綠基盤因應氣候變遷之綜效、權衡與共效益初探：以臺北都會區為例

Synergy, trade-offs and co-benefits of green infrastructure in response to climate change: A case study of the Taipei Metropolitan Area

10.6128/CP.202306_50(2).0003

李盈潔(Ying-Chieh Lee)；蔡雅妃(Ya-Fei Tsai)

綠基盤 ； 氣候變遷 ； 綜效 ； 權衡 ； 共效益 ； 生態系統服務 ； Green Infrastructure ； Climate Change ； Synergy ； Trade-offs ； Co-benefit ； Ecosystem Services

都市與計劃

50卷2期（2023 / 06 / 30）

195 - 218

繁體中文;英文

都市地區具有高度人口與經濟活動集中的特性，故受到氣候變遷與極端氣候衝擊所帶來的災損風險相對較高，都市綠基盤能提供多種生態系統服務，除了能因應氣候變遷的減緩與調適之外，亦能帶來許多氣候變遷目標以外的共效益。本研究首先回顧綜效、權衡與共效益過去在綠基盤相關研究中的概念類型。其次，盤點臺北都會區綠基盤從1981年至2015年間的變遷情形，並針對都市發展密集的核心區域進行降尺度分析；最後，藉由專家問卷界定出臺北都會區綠基盤所能提供的較為重要之調節氣候變遷主效益、共效益，並進一步將主效益與共效益皆視為綠基盤提供之生態系統服務下，分析這些生態系統服務間的綜效、權衡關係。研究發現，在外圍林地規模維持得宜下，綠基盤佔臺北都會區整體面積比例由81.12%小幅流失至78.22%，但在都市化程度較高的臺北都會區核心區域，綠基盤流失幅度超過一成，農地轉用建地是綠基盤流失最主要的類型。在透過專家問卷調查後，發現「透過植物截留與透水鋪面入滲，減少地表逕流」是綠基盤在臺北都會區最重要的調節氣候變遷主效益，而綠基盤對文化服務產生的共效益程度相較於其他三種生態系統服務類別而言是較高的。若將主效益與共效益皆視為綠基盤提供之生態系統服務時，綠基盤之生態系統服務間的綜效效果遠多過權衡關係，其中「透過植物截留與透水鋪面入滲，減少地表逕流」（同時也是專家學者認定最重要之氣候變遷主效益），對「本土物種棲地提供」、「景觀美質與居住品質」等生態系統服務項目皆產生綜效。對都市層級政府而言，在推行氣候政策時若能強調市民日常生活有感的共效益，則其政策的實施就會較容易爭取到民眾支持與配合，且除了達成氣候變遷減緩與調適外，也能夠同時促成都市對於其他目標的達成。

Urban areas are at particularly high risk from the impacts of climate change and extreme weather events due to the spatial concentration of people and economic activities. To understand better the climate benefits and co-benefits provided by green infrastructure in response to climate change in the Taipei Metropolitan Area, this study reviews the concepts of synergy, trade-offs and co-benefits in the literature related to green infrastructure, and also collects and organizes the existing research on the climate benefits of green infrastructure in Taiwan. The changes in green infrastructure from 1981 to 2015 are analyzed. An expert questionnaire is adopted to identify the synergies, trade-offs and co-benefits of the Taipei Metropolitan Area's green infrastructure in response to climate change. Analytical results show hat green infrastructure covered around 81.12% of the territory of the Taipei Metropolitan Area in 1981 and has since slightly decreased to a coverage of 78.22% in 2015. However, the total area of green infrastructure decreased by more than 10% in the highly urbanized core areas within the Taipei Metropolitan Area. The questionnaire results indicate that "runoff reduction due to interception and infiltration effects" is the most important benefit arising from the regulation of climate change through the installation of green infrastructure in the Taipei Metropolitan Area. The co-benefits of green infrastructure in addressing climate change given the effects on cultural services are greater than other categories of ecosystem services. Besides "runoff reduction due to interception and infiltration effects", the main additional climate benefits provided by green infrastructure in the Taipei Metropolitan Area are synergy effects, which "provide habitat for native species" and enhance "aesthetics and quality of life." The research suggests that governments should emphasize the co-benefits of those climate actions and make them evident in the daily lives of citizens to increase support for government action on climate change, thus enabling governments to perform climate mitigation and adaptation agendas while achieving other significant objectives.

