:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:多尺度土地使用/覆蓋型態變遷之研究
作者:黃國慶
作者(外文):Huang, Kuo-Ching
校院名稱:國立臺北大學
系所名稱:都市計劃研究所
指導教授:詹士樑
黃書禮
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2015
主題關鍵詞:土地使用/覆蓋變遷尺度型態景觀生態指數群落分析land-use/cover changescalepatternlandscape metricscluster analysis
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:25
土地使用/覆蓋變遷為近年來重要的研究議題之一,在傳統上是以單一網格或單一宗地之變化為對象,透過不同的分析方法,對土地使用/覆蓋之變遷、驅動力與其動態過程進行分析與模擬,從而探討土地使用/覆蓋變遷之內涵、趨勢與因應對策等。其中,以多主體模擬(Multi-agents simulation)、計量經濟模型(econometric model)、景觀生態指數、空間統計、CLUS、SLEUTH等方法最為常見。然而,單位土地與土地之間或宗地與宗地之間往往具有空間相依的特性,亦即土地使用/覆蓋的變遷不會僅僅發生在單一土地或單一宗地,往往伴隨周圍土地的變動。再者,不同尺度的土地分析單元亦會造成土地使用/覆蓋變遷分析結果的改變。因此探討不同尺度面向之土地使用組合、土地空間型態或空間特徵的變化與特性應為土地使用/覆蓋變遷研究發展的一項重點。
本研究假設土地使用/覆蓋變遷之分析範疇可分為網格(parcel/Grid)、型態(pattern)、系統(system)等三種尺度層次,透過不同尺度的分析將有助於建立或分析土地使用之組合特性。近年來,景觀生態指數廣泛地應用在探討土地型態以及土地類型的轉變過程,對研究不同尺度上之土地變遷議題上,提供了一項有力的工具。同時,資料分群方法(如群落分析)亦對土地型態類型分辨提供了統計的解釋與證據。故此,本研究以土地使用/覆蓋為對象,整合景觀生態指數、群落分析等方法,從探討土地使用/覆蓋型態為出發點,透過人口、社會經濟、交通、自然環境等面向,以台北都會區為實證地區,建構台北都會區之土地型態與變遷關係,並實證土地覆蓋型態變遷及其動態。結果顯示透過不同尺度的案例分析,即使個別的土地覆蓋型態類別不盡相同,但其整體都市結構與變遷區位仍極為相似,說明了群落分析方法與景觀生態指數的應用有助於瞭解整體都市空間的基本架構。在此結果下,台北都會區之土地使用/覆蓋型態基礎類別可分為都市核心、都市次核心、都市外圍與自然地區等四類,其整體結構是以台北盆地平原為都市核心,分別向盆地東、北、西三面以走廊方式進行衍伸,其中以西面發展為主要擴張對象。在變遷方面,都市核心與都市次核心原位於台北市西側及以西區地區,其範圍以其為中心略微向外擴張;都市外圍與自然地區的轉變則位於西側都市外圍地區、東側走廊與東北面海岸地區等。
Land-use/land-cover change is of priority concern in the field of global change research. The land-use/land-cover project (LUCC) is the most comprehensive in analyzing land-use/land-cover change, as it identifies the determinants, driving forces and interaction relation of land-use/land-cover change. Traditional research of land cover/land use change sets has focused on the spatial units of parcels or grids for analysis and simulation. Since the change of individual land use is affected by surrounding land uses, there is another possibility for exploring land use change in terms of spatial patterns.
The research assumes that three tiers of spatial scales as system, pattern and parcel existed in the nature environment, and it will be used to explore variety sets of land use/cover by scales. This study applies indicators of landscape metrics to analyze pattern characteristics of urban structure, and cluster analysis and discriminant analysis to identify the type of spatial pattern. This study also attempts to analyze land use patterns and their changes by metric analysis with patch-corridor-matrix structure. The process includes three phases. The first phase is to explore categories of land use patterns and attributes by cluster analysis. The second phase is to analyze pattern changes with different periods and to identify properties of pattern changes in the whole system. The final phase is to classify the pattern changes and to look for the relation between different patterns. Through analysis of pattern changes, it would be helpful to understand urban development in relation to landscape metrics and to offer new thinking that differs from traditional views of urban development.
