1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. College of Social Science
  4. Theses
  5. Item

學術產出-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

Citation Infomation

題名 我國社會住宅周邊環境可近性評估-以六都為例
Evaluation of the Accessibility of the Surrounding Environment of Social Housing -A Case Study of Six Metropolitan Cities of Taiwan
作者 周仲璿
Chou, Chung-Hsuan
貢獻者 廖興中
Liao, Hsin-Chung
周仲璿
Chou, Chung-Hsuan
關鍵詞 社會住宅
可近性
線性路網環域分析
Social Housing
Accessibility
Line-Based Network Buffer
日期 2022
上傳時間 2-Sep-2022 15:15:14 (UTC+8)
摘要 本研究主要係針對我國社會住宅之可近性與選址進行研究，並以地理上的可近性進行分析。於評估方法上，則採取旅行成本法，並以線性路網環域分析為分析方法。而在評量指標上，則是參酌國內外住宅區位相關研究及政策報告書之標準，以交通設施（公車站、火車站、捷運站）、生活機能設施（超市、便利商店）、休閒娛樂設施（公園、綠地）、教育設施（國小、國中、幼稚園）、醫院設施（診所、醫院）、文化設施（圖書館）為評估指標。有關研究資料之獲得則以開放資料為主，自建資料為輔的方式獲得。研究結果發現現行的社會住宅對於設施的可近性表現上，大致都能符合政策指標，僅有少數的社會住宅出現與指標脫鉤的情形。首先，整體指標表現來說呈現區域性的差異。其次，在教育設施的可近性上，出現教育資源雙重缺乏的情形。復次，部分社會住宅坐落於新開發之都市計畫區、重劃區，然而囿限於該區域尚未完全發展成熟，故各項設施的可近性較為缺乏。最後，除臺北市外，各直轄市的可近性較差的社會住宅都具有一項指標表現較其他指標為疲弱。另外，本研究亦發現我國開放資料無法滿足「質」的需求之情形。
The research mainly analyzes the accessibility and site selection of social housing based on geographical accessibility. The evaluation method uses the travel cost method and uses the line-based network buffer as the analysis method. Evaluation indicators are based on domestic and foreign research and policy reports, and propose transportation facilities (bus stations, railway stations, MRT stations), life function facilities (supermarkets, convenience stores), leisure and entertainment facilities (parks, green spaces), educational facilities ( elementary school, middle school, kindergarten), hospital facilities (clinics, hospitals), cultural facilities (libraries).The research data is mainly obtained by open data, supplemented by self-built data. The results of the study found that the accessibility of social housing to facilities generally met the policy indicators, and only a few social housing failed to meet the policy indicators. First, the overall indicator performance shows regional differences. Secondly, the accessibility of educational facilities appears to be a double lack of educational resources. Third, some social housing is located in the newly developed urban planning area, and the accessibility of facilities is relatively lacking because the area is not yet fully developed. Finally, with the exception of Taipei City, all municipalities` social housing has one indicator that is weaker than the others. In addition, this study also found that open data cannot meet the needs of "quality".
