臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：坡地災害社會脆弱度指標評估與應用
書刊名：都市與計劃
作者：李欣輯／楊惠萱
作者(外文)：Li, Hsin-chi／Yang, Hui-hsuan
出版日期：2012
卷期：39:4
頁次：頁375-406
主題關鍵詞：社會脆弱度；坡地災害；地理資訊系統；帕累托等級分析法；Social vulnerability；Landslide disasters；GIS；Pareto ranking
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(9) 博士論文(3) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:9
  • 共同引用共同引用:147
  • 點閱點閱:120
921地震之後，坡地災害發生之次數明顯的增加，使得坡地住民的受災風險因而提升。這十年來政府雖積極進行許多整治工作，但由於氣候變異影響逐漸顯著，使得短延時且強降雨的致災事件增多，例如：2009年的莫拉克颱風夾帶超過兩百年頻率的超大豪雨，釀成全台共 1690處的坡地災害、130處道路中斷、196座橋梁損毀以及 699人死亡等嚴重災情。過去依據物理脆弱度因子 (有效集水面積、岩體之破碎程度、通過之斷層長度、崩塌面積等 )來進行的預警工作，雖可針對山坡地的自然環境進行監控，但若要改善坡地災害造成的損失與傷亡，亦不可忽略對山坡地社會脆弱因素的探討與分析，才能理解社會系統面對自然災害時的抵抗能力，藉以有效降低災害衝擊。本文將坡地災害之社會脆弱度因素分類為四個取向，包括： (1)可能的最大損失 (保全人數、結構物損失、家俱家電、交通工具的損失 )，(2)環境建設(土地使用、道路交通 )，(3)自保能力 (依賴人口、警消人力、避難所與受災次數等 )，(4)復原與適應能力。同時為了使研究成果得以落實於現今防災工作，本文使用帕累托等級分析法 (Pareto ranking)，建立分項及綜合之評估指標。最後，透過 GIS圖層的繪製，空間化不同地區之社會脆弱度，使之易於結合坡地災害之區域分布特性。指標評估結果發現，屏東縣、台東縣內高脆弱鄉鎮最多，依比例來說，嘉義市與桃園縣內的高脆弱鄉鎮市區比例最高，這四個縣市是坡地災害衝擊下，高社會脆弱度區，此外，若套疊坡地歷史災點更可發現，南投縣信義、水里、埔里鄉，新竹縣尖石鄉、苗栗縣泰安鄉等，是坡地災害的高風險地區。藉由指標的評估結果有助於災害防救單位進行適切的災前減災規畫、災時應變評估與災後復原策略擬訂等防災工作。
This study constructs a framework of social vulnerability index of slope-land disasters, and assesses the idea of social vulnerability by analyzing a group of factors classified by the framework of SVIoL. The number of landslide disasters increased significantly after the Chi-chi earthquake, putting residents of mountain areas at higher risk of debris flow or landslide. The government has revised numerous engineering design over the past decade to reduce the risk of slope-land disasters. However, weather events still cause enormous damage. For example, Typhoon Morakot caused the heavy rainfall breaking the historical records, and resulted in 1,690 landslide/debris flow events, 130 broken roads, 196 damaged bridges and 699 deaths. This disaster revealed that disaster management needs go beyond merely evaluating physical vulnerability or building engineering facilities, and that social vulnerability index assessment is a potential means of improving disaster management and catastrophe resistance. The framework of SVI has four important aspects attributed by previous studies: 1) maximum loss of household property, 2) environmental engineering, 3) resistance to slope-land disasters, and 4) self-recovery ability. Pareto ranking (PR) analysis was applied to integrate the four aspects, and to rank the intensity of SV scores of each town, where higher ranks indicated greater vulnerability. Pingtung and Taitung counties have the highest number of towns assigned to the highest rank, while Chiayi City and Taoyuan County have the highest percentage of towns with the highest PR. Furthermore, after overlapping the historical landslide hotspots with the SVI layer, the most risky places are Shueili, Shini and Puli in Nantou County, Jianshi in Hsinchu County, and Taian in Miaoli County. SVIoL can help not just local governments but also central government understanding the disaster vulnerability of different places, and adjust their disaster prevention, response and recovery strategies accordingly.