中文部分

1.于如陵(1990),都市土地使用結構之研究-以台中市為例,國立成功大學都市計畫研究所碩論。
2.王小璘、林沛毅(2004),以景觀生態學觀點探討棲地模擬模型-以台中市大坑地區為例,設計學報,9(2):47-69。new window
3.王小璘、曾詠宜(2003),都市公園綠地區位景觀生態評估之研究,設計學報,8(3):53-74。new window
4.王濟川、郭志剛(2004),Logistic 迴歸模型-方法及應用,台北:五南圖書。
5.交通部運輸研究所(1999),第三期台灣地區整體運輸系統規劃—整體運輸系統供需預測與分析。
6.交通運輸研究所(1986),台灣地區運輸經濟分析與預測。
7.吳振發、林裕彬(2006),汐止市土地利用時空間變遷模式,都市與計劃,33(3):231-259。new window
8.李介中、蔡博文(2005),應用碎形理論於臺灣建地空間型態與地形關係之研究,臺灣地理資訊學刊,3:43-55。
9.李明儒(2008),不同空間尺度下網格式土地使用變遷模型之敏感性分析,國立台灣大學建築與城鄉所碩士論文。
10.李家儂、賴宗裕(2007),大眾捷運車站周邊土地使用規劃模型之探討-多目標與多評準決策方法之應用,都市交通,22(1):35-49。new window
11.李朝賢(1993),區域發展規劃,台北:華泰書局。
12.李瑞陽、林士強(2006),利用空間技術與景觀生態指數分析墾丁國家公園土地覆蓋變遷影響之研究,地理學報,46: 31-48。new window
13.李萬凱(2007),工商及戶口普查資料空間分派模式之建立及運用,建築學報,59:127-144。
14.李鈴玉(1994),台北都會區空間發展之研究(1961-1993),文化大學地學研究所碩士論文。
15.肖篤寧(1993),景觀生態學理論、方法與應用,地景企業股份公司。
16.周天穎、簡甫任、雷祖強(2003),都市地區土地利用變遷量化分析之研究,台灣土地研究,6 (1 ):105-130。new window
17.林承緯(2005),台灣都市蔓延發展型態之研究---以台灣四大都會區為例,國立成功大學都市計畫研究所碩士論文。
18.林美君、蘇明道與蔡博文(2013),統計區分類系統在洪災事件之人口暴露量推估,農業工程學報,58(3):40-49。
19.林峰田(2006;2007;2008),臺北都會區土地使用變遷模式之研究-總計畫暨子計畫一:都會區土地使用變遷之網格自動機模型之研究 (I/II/III),國科會專題研究計畫。
20.林峰田、張峻誠(1998),區域防災地理資訊系統的空間關聯性分析,都市與計劃,25(1):23-47。new window
21.林師模、陳苑欽(2004),多變量分析-管理上的應用,台北:雙葉書廊。
22.林楨家、高誌謙(2003),用於捷運車站周邊地區容積管制檢討之TOD規劃模式,運輸計畫季刊,32(3):581-600。new window
23.林裕彬、吳振發、鄧東波(2004),景觀生態面向及指數分析汐止地區1990至2001土地利用時空間鑲嵌特徵,都市與計畫,31(3):239-268。new window
24.林裕彬、曾正輝、鄧東波(2002),景觀生態指數於集水區整體景觀時空間型態變遷探討,農業工程學報,48(1):64-82。
25.林裕彬、鄧東波(2001),以衛星影像及碎形理論探討都市綠空間之發展結構-以信義計畫區為例,都市與計畫,28(2):127-154。new window
26.林漢良(2005),土地使用圖之點資料空間分析研究,規劃學報,32:31-44。
27.洪鴻智、黃于芳(2010),農村工業污染風險知覺的空間特性與決定因素,台灣土地研究,13(2):31-57。new window
28.高麗貞(1990),都會區土地使用變遷之研究國民旅舍住宿旅各市場特性之研究,國立中興大學公共行政及政策研究所碩論。
29.張小飛、王仰麟、;薛怡珍、李正國、李衛鋒、蔣依依、施孟亨(2010),深圳市城市發展過程之生態環境影響與景觀格局最適化,都市與計劃,37(1):121-142。new window
30.張郁旎(2001),都會區產業空間分佈變遷及區位選擇因素之研究:以台北都會區為例,國立政治大學地政學系碩士論文。
31.張國楨、陳明勳、林嘉宏與王翊芬(2014),統計單元調整下空間差異性之研究,TGIS-GeoInformatics-UGIS Joint International Conference 2014. Kaohsiung,Taiwan.