參考文獻 江明芸（2011）。社會住宅，從民間倡議到政府爆衝。新社會政策，（14），8-12。
江穎慧（2011）。社會住宅的迷思。新社會政策，（15），30-31。
林育如（2011）。社會住宅在臺灣的實踐之路。新社會政策，（14），17-20。
林萬億（2003）。論我國的社會住宅政策與社會照顧的結合。國家政策季刊，2（4），53-82。
法務部（2018）。公民與政治權利國際公約經濟社會文化權利國際公約一般性意見。臺北：法務部。
胡勝正（2015）。從房價所得比看臺灣的社會不公。臺灣經濟預測與政策，45（2），23-43。
高秉毅、謝博明（2018）。社會住宅物業經營管理型態與策略之初探性研究-以臺北市為例。物業管理學報，9（1），71-87。
張金鶚（2011）。當前社會住宅的期待。中華民國建築學會會刊雜誌，（63）10-13。
張金鶚、林秋瑾、周美伶、朱芳妮、林佑儒、黃一敏（2010）。住宅需求動向調查報告書。內政部營建署委託研究，未出版。
張雅惠（2009）。國民住宅轉型社會住宅之課題分析。土地問題研究季刊，8（2），79-88。
章殷超、溫在弘、賴美淑（2009）。利用地理資訊系統探討肝癌病患就醫地理可近性與醫院選擇間之相關性。臺灣公共衛生雜誌，28（6），517-529。
陳威姍（2014）。社會住宅區位選址指標評估-以原臺中市為例。逢甲大學都市計畫與空間資訊學系碩士班碩士論文，未出版，臺中。
陳致堯（2016）。論社會住宅區位之選址指標分析-以臺北市公共住宅政策為例。國立中央大學法律與政府研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園。
陳雅倫（2016）。論臺灣社會住宅政策回應性評估之研究—以桃園市中路二號宅為例。國立臺北大學公共行政暨政策學系碩士論文，未出版，新北。
彭建文、李美杏、陳冠儒（2020）。臺灣地區居住滿意度影響因素之實證分析。都市與計劃，47（3），243-270。
黃如瀅（2019）。臺北市公共住宅鄰避效應之探討。國立臺灣大學公共事務研究所碩士學位論文，未出版，臺北。
廖興中（2013）。臺灣小兒科醫療資源空間可接近性分析。公共行政學報，（44）， 1-39。
廖興中（2014）。應用空間可接近性分析於臺灣婦產科醫療資源的評估。民主與治理，1（2），83-118。
Aday, L. A., & Andersen, R. (1974). A framework for the study of access to medical care. Health services research, 9(3), 208.
Apparicio, P., & Séguin, A. M. (2006). Measuring the accessibility of services and facilities for residents of public housing in Montreal. Urban studies, 43(1), 187-211.
Apparicio, P., Séguin, A. M., & Naud, D. (2008). The quality of the urban environment around public housing buildings in Montréal: An objective approach based on GIS and multivariate statistical analysis. Social Indicators Research, 86(3), 355-380.
Biswas, B., Sultana, Z., Priovashini, C., Ahsan, M. N., & Mallick, B. (2021). The emergence of residential satisfaction studies in social research: A bibliometric analysis. Habitat International, 109, 102336.
Braga, M., & Palvarini, P. (2013). Social Housing in the EU.
Cox, W. (2021). Demographia international housing affordability: 2021 edition. Urban Reform Institute & The Frontier Centre for Public Policy..
Dekker, K., de Vos, S., Musterd, S., & Van Kempen, R. (2011). Residential satisfaction in housing estates in European cities: A multi-level research approach. Housing Studies, 26(04), 479-499.
Edgar, B., & Doherty, J. (2001). Supported housing and homelessness in the European Union. European Journal of Housing Policy, 1(1), 59-78.
Fried, M., & Gleicher, P. (1961). Some sources of residential satisfaction in an urban slum. Journal of the American Institute of planners, 27(4), 305-315.
Gulliford, M., Figueroa-Munoz, J., Morgan, M., Hughes, D., Gibson, B., Beech, R., & Hudson, M. (2002). What does` access to health care`mean?. Journal of health services research & policy, 7(3), 186-188.
Higgs, G. (2004). A literature review of the use of GIS-based measures of access to health care services. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology, 5(2), 119-139.
Joseph, A. E., & D. R. Phillips (1984). Accessibility and utilization: Geographical perspectives on health care delivery. London: Harper & Row.
Khan, A. A. (1992). An integrated approach to measuring potential spatial access to health care services. Socio-economic planning sciences, 26(4), 275-287.
Kirkpatrick, S. I., & Tarasuk, V. (2011). Housing circumstances are associated with household food access among low-income urban families. Journal of urban health, 88(2), 284-296.