1. 石婉瑜,Mabon, L.(2018)。臺北盆地的熱環境特徵與都市綠色基盤的影響。都市與計劃，45(4)，283-300。
   連結：
2. 林蕙萱,錢玉蘭,林幸助(2019)。臺灣西部海岸濕地碳儲存效益。農業經濟叢刊，25(1)，1-26。
   連結：
3. 孫振義,林憲德,呂罡銘,劉正千,陳瑞鈴(2010)。台南市地表溫度與地表覆蓋關係之研究。都市與計劃，37(3)，369-391。
   連結：
4. Ahern, J.(2013).Urban landscape sustainability and resilience: the promise and challenges of integrating ecology with urban planning and design.Landscape Ecology,28(6),1203-1212.
5. Ahern, J.(2007).Green infrastructure for cities: the spatial dimension.Cities of the Future: Towards Integrated Sustainable Water and Landscape Management,London:
6. Andersson, E.,Barthel, S.,Borgström, S.,Colding, J.,Elmqvist, T.,Folke, C.,Gren, Å.(2014).Reconnecting Cities to the Biosphere: Stewardship of Green Infrastructure and Urban Ecosystem Services.AMBIO,43(4),445-453.
7. Benedict, M. A.,McMahon, E.(2006).Green infrastructure: Linking landscapes and communities.Washington, DC:Island Press.
8. Camps-Calvet, M.,Langemeyer, J.,Calvet-Mir, L.,Gómez-Baggethun, E.(2016).Ecosystem services provided by urban gardens in Barcelona, Spain: insights for policy and planning.Environmental Science and Policy,62,14-23.
9. Chang, C. R.,Li, M. H.(2014).Effects of urban parks on the local urban thermal environment.Urban Forestry and Urban Greening,13(4),672-681.
10. Chang, C. R.,Li, M. H.,Chang, S. D.(2007).A preliminary study on the local cool-island intensity of Taipei city parks.Landscape and Urban Planning,80(4),386-395.
11. Chenoweth, J.,Anderson, A. R.,Kumar, P.,Hunt, W. F.,Chimbwandira, S. J.,Moore, T. L.(2018).The interrelationship of green infrastructure and natural capital.Land Use Policy,75,137-144.
12. Chiu, H. W.,Lee, Y. C.,Huang, S. L.,Hsieh, Y. C.(2019).How does peri-urbanization teleconnect remote areas? An emergy approach.Ecological Modelling,403,57-69.
13. Coutts, C.,Hahn, M.(2015).Green Infrastructure, Ecosystem Services, and Human Health.Environmental Research and Public Health,12(8),9768-9798.
14. Daily, G. C.(2013).Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems (1997).The Future of Nature,USA:
15. Daily, G. C.(ed.)(1997).Nature’s Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems.Washington, DC:Island Press.
16. Daniel, T. C,Muhar, A.,Arnberger, A.,Aznar, O.,Boyd, J. W.,Chan, K. M. A.,Costanza, R.,Elmqvist, T.,Flint, C. G.,Gobster, P. H.,Grêt-Regamey, A.,Lave, R.,Muhar, S.,Penker, M.,Ribe, R. G.,Schauppenlehner, T.,Sikor, T.,Soloviy, I.,Spierenburg, M.,Taczanowska, K.,Tam, J.,von der Dunk, A.(2012).Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,109(23),8812-8819.
17. Demuzere, M.,Orru, K.,Heidrich, O.,Olazabal, E.,Geneletti, D.,Orru, H.,Bhave, A. G.,Mittal, N.,Feliu, E.,Faehnle, M.(2014).Mitigating and adapting to climate change: Multi-functional and multi-scale assessment of green urban infrastructure.Environmental Management,146,107-115.
18. Elmqvist, T.,Setälä, H.,Handel, S. N.,Van Der Ploeg, S.,Aronson, J.,Blignaut, J. N.,Gómez-Baggethun, E.,Nowak, D.J.,Kronenberg, J.,De Groot, R.(2015).Benefits of restoring ecosystem services in urban areas.Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability,14,101-108.
19. European Commission(2011).European Commission (2011). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Green Infrastructure (GI)-Enhancing Europe's Natural Capital, COM (2013) 249 Final. Brussels: European Commission..
20. Fu, J. C.,Jang, J. H.,Huang, C. M.,Lin, W. Y.,Yeh, C. C.(2018).Cross-analysis of land and runoff variations in response to urbanization on basin, watershed, and city scales with/without green infrastructures.Water,10(2),106.