32.張耀麟(2005),都市土地使用變遷之研究,國立成功大學都市計畫研究所博士論文。
33.許銘峰(2008),台灣地區都市型態特徵之比較研究,國立成功大學都市計畫研究所碩士論文。
34.陳坤宏(1991),空間結構─理論與方法論,台北:明文書局。
35.黃任薇(2007),GIS網格解析度之研究,國立成功大學碩士論文。
36.黃若蘋(2007),啟發式演算法於資料分群問題之比較,大同大學碩士論文。
37.黃書偉(2008), 土地混合使用空間型態量測與其影響因素之研究,國立成功大學都市計劃研究所博士論文。
38.黃書禮(2004),都市生態經濟與能量,台北:詹氏書局。
39.黃書禮、李佳倫、賴曉瑩(1998),台北盆地生態能量流動與土地使用之關係—(1)土地使用能量階層性分析,都市與計劃,25(2):205-221。new window
40.黃書禮、翁瑞豪、陳子淳(1997),台北市永續發展指標系統之建立與評估,都市與計劃,24(1):23-42。new window
41.黃書禮、蔡靜如(2000),台北盆地土地利用變遷趨勢之研究,都市與計劃,27(1):01-22。new window
42.黃書禮、賴曉瑩(1999),台北盆地生態能量流動與土地使用之關係—(Ⅱ)生態能量分區,都市與計劃,26(1):1-17。new window
43.黃國慶、詹士樑(2009),台北都會區土地使用/覆蓋變遷驅動力之空間近鄰效果探討,都市與計劃,36(4):415-443。new window
44.楊重信、林育諄(2003),台灣都市生產者服務業動態外部之實證,都市與計劃,30(2):91-107。new window
45.詹士樑、黃國慶(2006;2007;2008),臺北都會區土地使用變遷模式之研究-子計畫四:社經空間型態與土地使用/覆蓋變遷之互動影響分析(I/II/III),國科會專題研究計畫。
46.鄒克萬、張曜麟(2004),土地使用變遷空間動態模型之研究,地理學報,35:35-52。new window
47.鄔建國(2000),景觀生態學-概念與理論,生態學雜誌,19(1):42-52。
48.鄔建國(2003),景觀生態學:格局過程尺度與等級,五南出版社,台北。
49.趙景明、陳俊華(2006),移動式網格之分散式資料分群技術,資訊管理研究,6:63-80。
50.劉小蘭、賴玫錡(2011),都市化與氣候暖化關係之研究--以台北都會區為例,台灣土地研究,14(2):39-66。new window
51.劉瑋(2004),都市土地利用變遷與道路關係之探討-以台中市平地地區為例,國立台灣大學地理環境資源研究所碩士論文。
52.蔡厚男、呂慧穎(2003),都市化對景觀碎裂影響之碎形分析,中國園藝,49(2):233-248。
53.蔡博文(2005),土地變遷研究之回顧與展望,全球變遷通訊雜誌,48:21-24。
54.蕭元傑(2010),應用層級分析法於都會區交通分區評估準則之建立,逢甲大學交通工程與管理所碩士論文。
55.賴進貴、葉高華、王韋力(2004),土地利用變遷與空間相依性之探討-以臺北盆地聚落變遷為例,台灣地理資訊學刊,1:33-46。
56.謝懷德(2002),台灣地區自動櫃員機區位選擇因素之研究,國立交通大學科技管理研究所碩士論文。
57.蘇明道與林美君(2014),社經資料隱私與空間分布特性保留之平衡研討,TGIS-GeoInformatics-UGIS Joint International Conference 2014. Kaohsiung, Taiwan.


