臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

在人類與自然過去數世紀的共演化過程中，形成了生物棲地和人類土地利用動態鑲嵌的社會生態生產地景，並可直接對應到台灣水梯田聚落。過去，臺灣稻米文化、特殊地形、地貌與人口稠密等特性下，造就許多農村皆有獨特的水梯田景觀。然隨環境變遷的擾動下，許多亦已產生嚴重陸化、休耕與廢耕現象，或轉為都市或其他產業發展用地。爰此，林務局於2009年開始執行水梯田溼地生態保存與復育計畫，結合里山倡議理念，以復育社會生態生產地景為主軸，重塑人與自然和諧的互動關係，提供台灣水梯田聚落永續發展的契機。
　　本研究欲透過回復力觀點，調查與分析推動里山倡議的八煙、貢寮、石梯坪三處水梯田聚落回復力運作機制，並作為制訂水梯田聚落環境變遷回復力政策之參考。透過回顧回復力、社會生態生產地景與社會生態生產地景回復力指標相關文獻，本研究制訂出水梯田聚落回復力運作機制分析架構，將其拆解為「回復力構成要素」、「動態擾動」、「利害關係人」三部分，並以回復力指標作為回復力構成要素，以捕捉水梯田聚落所具有的回復力特質。於此架構下，應用深度訪談法、文件分析法與參與觀察法。一方面，調查水梯田聚落回復力構成要素與動態擾動；另一方面，結合不同水梯田聚落推動經驗，運用回復力指標分析聚落間運作差異與回復力後續維繫關鍵，最後回饋到「水梯田聚落環境變遷回復力政策建議」與「社會生態生產地景復育政策建議」上，以達本研究之目的。

Humans and nature have co-evolved over centuries, creating unique mosaic socio-ecological production landscapes with habitats and human land use, and that can directly correspond to the paddy landscapes in Taiwan. In the past, the characteristics of rice culture, special topography, and densely populated in Taiwan, creating many paddy landscapes in rural area. However, with the disturbances of environmental change, many paddy landscapes have been waste, or turned into urban or industrial use. Therefore, the Forestry Bureau began to implement wetland ecosystem conservation and restoration plan in 2009, combined with the concept of Satoyama Initiative to reshape harmonious interactions between humans and nature and restore the socio-ecological production landscapes. Providing paddy landscapes in Taiwan sustainable development opportunities.
This study uses the resilience perspective, investigating and assessing resilience in Bajen, Gongliao and Shihtiping paddy landscapes, and also formulate environmental change resilience policy suggestion of paddy landscapes. After reviewing literatures of resilience concept, socio-ecological production landscapes and indicators of socio-ecological production landscapes. This study makes resilience assessment framework of paddy landscapes, and divide into “resilience components”, “dynamic disturbances” and “stakeholders”. In order to capture essential of resilience, this study uses indicators of resilience to conduct resilience components. Under this framework, this study uses in-depth interview, document analysis and participant observation. On one hand, assessing resilience components and dynamic disturbances of paddy landscapes; On the other hand, combining with other paddy landscapes experiences, using indicators of resilience to analyze operation mode between different paddy landscapes and critical thresholds. Finally, feedback to the policy suggestion of environmental change resilience of paddy landscapes and socio-ecological production landscapes restoration.

第一章、緒論 1
第一節、研究動機 1
第二節、研究目的 3
第三節、研究案例 4
第四節、研究內容與流程 5
第二章、文獻回顧 7
第一節、回復力 8
第二節、社會生態生產地景 14
第三節、社會生態生產地景回復力指標 28
第四節、小結 35
第三章、研究設計與方法 36
第一節、研究設計 36
第二節、研究架構 37
第三節、研究方法 39
第四章、案例調查結果 42
第一節、八煙水梯田聚落 42
第二節、貢寮水梯田聚落 57
第三節、石梯坪水梯田聚落 73
第四節、小結 84
第五章、案例綜合比較分析 85
第一節、水梯田聚落回復力構成要素比較分析 85
第二節、水梯田聚落回復力後續維繫關鍵 93
第六章、結論與建議 96
第一節、結論 96
第二節、建議 98
參考文獻 100
附錄一 103

中文部分
1.人禾環境倫理發展基金會（2015）。田寮洋濕地周邊水梯田生態保育計畫結案報告。行政院農業委員會林務局。臺北：行政院農業委員會林務局。
2.李光中（2011）。鄉村地景保育的新思維─里山倡議，台灣林業期刊，第37卷，第3期，第59-64頁。
3.李光中、呂宜瑾（2013）。日本里山-里海評估－目標、方法和結果，台灣林業期刊，第39卷，第2期，第25-30頁。
4.李光中、夏榮生、黃群策、許曉華、張弘毅（2015）。推動台灣里山倡議的策略架構芻議。台灣林業期刊，第41卷，第1期，第38-46頁。
5.洪鴻智、李承嘉、詹士樑（2013）。水梯田濕地生態保存及復育補貼政策研究計畫。行政院農業委員會林務局。臺北：行政院農業委員會林務局。
6.洪鴻智、李承嘉、詹士樑、林華慶、蕭婷允、文嬿翔（2013）。水梯田濕地生態與景觀保育價值評估，臺灣土地研究，第16卷，第2期，第1-22頁。
7.財團法人台灣生態工法發展基金會（2013）。八煙聚落砌石水梯田生態復舊與產業復甦研究計畫。行政院農業委員會林務局。臺北：行政院農業委員會林務局。
8.塩見直紀（2006）。半農半X的生活：順從自然，實踐天賦。臺北：天下文化出版社。
9.葉美秀（2011）。陽明山國家公園八煙地區文化景觀活化與生態聚落永續發展推動計畫。陽明山國家公園管理處。臺北：陽明山國家公園管理處。
10.葉美秀（2013）。陽明山國家公園輔導社區改造規劃－八煙地區推動文化景觀活化與生態聚落永續發展先期規劃。陽明山國家公園管理處。臺北：陽明山國家公園管理處。
11.趙榮台（2011）。CBD-COP10 生物多樣性公約第十屆締約方大會特輯：里山倡議，大自然雜誌，第110期，第64-67頁。
12.駱鴻捷（2014）。八煙地區多元化夥伴關係之輔導。陽明山國家公園管理處。臺北：陽明山國家公園管理處。
英文部分
1.Berkes, F., Colding, J. F., and Folke, C., editors (2003). Navigating nature’s dynamics: building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University Press, New York, New York, USA.
2.Carpenter, S. R., Walker, B. H., Anderies, J. M., Abel, N. (2001). From metaphor to measurement: resilience of what to what? Ecosystems 4,765–781.
3.Chang, K. and Ying, Y. (2005). External benefits of preserving agricultural land: Taiwan’s rice fields, Social Science Journal, 42(2): 285-293.
4.Cumming, G. S. (2011). Spatial resilience in social-ecological systems. Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands.
5.Folke, C., Carpenter, S. R., Walker, B., Scheffer, M., Chapin, T., and Rockström, J. (2010). Resilience thinking : integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability. Ecology and Society 15(4): 20.
6.Folke, C. (2006).Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change 16, 253–267
7.Gunderson, L. H., and Holling, C. S., editors (2002). Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA
8.Gunderson, L. H. (2000). Ecological resilience in theory and practice. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 31, 425–439.
9.Holling, C. S. (1986). The resilience of terrestrial ecosystems: local surprise and global change. In: Clark, W.C., Munn, R.E. (Eds.), Sustainable Development of the Biosphere. Cambridge University Press, London,292–317.
10.Holling, C. S. (1996). Engineering resilience versus ecological resilience. In : Schulze, P. (Ed.), Engineering Within Ecological Constraints. National Academy Press, Washington DC, 31–44.
11.Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4, 1–23.
12.IPCC (2013). Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
13.Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Synthesis. Island Press, Washington DC
14.O’Neill, R. V. (1999). Recovery in complex ecosystems. Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Stress and Recovery 6, 181–187.as cited in Folke, C.(2006).Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change 16, 253–267
15.Paine, R. T., Tegner, M. J., Johnson, E. A. (1998). Compounded perturbations yield ecological surprises. Ecosystems 1, 535–545.as cited in Folke, C. (2006).Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change 16, 253–267
16.Resilience Alliance (2014). General Resilience: A discussion paper based on insights from a catchment management area workshop in south eastern Australia.http://www.resalliance.org/bibliography/index.php/discussion-papers
17.Resilience Alliance (2010). Assessing resilience in social-ecological systems : Workbook for practitioners. Version 2.0.Online: http://www.resalliance.org/3871.php
18.UNU-IAS (2010a). Satoyama–Satoumi Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Socio-Ecological Production Landscapes of Japan. Tokyo: UNU-IAS
19.UNU-IAS (2010b). Biodiversity and Livelihood-The Satoyama Initiative Concept in Practice. Tokyo: UNU-IAS
20.UNU-IAS (2012). Indicators of Resilience in Socioecological Production Landscapes (SEPLs), UNU-IAS Policy Report.
21.UNU-IAS, Bioversity International, IGES and UNDP (2014). Toolkit for the Indicators of Resilience in Socio-ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes (SEPLS).
22.Van Oudenhoven, F., Mijatovic, D. and Eyzaguirre, P. (2010). Social-ecological indicators of resilience in agrarian and natural landscapes, Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 22(2), 154–173.