非都市地區高齡者鄰里活動類型、活動空間與鄰里環境供給滿意度之研究：以新北三峽與桃園新屋區為例

A Study into the Outdoor Activity Types and Space and the Satisfaction Level of the Elderly Population in Rural Areas-Case Studies in Sanxia District, New Taipei City and Xinwu District, Taoyuan City

10.6234/JGR.202011_(72).0006

董娟鳴(Chuan-Ming Tung)

非都市地區 ； 高齡者 ； 供給 ； 鄰里環境 ； rural area ； elderly people ； affordance ； neighborhood environment

地理研究

72期（2020 / 11 / 01）

139 - 162

繁體中文

臺灣已進入高齡化社會，高齡者普遍以「在宅老化」作為居住的主流型態，因此社區環境能夠提供高齡者日常生活活動之供給，即成為臺灣面對高齡化社會下重要的議題。相較於都市地區，非都市地區鄰里環境各項公共設施則距離高齡者住家較遠，在設施種類上亦較不足，因此了解非都市地區高齡者在鄰里內的活動類型、活動空間與鄰里環境供給滿意度，為規劃者進行非都市地區友善高齡者鄰里環境改善的重要參考。本研究以桃園市新屋區臨近海邊5個里、新北市三峽區鄰近山區5個里的高齡者為研究對象，透過訪談與問卷調查（N=296），探討非都市地區高齡者在鄰里之活動類型、主要活動空間、高齡者移動性、對主要活動空間供給滿意度及對鄰里環境供給滿意度進行研究。研究結果顯示，非都市地區高齡者在鄰里主要活動範圍在距離住家150公尺範圍內。菜園與社區活動中心為高齡者在鄰里主要活動空間，高齡者在鄰里內活動限制性高，住家菜園是高齡者在鄰里內主要活動之空間。非都市地區高齡者對鄰里供給滿意度平均值為3.81（最高為5分），高齡者對鄰里滿意度較偏向於提供活動與可供休憩遮蔭的空間，對鄰里內提供學習空間與設施滿意度，呈現滿意度較低的結果。高齡者對於社區活動中心的供給滿意度顯著高於住家菜園。非都市地區高齡者對社區活動中心供給滿意度之影響因素，以安全性供給因素、可及性供給因素、及活動機能供給因素為顯著影響因素。至於高齡者對鄰里環境供給滿意度則受「鄰里高齡支持與社會交往供給因素」、「鄰里休憩活動機能供給因素」、「鄰里可及性供給因素」、「鄰里自然景色供給因素」與「鄰里休憩活動機能供給因素」等因素之正向影響。

Taiwan has entered into an aging society where ＂aging in place＂ has become the mainstream lifestyle among the elderly population in Taiwan. Therefore, whether communities can provide an environment for the elderly to carry out daily activities has become an important topic in Taiwan in coming to terms with an aging society. In contrast with the urban areas, public facilities inrural neighborhoods are generally further away from the homes of senior citizens and there is a lack of variety of facilities. As a result, understanding the elderly population's activity types and spaces required, as well as their satisfaction levels about the affordance of the neighborhood environment, can serve as an important reference for planners who need to improve the 'age-friendliness' of the environment in non-urban areas. This research used as its case study the senior citizens who live in the five seaside villages in Xinwu District, Taoyuan City and the five mountainside villages in Sanxia District, New Taipei City and, by way of interviews and questionnaires (N=296), examined data about these senior citizens' activity types, main activity spaces, mobility levels, satisfaction levels about the spaces provided for their main activities and the affordance of the neighborhood environment. According to the results of this research, seniors in non-urban areas participate in activities mainly within 150 meters from their own homes. Their main activities took place in their own vegetable gardens and the community centers. As they faced restrictions in terms of participating in neighborhood activities, the vegetable gardens in their own homes provided the main space for them to take part in such activities. The average satisfaction rate of the seniors in non-urban areas about the affordance of the neighborhood environment was 3.81 (the highest score is 5.00). While the elderly people tended to be more satisfied with the provision of space for activities, resting and sheltering, they were rather dissatisfied about the provision of space for learning and facilities. In addition, communities that offer senior centers for senior citizens to stay active were appealing to the older population with mobility issues. The senior citizens were more satisfied with the affordance of the community centers than that of their own vegetable gardens. The factors that significantly affected the satisfaction level of the older population in non-urban areas regarding the affordance of the community centers included the provision of safety, accessibility and the functionality for carrying out activities. As for their satisfaction about the affordance of the neighborhood environment, factors such as ＂provision of support for seniors and social exchanges＂, ＂provision of functions for leisure activities in the neighborhood＂, ＂provision of accessibility in the neighborhood＂ and ＂provision of natural scenes in the neighborhood＂ had had a positive influence.