英文部分

1.Anselin, L. (1988). Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.
2.Anselin, L. (1990). Spatial dependence and spatial structural instability in applied regression analysis. Journal of Regional Science, 30: 185–207.
3.Anselin, L. (1995). Local Indicators of Spatial Association: LISA, Geographical Analysis, 93-115.
4.Anselin, L. (1998). Spatial econometrics: methods and models, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.
5.Arsenault, J., Michel, P., Berke, O., Ravel, A. and Gosselin, P. (2013). How to choose geographical units in ecological studies- proposal and application to campylobaceriosis. Spatial and Saptio-temporal Epidemiology, 7: 11-24.
6.Bao, S., and Henry, H.S. (1996). Heterogeneity issues in local measurements of spatial association, Geographical Systems, 3: 1-13.
7.Briassoulis, H. (2000). Analysis of Land Use Change: Theoretical and Modeling Approaches, Regional Research Institute, WVU.
8.Burgess, E. (1925). The growth of the city: An introduction to a research project. In Park, ed. , E. Burgess, ed. , & R. McKenzie (Eds.), The city (pp. 47–62). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
9.Cockings, S. and Martin, D.(2005). Zone design for environment and health studies using pre-aggregated data. Social Science and Medicine, 60: 2729-2742.
10.Dale, M.R.T. (2000). Lacunarity analysis of spatial pattern: a comparison, Landscape Ecology, 15:467–468.
11.Dicken, P. and Lloyd, P.E. (1990). Location in space, third edition. London and New York.
12.Dramstad, W.E., Sundli Tveit, M., Fjellstad, W.J., and Fry, G.L.A. (2006). Relationships between visual landscape preferences and map-based indicators of landscape structure, Landscape and Urban Planning, 78: 465–474.
13.Engelen, G., White, R., Uljee, I., Drazan, P. (1995). Cellular Automata for Integrated Modelling of Socio-environmental Systems, Environmental Monitoring Assessment, 30: 203.
14.Flowerdew, R., Manley, D. J. and Sabel, C.E. (2008). Neighbourhood effects on health- Does it matter wher you draw the boundaries? Social Science and Medicine, 66: 1241-1255.
15.Forman, R.T.T. and Godron, M. (1986). Landscape ecology. Wiley, NY.
16.Fotheringham, A. S. and Wong, D. W. S. (1991). The modifiable areal unit problem in multivariate statistical analysis, Environment and Planning A, 23(7): 1025-1044.
17.Getis, A., and Ord, J.K. (1992). The Analysis of Spatial Association by Use of Distance Statistics, Geographical Analysis, 24: 189-206.
18.GLP. (2005). http://www.globallandproject.org/documents.shtml.
19.Gregel, S.E. and Turner, M.G. (eds). (2002). Learning Landscape Ecology: A Pritical Guide to Concepts and Technique. Springer. (CD ROM available) http:/www.nceas.ucsb.edu/LearningLandscapeEcology/National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis.
20.Hansen, H.S. (2008). Quantifying and Analysing Neighbourhood Characteristics Supporting Urban Land-Use Modelling, Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography, 283-299.
21.Harris, C.D. and Ullman, E.L. (1945). The Nature of Cities. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 242: 7-17, doi:10.1177/000271624524200103.
22.Howard, P.J.A. and Howard, D.M. (1981). Multivariate analysis on map data: a case study in classification and dissection. J. Environ. Manage, 13: 22–40.
23.Hoyt, H. (1939). The Structure and Growth of Residential Neighbourhoods in American Cities Washington, Federal Housing Administration.
24.Jelinski D.E., and Wu, J. (1996). The modifiable areal unit problem and implications for landscape ecology, Landscape Ecology, 11(3): 129-140.