Other
1.Varnes, D. J.(1978)。Slope movement types and processes。  new window
期刊論文
1.Koukis, G.、Ziourkas, C.(1991)。Slope Instability Phenomena in Greece: A Statistical Analysis。Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment，43，47-60。  new window
2.Liu, Ko-Fei、Li, Hsin-Chi、Hsu, Yu-Cham(2009)。Debris flow hazard assessment with numerical simulation。Natural Hazards，49(1)，137-161。  new window
3.吳杰穎、江宜錦(200803)。臺灣天然災害統計指標體系建構與分析。地理學報，51，65-84。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.吳杰穎、黃昱翔(20110600)。颱洪災害脆弱度評估指標之建立：以南投縣水里鄉為例。都市與計劃，38(2)，195-218。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.葉淑娟、施智婷、莊智薰、蔡淑鳳(20040600)。社會支持系統與老人生活滿意度之關係--以高雄市老人為例。中山管理評論，12(2)，399-427。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.劉雅貞、陳紫娥(20080600)。從災害識覺觀點看花蓮縣土石流保全住戶之疏散配合意願。中華水土保持學報，39(2)，125-139。  延伸查詢new window
7.Clark, G. E.(1998)。Assessing the vulnerability of coastal communities to extreme storms: the case of Revere。Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change，3(1)，59-82。  new window
8.Cutter, S. L.(1996)。Vulnerability to Environmental Hazards。Progress in Human Geography，20(4)，529-539。  new window
9.呂寶靜(20001200)。老人朋友網絡支持功能之初探。社會政策與社會工作學刊，4(2)，43-90。new window  延伸查詢new window
10.林萬億(20021200)。災難救援與社會工作--以臺北縣921地震災難社會服務為例。臺大社會工作學刊，7，127+129-202。new window  延伸查詢new window
11.林冠慧(20040900)。全球變遷下脆弱性與適應性研究方法與方法論的探討。全球變遷通訊雜誌，43，33-38。  延伸查詢new window
12.洪維勵、李宛樺(20070600)。災難風險知覺與回應行為之研究--以谷關地區旅館業為例。環境與管理研究，8(1)，16-42。new window  延伸查詢new window
13.Weinstein, Neil D.、Lyon, Judith E.、Rothman, Alexander J.、Cuite, Cara L.(2000)。Changes in perceived vulnerability following natural disaster。Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology，19(3)，372-395。  new window
14.吳杰穎(2009)。不同土石流潛勢區居民疏散避難決策與行為之比較。坡地防災學報，8(1)，1-14。  延伸查詢new window
研究報告
1.行政院農委會(2005)。土石流災害防救業務計畫。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Dwyer, A.、Zoppou C.、Nielsen, O.、Day, S.、Roberts, S.(2004)。Quantifying Social Vulnerability: A Methodology for Identifying those at Risk to Natural Hazards。Australia：commonwealth of Australia。  new window
2.吳杰穎、邵珮君、林文苑、柯于璋、洪鴻智、陳天健、陳亮全、黃智彥、詹士樑、薩支平(2007)。災害管理學辭典。臺北：五南出版社。  延伸查詢new window
3.Schneiderbauer, S.、Ehrlich, D.(2004)。Risk, Hazard and People’s Vulnerability to Natural Hazards: A Review of Difinations, Concepts and Data。  new window
其他
1.行政院農業委員會(2010)。防災訓練保全村，平安重建新家園--南投水里新山村林美玲村長。  延伸查詢new window
2.吳輝龍(2002)。山坡地管理與水土保持。  延伸查詢new window
3.巫孟珊、蘇淑娟(2003)。集集地震後埔里地區居民的空間調適行為。  延伸查詢new window
4.花蓮縣政府(2010)。花蓮縣災害防救深耕計畫細部執行計畫。  延伸查詢new window
5.柯孝勳、許俊文、蔣得心(2009)。地方政府「地區災害防救計畫」之強化機制探討。  延伸查詢new window
6.陳志嘉(2007)。台灣在全球環境變遷下的脆弱性研究與發展。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.陳亮全(2009)。各層級國土空間規劃與管理之脆弱度與回復力之評估研究-以社區空間為對象。  延伸查詢new window
8.陳亮全、吳杰穎、劉怡君、李宜樺(2007)。土石流潛勢區內居民疏散避難行為與決策之研究--以泰利颱風為例。  延伸查詢new window
9.陳建男、葉一隆(2010)。山地部落坡地災害復原評估。  延伸查詢new window
10.陳樹群、王俞婷、吳亭燁(2005)。坡地災害高風險縣市之坡地村里耐災程度評估。  延伸查詢new window
11.陳樹群、吳俊毅、黃柏璁、陳振宇、林裕益(2009)。工程與非工程方法之土石流災害風險管理--以松鶴地區為例。  延伸查詢new window
12.黃秀政(2005)。九二一震災災後重建實錄。  延伸查詢new window
13.蕭景楷，黃錦煌，李俊鴻(2005)。土石流災害認知及偏好分析--多重屬性效用理論之應用。  延伸查詢new window
14.Adger, W. N., Brooks, N., Graham, B., Agnew, M., and Eriksen, S.(2004)。New Indicators of Vulnerability and Adaptive Capacity。  new window
15.Anderson, M., Holcombe, L., and Williams, D.(2007)。Reducing landslide risk in areas of unplanned housing in the caribbean: A government community partnership model。  new window
16.Burke, T. J., Sattler, D. N., and Terich, T.(2002)。The socioeconomic effects of a landslide in Western Washington。  new window
17.Cardona, O. D.(2003)。The Need for Rethinking the Concepts of Vulnerability and Risk from a Holistic Perspective: A necessary Review and Criticism for Effective Risk Management。  new window
18.Chambers, R.(2006)。Vunerability, coping and policy。  new window
19.Cutter, S. L., Mitchell, J. T., and Scott, M. S.(2000)。Revealing the vulnerability of people and places: A case study of Georgetown County。  new window
20.Dai, F. C., Lee, C. F., and Ngai, Y. Y.(2002)。Landslide risk assessment and management: An overview。  new window
21.Hurlbert, J. S., Haines, V. A., and Beggs, J. J.(2000)。Core networks and tie activation: What kinds of routine networks allocate resources in nonroutine situations?。  new window
22.Munasinghe, M.(2007)。The importance of social capital: Comparing the impacts of the 2004 Asian Tsunami on Sri Lanka, and Hurricane Katrina 2005 on New Orleans。  new window
23.O'Hare, G. and Rivas, S.(2005)。The landslide hazard and human vulnerability in La Paz City。  new window
24.Rygel, L., O'Sullivan, D., and Yarnal, B.(2006)。A method for constructing a social vulnerability index。  new window
25.Tunstall, S., Tapsell, S., and Fernandez-Bilbao, A.(2007)。Vulnerability and Flooding: A Reanalysis of FHRC Data Report。  new window
26.Yang, H. H. and Li, H. C.(2010)。Analyzing social vulnerability factors of flood disaster in Taiwan。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：337（臺灣：335，外國：2） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1885225 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67696536
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上