produced differences focused on ' difficulties in implementation', and the others are 'community self-identity' and 'to enhance the competitiveness of the community'. From the results shown, overall people for community greening survey responses were common to feel satisfaction, and contrast to the community which didn't execute tree planting and green beauty, residents who understand and participate in community activities and have community awareness should be relatively high, willingness for community activities was also higher, difficulties in implementation relatively few.
The results of qualitative research: according to quantitative research which generated significant differences generated by the project to decide interview content, the core of the community actors were interviewed to understand the meaning of their reasons for the difference, most of the results with the actual situation of the local community and related to the degree of part in community activities. Contrast to the community which didn't execute tree planting and green beauty, the idea of these communities more oriented toward practical dimension, such as after changing the actual conduct, enhancing the overall emotion of the community after the green beauty, changing attitudes of people, cohering sense of community cohesion, bring attention to the higher authorities, as well as giving people can 'see' the community changes, etc. The differences model community and other communities are high degree of public participation, mutual cooperation relationship between community development groups and residents is quite good, along with varying degrees of investment in community participation in public affairs, higher level of commitment community of its residents to participate in wishes will be higher.
Overall, most communities for community tree planting and green beauty are to give a positive attitude, through this research can be found in deeper parts of the community actually need to help, such as improving money subsidy, simplifying way of land supply, rewarding censorship openness, increasing the subsidy money than the method. These improvements directions can be used as the future promoting community tree planting and green beauty management unit of reference.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/89266
Rights: 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,2015-02-07起公開。
Appears in Collections:森林學系

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat Existing users please Login
nchu-103-7100033010-1.pdf4.24 MBAdobe PDFThis file is only available in the university internal network    Request a copy
Show full item record
 

Google ScholarTM

Check


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