25.Jeon, J.H., Kho, S.Y., Park, J.J. and Kim, D.K. (2012). Effects of Spatial Aggregation Level on an Urban Transportation Planning Model, KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 16(5): 835-844.
26.Krugman, P. (1996). Confronting the Mystery of Urban Hierarchy, Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 10: 399–418.
27.Lambin, E. F., and Geist, H. J. (2001). Global land-use and cover change: What have we learned so far? Global Change Newsletter, 46: 27-30.
28.Lambin, E. F., Baulies, X., Bockstael, N., Fischer, G., Krug, T., Leemans, R., Moran, E. F., Rindfuss, R. R., Sato, T., Skole, D., and Turner II, B. L., Vogel, C. (1999). Land-Use and Land-Cover Change (LUCC), Implementation Strategy (IGBP Report48/IHDP Report10), Stockholm: Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.
29.Lambin, E. F., Turner II, B. L., Geist, H. J., Agbola, S. B., Angelsen, A., Bruce, J. W., Coomes, O., Dirzo, R., Fischer, G., Folke, C., George, P. S., Homewood, K., Imbernon, J., Leemans, R., Li, X., Moran, E. F., Mortimore, M., Ramakrishnan, P. S., Richards, J. F., Skanes, H., Stone, G. D., Svedin, U., Veldkamp, T. A., Vogel, C., and Xu, J. (2001). The causes of land-use and land-cover change: moving beyond the myths, Global Environmental Change, 11(4): 261-269.
30.Lee, J., and Wong, D. W. S. (2001). Statistical analysis with ArcView GIS, New York: John Wiley and Sons.
31.Lin, Y. P., Hong, N. M., Wu, P. J., Wu, C. F., & Verburg, P. H. (2008). Impacts of land use change scenarios on hydrology and land use patterns in the Wu-Tu watershed in Northern Taiwan. Landscape and Urban Planning, 80(1-2), 111-126.
32.Lynch, Kevin. (1981). A Theory of Good City Form. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33.Marceau D.J. and Hay G.J. (1999). Remote sensing contributions to the scale issue, Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing, 25(4): 357-366.
34.Morita, H., Hoshino, S., Kagatsume, M., and Mizuno, K. (1997). An Application of the Land Use Change Model for the Japan Case Study Area, Interim Report, IR-97-065, Laxenburg, Austria.
35.National Research Council (1999). Board on Sustainable Development, Policy Division, Committee on Global Change Research. Global Environmental Change: Research Pathways for the Next Decade.Washington. National Academy Press.
36.Parker, D. C., Manson, S. M., Janssen, M., Hoffmannm M. J., and Deadman, P. J. (2003). Multi-agent systems for the simulation of land use and land cover change: a review, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 93(2): 316-340.
37.Pickett, S.T.A. and Cadenasso, M.L. (1995). Landscape ecology: Spatial heterogeneity in ecological systems, Science, 269: 331-334.
38.Ramankutty, N., and Foley, J. (1998). Characterizing Patterns of Global Land Use: An Analysis of Global Croplands Data, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 12: 667-685.
39.Rindfuss, R. R., Turner II, B. L., Entwisle, B., and Walsh, S. J. (2004). Developing a science of land change: challenges and methodological issues, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101: 13976-13981.
40.Ritters, K.H., O’Neill, R.V., Hunsaker, C.T., Wickham,J.D., Yankee, D.H., Timmins, S.P., Jones, K.B. & Jackson,B.L. (1995). A factor analysis of landscape pattern and structure metrics, Landscape Ecology, 10: 23–40.
41.Serra, P., Pons, X., Sauri, D. (2008). Land-cover and land-use change in a Mediterranean landscape: A spatial analysis of driving forces integrating biophysical and human factors, Applied Geography, 28: 189–209.
42.Song, Y. and Knaap, G.J. (2004). Measuring the effects of mixed land uses on housing values, Regional Science and Urban Economics, 34: 663– 680.