21. Gaglio, M.,Aschonitis, V.,Pieretti, L.,Santos, L.,Gissi, E.,Castaldelli, G.,Fano, E. A.(2019).Modelling past, present and future Ecosystem Services supply in a protected floodplain under land use and climate changes.Ecological Modelling,403,23-34.
22. Gill, S. E.,Handley, J. F.,Ennos, A. R.,Pauleit, S.(2007).Adapting cities for climate change: the role of the green infrastructure.Built Environment,33(1),115-133.
23. Girma, Y.,Terefe, H.,Pauleit, S.,Kindu, M.(2019).Urban green infrastructure planning in Ethiopia: The case of emerging towns of Oromia special zone surrounding Finfinne.Journal of Urban Management,8(1),75-88.
24. Haase, D.,Larondelle, N.,Andersson, E.,Artmann, M.,Borgström, S.,Breuste, J.,Gomez-Baggethun, E.,Gren, Å.,Hamstead, Z.,Hansen, R.,Kabisch, N.,Kremer, P.,Langemeyer, J.,Rall, E. L.,McPhearson, T.,Pauleit, S.,Qureshi, S.,Schwarz, N.,Voigt, A.,Wurster, D.,Elmqvist, T.(2014).A quantitative review of urban ecosystem service assessments: concepts, models, and implementation.Ambio,43(4),413-433.
25. Haase, D.,Schwarz, N.,Strohbach, M.,Kroll, F.,Seppelt, R.(2012).Synergies, trade-offs, and losses of ecosystem services in urban regions: an integrated multiscale framework applied to the Leipzig-Halle Region, Germany.Ecology and Society,17(3)
26. Hopkins, K. G.,Grimm, N. B.,York, A. M.(2018).Influence of governance structure on green stormwater infrastructure investment.Environmental Science and Policy,84,124-133.
27. Huang, J. M.,Chen, L. C.(2020).A numerical study on Mitigation strategies of urban heat islands in a tropic megacity: A case study in Kaohsiung City, Taiwan.Sustainability,12(10),3952.
28. IPCC(2007).Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.UK:IPCC.
29. IPCC(2001).Climate Change 2001: Mitigation, Contribution of Working Group III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.Cambridge, UK:IPCC.
30. IPCC(2007).Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.UK:IPCC.
31. IPCC(2014).Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.Switzerland:IPCC.
32. Irwin, N. B.,Klaiber, H. A.,Irwin, E. G.(2017).Do Stormwater Basins Generate Co-benefits? Evidence from Baltimore County, Maryland.Ecological Economics,141,202-212.
33. Kabisch, N.,Frantzeskaki, N.,Pauleit, S.,Naumann, S.,Davis, M.,Artmann, M.,Haase, D.,Knapp, S.,Korn, H.,Stadler, J.,Zaunberger, K.,Bonn, A.(2016).Nature-based solutions to climate change Mitigation and Adaptation in urban areas: perspectives on indicators, knowledge gaps, barriers, and opportunities for action.Ecology and Society,21(2),39.
34. Keeley, M.,Koburger, A.,Dolowitz, D. P.,Medearis, D.,Nickel, D.,Shuster, W.(2013).Perspectives on the use of green infrastructure for stormwater management in Cleveland and Milwaukee.Environmental Management,51(6),1093-1108.
35. Krasny, M. E.,Tidball, K. G.(2009).Community gardens as contexts for science, stewardship, and civic action learning.Cities and the Environment,2(1),8.
36. Lake, O.,Solutions, G.,Barrels, R.,Gardens, R.,Planting, T.,Roofs, G.(2012).Banking on Green-A Look at How Green Infrastructure Can Save Municipalities Money and Provide Economic Benefits Community-wide.American:American Rivers.
37. Larondelle, N.,Haase, D.(2013).Urban ecosystem services assessment along a rural-urban gradient: a cross-analysis of European cities.Ecological Indicators,29,179-190.
38. Lee, T.,Van de Meene, S.(2013).Comparative studies of urban climate Co-benefits in Asian cities: an analysis of relationships between CO2 emissions and environmental indicators.Journal of Cleaner Production,58,15-24.