Koontz, CM, Jue, DK, Lance, KC (2005) Neighborhood-based in-library use performance measures for public libraries: A nationwide study of majority-minority and majority white/low income markets using personal digital data collectors. Library & Information Science Research, 27(1): 28–50.
Kristensen, H. (2002). Social housing policy and the welfare state: A Danish perspective. Urban studies, 39(2), 255-263.
Kyle, T., & Dunn, J. R. (2008). Effects of housing circumstances on health, quality of life and healthcare use for people with severe mental illness: a review. Health & social care in the community, 16(1), 1-15.
Luo, W., & Qi, Y. (2009). An enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) method for measuring spatial accessibility to primary care physicians. Health & place, 15(4), 1100-1107.
Luo, W., & Wang, F. (2003). Measures of spatial accessibility to health care in a GIS environment: synthesis and a case study in the Chicago region. Environment and planning B: planning and design, 30(6), 865-884.
Macintyre, S., Macdonald, L., & Ellaway, A. (2008). Do poorer people have poorer access to local resources and facilities? The distribution of local resources by area deprivation in Glasgow, Scotland. Social science & medicine, 67(6), 900-914.
Nicholls, S. (2001). Measuring the accessibility and equity of public parks: A case study using GIS. Managing leisure, 6(4), 201-219.
Oh, K., & Jeong, S. (2007). Assessing the spatial distribution of urban parks using GIS. Landscape and urban planning, 82(1-2), 25-32.
Oliver, L. N., Schuurman, N., & Hall, A. W. (2007). Comparing circular and network buffers to examine the influence of land use on walking for leisure and errands. International journal of health geographics, 6(1), 1-11.
Park, S. J. (2012). Measuring public library accessibility: A case study using GIS. Library & information science research, 34(1), 13-21.
Penchansky, R., & Thomas, J. W. (1981). The concept of access: definition and relationship to consumer satisfaction. Medical care, 127-140.
Schiefele, U., Schaffner, E., Möller, J., & Wigfield, A. (2012). Dimensions of reading motivation and their relation to reading behavior and competence. Reading research quarterly, 47(4), 427-463.
Sin, SJ (2011) Neighborhood disparities in access to information resources: Measuring and mapping U.S. Public libraries’ funding and service landscapes. Library & Information Science Research, 33(1): 41–53.
Speare, A. (1974). Residential satisfaction as an intervening variable in residential mobility. Demography, 11(2), 173-188.
Talen, E., & Koschinsky, J. (2011). Is subsidized housing in sustainable neighborhoods? Evidence from Chicago. Housing Policy Debate, 21(1), 1-28.
Van Zandt, S., & Mhatre, P. C. (2009). Growing pains: Perpetuating inequality through the production of low-income housing in the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex. Urban Geography, 30(5), 490-513.
Yi, J., & Zhang, J. (2010). The effect of house price on fertility: evidence from Hong Kong. Economic Inquiry, 48(3), 635-650.
Zeng, W., Rees, P., & Xiang, L. (2019). Do residents of Affordable Housing Communities in China suffer from relative accessibility deprivation? A case study of Nanjing. Cities, 90, 141-156.
Zheng, W., Shen, G., Wang, H., & Lombardi, P. (2015). Critical issues in spatial distribution of public housing estates and their implications on urban renewal in Hong Kong. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
公共行政學系
108256011
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108256011
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 廖興中zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Liao, Hsin-Chungen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 周仲璿zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Chou, Chung-Hsuanen_US
dc.creator (作者) 周仲璿zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Chou, Chung-Hsuanen_US
dc.date (日期) 2022en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2-Sep-2022 15:15:14 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 2-Sep-2022 15:15:14 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 2-Sep-2022 15:15:14 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0108256011en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/141688-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 公共行政學系zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 108256011zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本研究主要係針對我國社會住宅之可近性與選址進行研究，並以地理上的可近性進行分析。於評估方法上，則採取旅行成本法，並以線性路網環域分析為分析方法。而在評量指標上，則是參酌國內外住宅區位相關研究及政策報告書之標準，以交通設施（公車站、火車站、捷運站）、生活機能設施（超市、便利商店）、休閒娛樂設施（公園、綠地）、教育設施（國小、國中、幼稚園）、醫院設施（診所、醫院）、文化設施（圖書館）為評估指標。有關研究資料之獲得則以開放資料為主，自建資料為輔的方式獲得。研究結果發現現行的社會住宅對於設施的可近性表現上，大致都能符合政策指標，僅有少數的社會住宅出現與指標脫鉤的情形。首先，整體指標表現來說呈現區域性的差異。其次，在教育設施的可近性上，出現教育資源雙重缺乏的情形。復次，部分社會住宅坐落於新開發之都市計畫區、重劃區，然而囿限於該區域尚未完全發展成熟，故各項設施的可近性較為缺乏。最後，除臺北市外，各直轄市的可近性較差的社會住宅都具有一項指標表現較其他指標為疲弱。另外，本研究亦發現我國開放資料無法滿足「質」的需求之情形。zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) The research mainly analyzes the accessibility and site selection of social housing based on geographical accessibility. The evaluation method uses the travel cost method and uses the line-based network buffer as the analysis method. Evaluation indicators are based on domestic and foreign research and policy reports, and propose transportation facilities (bus stations, railway stations, MRT stations), life function facilities (supermarkets, convenience stores), leisure and entertainment facilities (parks, green spaces), educational facilities ( elementary school, middle school, kindergarten), hospital facilities (clinics, hospitals), cultural facilities (libraries).The research data is mainly obtained by open data, supplemented by self-built data. The results of the study found that the accessibility of social housing to facilities generally met the policy indicators, and only a few social housing failed to meet the policy indicators. First, the overall indicator performance shows regional differences. Secondly, the accessibility of educational facilities appears to be a double lack of educational resources. Third, some social housing is located in the newly developed urban planning area, and the accessibility of facilities is relatively lacking because the area is not yet fully developed. Finally, with the exception of Taipei City, all municipalities` social housing has one indicator that is weaker than the others. In addition, this study also found that open data cannot meet the needs of "quality".en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景 1
第二節 研究動機 2
第三節 研究目的與研究問題 5
第二章　文獻回顧 7
第一節 社會住宅相關概念探討 7
第二節 住宅的區位相關研究回顧 27
第三節 可近性評估方法回顧 37
第三章 研究方法 45
第一節 線性路網環域分析 45
第二節 研究資料 48
第四章 研究分析 57
第一節 臺北市社會住宅可近性分析 59
第二節 新北市社會住宅可近性分析 77
第三節 桃園市社會住宅可近性分析 95
第四節 臺中市社會住宅可近性分析 113
第五節 臺南市社會住宅可近性分析 130
第六節 高雄市社會住宅可近性分析 146
第七節 研究分析討論 163
第五章 結論與研究建限制 168
第一節 研究發現 168
第二節 政策建議 173