43.The Sustainable Seattle Indicators Task Term (1998). Sustainable Seattle: Indicator of Sustainable Community. A Status Report on Long-term Cultural, Economic and Environmental Health for Seattle/King County. U.S.A: Sustainable Seattle.
44.Tsai, T.H. (2005). Quantifying Urban Form: Compactness versus ‘Sprawl’, Urban Studies, 42(1): 141-161.
45.Turner II, B. L., and Meyer, W. B. (1991). Land Use and Land Cover in Global Environmental Change: Consideration for Study, International Social Science Journal, 130: 669-680.
46.Turner, M. G. (2005). Landscape ecology in North America: past, present and future, Ecology, 86:1967-1974.
47.Turner, M. G. (2005). Landscape ecology: what is the state of the science? Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 36:319-344.
48.Turner, M. G., Arthaud, G. J., Engstrom, R. T., Hejl, S. J., Liu, J., Loeb, S., and Mckelvey, K. (1995). Usefulness of Spatially Explicit Population Models in Land Management, Ecological Applications, 5(1): 12–16.
49.Veldkamp, A., and Fresco, L. O. (1996). CLUE: A Conceptual Model to Study the Conversion of Land Use and Its Effects, Ecological Modeling, 85:253-270.
50.Verburg, P. H. (2006). Simulating feedbacks in land use and land cover change models, Landscape Ecology, 21: 1171–1183.
51.Verburg, P. H., de Nijs, T.C.M., Ritsema van Eck, J.R., Visser, H. and Jong, K.D. (2004a). A method to analyse neighborhood characteristics of land use patterns, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 28: 667-690.
52.Verburg, P. H., Koning, G. H. J. de, Kok, K., Veldkamp, A., and Bouma, J. (1999). A spatial explicit allocation procedure for modelling the pattern of land use change based upon actual land use, Ecological Modeling, 116: 45-61.
53.Verburg, P. H., Ritsema van Eck, J.R., de Nijs, T.C.M., and Dijst, M.J. (2004b). Determinants of land-use change patterns in the Netherlands, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 31: 125-150.
54.Verburg, P. H., Schot, P., Dijst, M., and Veldkamp, A. (2004c). Land use change modelling: current practice and research priorities, GeoJournal, 61: 309–324.
55.Verburg, P. H., Soepboer, W., Veldkamp, A., Limpiada, R., Espaldon, V., and Mastura, S. S. A. (2002). Modeling the spatial dynamics of regional land use: the clue-s model, Environmental Management, 30(3): 391-405.
56.Vitousek, P. M. (1994). Beyond Global Warming: Ecology and Global Change, Ecology, 75: 1861-1876.
57.Wassmer, R.W. (2000). Urban sprawl in a US metropolitan area: ways to measure and a comparison of the Sacramento area to similar metropolitan areas in California and the US. CSUS Public Policy and Administration Working Paper.
58.White, R. (2005). Modelling Multi-scale Processes in a Cellular Automata Framework. In J. Portugali (ed.), Complex Artificial Environments, Springer-Verlag: 165-178.
59.White, R. (2006). Pattern Based Map Comparisons. Journal of Geographical Systems, 8: 145-164.
60.White, R., Engelen, G. and Uljee, I. (2000). Modelling Land Use Change with Linked Cellular Automata and Socio-Economic Models: A Tool for Exploring the Impact of Climate Change on the Island of St. Lucia. In M. Hill and R. Aspinall (eds.), Spatial Information for Land Use Management, Gordon and Breach: 189-204.
61.Wu, J. and Li, H. (2006). Concepts of scale and scaling, in Wu, J., Jones, K.B., Li, H. and Loucks, O. L.(eds.), Scaling and Uncertainty Analysis in Ecology: Methods and Applications, Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
62.Yeh, C.T. and Huang, S.L. (2009). Investigating spatiotemporal patterns of landscape diversity in response to urbanization, landscape and urban planning, 93(3): 51-162.
63.Yue, W., Liu, Y. and Fan, P. (2010). Polycentric urban development: the case of Hangzhou, Environment and Planning A, 42: 563- 577.

 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE