自從歐洲學者發展出「社會品質」的概念後，亞洲學界在這 幾年也積極討論這個概念的理論內涵與實用性。「社會品質」包 含四個面向：社會經濟安全、社會融合、社會凝聚與社會賦權， 同時每個面向又可再細分為數個子面向與指標供實證檢驗。本文 探討的是社會凝聚的面向，主要關於社會網絡創造或消解的過 程，以及支撐這些網絡的社會基礎結構。據此，我們探討社會凝 聚的四個子面向：信任、其他整合規範與價值、社會網絡、與認 同。基於2008年進行的一項社會品質調查，本文探索台灣的社會 凝聚特性。就歐洲所發展出的20個社會凝聚指標而言，有5個指 標及8個替代指標在台灣的情形直接可得。此外，社會品質調查 也測量受訪者主觀意見，在本研究中發現在「信任」的子面向 上，49.2%的受訪者同意「可以信任大部份人」，而且大學與宗 教機構比政府與國會較受信任。47.3%的受訪者自豪身為台灣 人，而12.9%則並不自豪，39.7%的感受中立。另一方面，53.0% 的受訪者並未參與任何社會團體；在有參與的受訪者中，22.7% 參加運動與休閒相關的團體，遠多於參加互助團體或是志願性服 務組織。最後，大部份受訪者對於外籍勞工與外籍配偶的態度中 立，但是對後者的接受度高於前者。整體而言，台灣社會並沒有 顯現強度的社會凝聚，這點值得政府及社會科學研究者的重視。

Originally proposed within a European context, considerable collective effort has since been placed into establishing a conceptual and theoretical framework for social quality in a number of Asian countries. The overall concept of social quality is sub-divided into the four domains: socio-economic security; social inclusion; social cohesion; social empowerment, and each provide additional sub-domains and related indicators for empirical assessment. This study aims to specifically explore “social cohesion＂, which describes the processes of creating, defending and demolishing social networks, as well as the social infrastructure underpinning such networks. This study closely examines the four sub-domains constituting social cohesion, comprising of trust, other integrative norms and values, social networks and identity. Our primary aim in the present study, through the adoption of this theoretical framework, is to explore the features of social cohesion in Taiwan based upon in-depth analysis of a social quality survey carried out in 2008. Of the twenty social cohesion indicators developed in Europe, five are available in Taiwan and eight are “alternatively available＂. Of particular interest are the results revealed by the social quality survey relating to subjective opinions shown in this study; in the case of trust, 49.2 per cent of the respondents agreed that “most people can be trusted＂, with universities and religious groups being regarded as more trustworthy than either the Government or the National Assembly. Furthermore, although 47.3 per cent of those surveyed indicated that they were proud to be Taiwanese, 12.9 per cent were not, whilst the remaining 39.7 per cent expressed a neutral attitude towards the issue. More than half (53.0 per cent) of all respondents were not members of any social groups; amongst those who had joined such groups, the primary choices were sports and leisure groups, which, at 22.7 per cent, far exceeded any membership of mutual help associations or voluntary service organizations. Most respondents were found to hold a neutral attitude towards foreign spouses or foreign workers; however, there was clearly much greater acceptance of the former than the latter. Taiwanese society, as a whole, does not appear to exhibit any strong degree of social cohesion, a finding which clearly calls for greater attention from both the government and social scientists.