第三節 研究限制 176
參考文獻 180
附錄一 臺北市社會住宅周邊設施可近性統計表 185
附錄二 新北市社會住宅周邊設施可近性統計表 188
附錄三 桃園市社會住宅周邊設施可近性統計表 190
附錄四 臺中市社會住宅周邊設施可近性統計表 192
附錄五 臺南市社會住宅周邊設施可近性統計表 193
附錄六 高雄市社會住宅周邊設施可近性統計表 194		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 9525793 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108256011en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 社會住宅zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 可近性zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 線性路網環域分析zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Social Housingen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Accessibilityen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Line-Based Network Bufferen_US
dc.title (題名) 我國社會住宅周邊環境可近性評估-以六都為例zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Evaluation of the Accessibility of the Surrounding Environment of Social Housing -A Case Study of Six Metropolitan Cities of Taiwanen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 江明芸（2011）。社會住宅，從民間倡議到政府爆衝。新社會政策，（14），8-12。
江穎慧（2011）。社會住宅的迷思。新社會政策，（15），30-31。
林育如（2011）。社會住宅在臺灣的實踐之路。新社會政策，（14），17-20。
林萬億（2003）。論我國的社會住宅政策與社會照顧的結合。國家政策季刊，2（4），53-82。
法務部（2018）。公民與政治權利國際公約經濟社會文化權利國際公約一般性意見。臺北：法務部。
胡勝正（2015）。從房價所得比看臺灣的社會不公。臺灣經濟預測與政策，45（2），23-43。
高秉毅、謝博明（2018）。社會住宅物業經營管理型態與策略之初探性研究-以臺北市為例。物業管理學報，9（1），71-87。
張金鶚（2011）。當前社會住宅的期待。中華民國建築學會會刊雜誌，（63）10-13。
張金鶚、林秋瑾、周美伶、朱芳妮、林佑儒、黃一敏（2010）。住宅需求動向調查報告書。內政部營建署委託研究，未出版。
張雅惠（2009）。國民住宅轉型社會住宅之課題分析。土地問題研究季刊，8（2），79-88。
章殷超、溫在弘、賴美淑（2009）。利用地理資訊系統探討肝癌病患就醫地理可近性與醫院選擇間之相關性。臺灣公共衛生雜誌，28（6），517-529。
陳威姍（2014）。社會住宅區位選址指標評估-以原臺中市為例。逢甲大學都市計畫與空間資訊學系碩士班碩士論文，未出版，臺中。
陳致堯（2016）。論社會住宅區位之選址指標分析-以臺北市公共住宅政策為例。國立中央大學法律與政府研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園。
陳雅倫（2016）。論臺灣社會住宅政策回應性評估之研究—以桃園市中路二號宅為例。國立臺北大學公共行政暨政策學系碩士論文，未出版，新北。
彭建文、李美杏、陳冠儒（2020）。臺灣地區居住滿意度影響因素之實證分析。都市與計劃，47（3），243-270。
黃如瀅（2019）。臺北市公共住宅鄰避效應之探討。國立臺灣大學公共事務研究所碩士學位論文，未出版，臺北。
廖興中（2013）。臺灣小兒科醫療資源空間可接近性分析。公共行政學報，（44）， 1-39。
廖興中（2014）。應用空間可接近性分析於臺灣婦產科醫療資源的評估。民主與治理，1（2），83-118。
Aday, L. A., & Andersen, R. (1974). A framework for the study of access to medical care. Health services research, 9(3), 208.
Apparicio, P., & Séguin, A. M. (2006). Measuring the accessibility of services and facilities for residents of public housing in Montreal. Urban studies, 43(1), 187-211.
Apparicio, P., Séguin, A. M., & Naud, D. (2008). The quality of the urban environment around public housing buildings in Montréal: An objective approach based on GIS and multivariate statistical analysis. Social Indicators Research, 86(3), 355-380.
Biswas, B., Sultana, Z., Priovashini, C., Ahsan, M. N., & Mallick, B. (2021). The emergence of residential satisfaction studies in social research: A bibliometric analysis. Habitat International, 109, 102336.
Braga, M., & Palvarini, P. (2013). Social Housing in the EU.
Cox, W. (2021). Demographia international housing affordability: 2021 edition. Urban Reform Institute & The Frontier Centre for Public Policy..
Dekker, K., de Vos, S., Musterd, S., & Van Kempen, R. (2011). Residential satisfaction in housing estates in European cities: A multi-level research approach. Housing Studies, 26(04), 479-499.
Edgar, B., & Doherty, J. (2001). Supported housing and homelessness in the European Union. European Journal of Housing Policy, 1(1), 59-78.
Fried, M., & Gleicher, P. (1961). Some sources of residential satisfaction in an urban slum. Journal of the American Institute of planners, 27(4), 305-315.
Gulliford, M., Figueroa-Munoz, J., Morgan, M., Hughes, D., Gibson, B., Beech, R., & Hudson, M. (2002). What does` access to health care`mean?. Journal of health services research & policy, 7(3), 186-188.