39. Lin, B. S.,Lin, C. T.(2016).Preliminary study of the influence of the spatial arrangement of urban parks on local temperature reduction.Urban Forestry and Urban Greening,20,348-357.
40. Maes, M. J.,Jones, K. E.,Toledano, M. B.,Milligan, B.(2019).Mapping synergies and trade-offs between urban ecosystems and the sustainable development goals.Environmental Science and Policy,93,181-188.
41. Mansor, M.(2010).Biophilia: Residents’ Connection with Green Infrastructure in a Town.Journal of Architecture, Planning and Construction Management,1(1)
42. McPhearson, T.,Andersson, E.,Elmqvist, T.,Frantzeskaki, N.(2015).Resilience of and through urban ecosystem services.Ecosystem Services,12,152-156.
43. Meerow, S.,Newell, J. P.(2017).Spatial planning for multifunctional green infrastructure: Growing resilience in Detroit.Landscape and Urban Planning,159,62-75.
44. Mekala, G. D.,Jones, R. N.,MacDonald, D. H.(2015).Valuing the benefits of creek rehabilitation: Building a business case for public investments in urban green infrastructure.Environmental Management,55(6),1354-1365.
45. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment(2005).Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis.Washington, DC:World Resources Institute.
46. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment(2005).Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis.Washington, DC:Island Press.
47. Morita, K.,Matsumoto, K.(2018).Synergies among climate change and biodiversity conservation measures and policies in the forest sector: A case study of Southeast Asian countries.Forest Policy and Economics,87,59-69.
48. Pulighe, G.,Fava, F.,Lupia, F.(2016).Insights and opportunities from mapping ecosystem services of urban green spaces and potentials in planning.Ecosystem Services,22,1-10.
49. Qiao, X.,Gu, Y.,Zou, C.,Xu, D.,Wang, L.,Ye, X.,Huang, X.(2019).Temporal variation and spatial scale dependency of the trade-offs and synergies among multiple ecosystem services in the Taihu Lake Basin of China.Science of The Total Environment,651,218-229.
50. Rall, E.,Hansen, R.,Pauleit, S.(2019).The added value of public participation GIS (PPGIS) for urban green infrastructure planning.Urban Forestry and Urban Greening,40,264-274.
51. Sanon, S.,Hein, T.,Douven, W.,Winkler, P.(2012).Quantifying ecosystem service trade-offs: The case of an urban floodplain in Vienna, Austria.Journal of Environmental Management,111,159-172.
52. Shih, W. Y.(2017).Greenspace patterns and the Mitigation of land surface temperature in Taipei metropolis.Habitat International,60,69-80.
53. Shih, W. Y.(2017).The cooling effect of green infrastructure on surrounding built environments in a sub-tropical climate: a case study in Taipei metropolis.Landscape Research,42(5),558-573.
54. Shoemaker, D. A.,BenDor, T. K.,Meentemeyer, R. K.(2019).Anticipating trade-offs between urban patterns and ecosystem service production: Scenario analyses of sprawl alternatives for a rapidly urbanizing region.Computers, Environment and Urban Systems,74,114-125.
55. Shrestha, S.,Dhakal, S.(2019).An assessment of potential synergies and trade-offs between climate Mitigation and Adaptation policies of Nepal.Journal of Environmental Management,235,535-545.
56. Tzoulas, K.,Korpela, K.,Venn, S.,Yli-Pelkonen, V.,Ka ́zmierczak, A.,Niemela, J.,James, P.(2007).Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using Green Infrastructure: A literature review.Landscape and Urban Planning,81(3),167-178.
57. 行政院科技部(2017).臺灣氣候變遷科學報告 2017―衝擊與調適面向.臺北:國家災害防救科技中心.
58. 李宣德,馮豐隆(2008)。森林碳吸存資源調查推估模式系統―以臺灣樟樹為例。臺灣林業科學，23(1)，11-22。
59. 臺北市政府都市發展局(2010)。臺北市政府都市發展局（2010），「臺北都會區綠色基盤綱要計畫」，臺北市：臺北市政府。