1. 黃幹忠, K. C.,夏晧清, H. C.(2013)。台南市老人的居住安排與居住環境之地區性比較—兼論社區老人住宅之接受度。建築與規劃學報，14(2/3)，67-81。
   連結：
2. 趙子元, T. Y.,黃彙雯, H. W.(2016)。高齡友善理念下公共空間規劃設計之初探。建築學報，95(S)，49-70。
   連結：
3. (1997).Toward the Integration of Theory, Methods, Research, and Utilization.Boston:Springer.
4. Alfonzo, M. A.(2005).To walk or not to walk? The hierarchy of walking needs.Environment and behavior,37(6),808-836.
5. Cerin, E.,Conway, T. L.,Saelens, B. E.,Frank, L. D.,Sallis, J. F.(2009).Cross–validation of the factorial structure of the Neighborhood Environment Walkability Scale (NEWS) and its abbreviated form (NEWS–A).International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity,6(1),32.
6. Folts, W. E.(Ed.),Yeatts, D. E.(Ed.)(1994).Housing and the aging population: Options for the new century.New York, NY:Garland Press.
7. Fry, P. S.(Ed.),Keyes, C. L. M.(Ed.)(2010).Frontiers of resilient aging: Life-strengths and wellness in late life.New York, NY:Cambridge University Press.
8. Gibson, J. J.(1986).The ecological approach to visual perception.Hillsdale. New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9. Kerr, J.,Rosenberg, D.,Frank, L.(2012).The role of the built environment in healthy aging: community design, physical activity, and health among older adults.Journal of Planning Literature,27(1),43-60.
10. Kyttä, M.(2002).Affordances of children's environments in the context of cities, small towns, suburbs and rural villages in Finland and Belarus.Journal of environmental psychology,22(1-2),109-123.
11. Kyttä, M.(2004).The extent of children's independent mobility and the number of actualized affordances as criteria for child–friendly environments.Journal of environmental psychology,24(2),179-198.
12. Min, B.,Lee, J.(2006).Children's neighborhood place as a psychological and behavioral domain.Journal of Environmental Psychology,26(1),51-71.
13. Rantakokko, M.,Portegijs, E.,Viljanen, A.,Iwarsson, S.,Rantanen, T.(2013).Life–space mobility and quality of life in community–dwelling older people.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society,61(10),1-16.
14. Rioux, L.,Werner, C.(2011).Residential satisfaction among aging people living in place.Journal of environmental psychology,31(2),158-169.
15. Settersten, R. A., Jr(Ed.)(2018).Invitation to the Life Course – Towards new understandings of later life.New York, NY:Routledge Press.
16. Spinney, J. E.,Scott, D. M.,Newbold, K. B.(2009).Transport mobility benefits and quality of life: A time–use perspective of elderly Canadians.Transport Policy,16(1),1-11.
17. Valdemarsson, M.,Jernryd, E.,Iwarsson, S.(2005).Preferences and frequencies of visits to public facilities in old age – a pilot study in a Swedish town center.Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics,40(1),15-28.
18. Van Cauwenberg, J.,Van Holle, V.,De Bourdeaudhuij, I.,Clarys, P.,Nasar, J.,Salmon, J.,Deforche, B.(2014).Physical environmental factors that invite older adults to walk for transportation.Journal of Environmental Psychology,38,94-103.
19. Van Der Meer, M.,Fortuijn, J. D.,Thissen, F.(2008).Vulnerability and environmental stress of older adults in deprived neighbourhoods in the Netherlands.Tijdschrift Voor Economische Sociale Geografie,99(1),53-64.
20. 任思豪, S. H.(2012)。臺南=Tainan，國立成功大學建築研究所=Department of Architecture, National Cheng Kung University。
21. 李鍾元, C. Y.(1991)。高齡者的休閒活動。健康教育，67，11-13。
22. 柯涵儀, H. Y.(2014)。社區照顧關懷據點實施成效評估─以南部某縣市為例。台灣老年學論壇，22
23. 國發會（2020）。人口推估查詢系統。https://pop–proj.ndc.gov.tw/index.aspx（2020/9/23 瀏覽）【National Development Council (2020). Population projections for the R.O.C (Taiwan). https://pop–proj.ndc.gov.tw/index.aspx (Retrieved September 23, 2020)】
24. 張正中（編）(2012).社區工作理論與實務.臺北:中華文化社.
25. 陳怡璇, Y. S.(2013)。臺北=Taipei，國立臺北科技大學建築與都市設計研究所=Department of Architecture, National Taipei University of Technology。
26. 曾旭正, H. C.(2007).台灣的社區營造.臺北=Taipei:遠足文化=Walkers Books.
27. 葉高華（2012）：《地圖會說話—為什麼沒有一起變老？》。https://mapstalk.blogspot.com/2012/02/blog–post.html（2019/9/23 瀏覽）【Yap, K. H. (2012). Maps can talk–why not grow old together?https://mapstalk.blogspot.com/2012/02/blog–post.html (Retrieved September 23, 2019)】
28. 蔡秋敏, C. M.(2012)。從社會資本觀點論促進家庭中老人參與健康促進活動。家庭教育雙月刊，35，6-23。
29. 蔡淑瑩, S. Y.(2012)。舊社區實現「在地老化」社區公共設施改造行動研究。人文與社會科學簡訊，13(2)，131-140。
30. 蔡淑瑩, S. Y.(2011)。臺灣地區城鄉高齡者對社區公共設施之需求比較分析。2011 國科會高齡社會研究成果發表會，臺北=Taipei:
31. 衛生署（2009）。中華民國 98 年老人狀況調查報告。https://www.mohw.gov.tw/dl–4712–21922681–62f1– 4551–89f1–387cf1e97bcd.html（2019/9/23 瀏覽）【Department of Health (2009). Report of the senior citizen condition survey 2009, Republic of China. https://www.mohw.gov.tw/dl–4712–21922681–62f1–4551–89f1–387cf1e97bcd.html (Retrieved September 23, 2019)】
32. 鄭淑子, S. T.,林如萍, J. P.,高淑貴, S. K.(1999)。農家老人社會網絡關係初探。中華家政學刊，28，93-109。