Higgs, G. (2004). A literature review of the use of GIS-based measures of access to health care services. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology, 5(2), 119-139.
Joseph, A. E., & D. R. Phillips (1984). Accessibility and utilization: Geographical perspectives on health care delivery. London: Harper & Row.
Khan, A. A. (1992). An integrated approach to measuring potential spatial access to health care services. Socio-economic planning sciences, 26(4), 275-287.
Kirkpatrick, S. I., & Tarasuk, V. (2011). Housing circumstances are associated with household food access among low-income urban families. Journal of urban health, 88(2), 284-296.
Koontz, CM, Jue, DK, Lance, KC (2005) Neighborhood-based in-library use performance measures for public libraries: A nationwide study of majority-minority and majority white/low income markets using personal digital data collectors. Library & Information Science Research, 27(1): 28–50.
Kristensen, H. (2002). Social housing policy and the welfare state: A Danish perspective. Urban studies, 39(2), 255-263.
Kyle, T., & Dunn, J. R. (2008). Effects of housing circumstances on health, quality of life and healthcare use for people with severe mental illness: a review. Health & social care in the community, 16(1), 1-15.
Luo, W., & Qi, Y. (2009). An enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) method for measuring spatial accessibility to primary care physicians. Health & place, 15(4), 1100-1107.
Luo, W., & Wang, F. (2003). Measures of spatial accessibility to health care in a GIS environment: synthesis and a case study in the Chicago region. Environment and planning B: planning and design, 30(6), 865-884.
Macintyre, S., Macdonald, L., & Ellaway, A. (2008). Do poorer people have poorer access to local resources and facilities? The distribution of local resources by area deprivation in Glasgow, Scotland. Social science & medicine, 67(6), 900-914.
Nicholls, S. (2001). Measuring the accessibility and equity of public parks: A case study using GIS. Managing leisure, 6(4), 201-219.
Oh, K., & Jeong, S. (2007). Assessing the spatial distribution of urban parks using GIS. Landscape and urban planning, 82(1-2), 25-32.
Oliver, L. N., Schuurman, N., & Hall, A. W. (2007). Comparing circular and network buffers to examine the influence of land use on walking for leisure and errands. International journal of health geographics, 6(1), 1-11.
Park, S. J. (2012). Measuring public library accessibility: A case study using GIS. Library & information science research, 34(1), 13-21.
Penchansky, R., & Thomas, J. W. (1981). The concept of access: definition and relationship to consumer satisfaction. Medical care, 127-140.
Schiefele, U., Schaffner, E., Möller, J., & Wigfield, A. (2012). Dimensions of reading motivation and their relation to reading behavior and competence. Reading research quarterly, 47(4), 427-463.
Sin, SJ (2011) Neighborhood disparities in access to information resources: Measuring and mapping U.S. Public libraries’ funding and service landscapes. Library & Information Science Research, 33(1): 41–53.
Speare, A. (1974). Residential satisfaction as an intervening variable in residential mobility. Demography, 11(2), 173-188.
Talen, E., & Koschinsky, J. (2011). Is subsidized housing in sustainable neighborhoods? Evidence from Chicago. Housing Policy Debate, 21(1), 1-28.
Van Zandt, S., & Mhatre, P. C. (2009). Growing pains: Perpetuating inequality through the production of low-income housing in the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex. Urban Geography, 30(5), 490-513.
Yi, J., & Zhang, J. (2010). The effect of house price on fertility: evidence from Hong Kong. Economic Inquiry, 48(3), 635-650.
Zeng, W., Rees, P., & Xiang, L. (2019). Do residents of Affordable Housing Communities in China suffer from relative accessibility deprivation? A case study of Nanjing. Cities, 90, 141-156.
Zheng, W., Shen, G., Wang, H., & Lombardi, P. (2015). Critical issues in spatial distribution of public housing estates and their implications on urban renewal in Hong Kong. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment.		zh_TW
dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202201309en_US