题名

區段徵收計畫範圍內外農地所有權人對農地價值功能認知之差異比較-以苗栗縣後龍鎮灣寶里為例

并列篇名

Comparing Attitude Towards Farmland Multiple Functions of Between Local Farmer Owing Farmland Property Inside and Outside Zone Expropriation Project Area: A Case Study of Wanbau Community

DOI

10.6677/JTLR.201505_18(1).0003

作者

王玉真(Yu-Jen Wang);李承嘉(Chen-Jai Lee);吳貞儀(Chen-Yi Wu)

关键词

多功能農業 ; 區段徵收 ; 農地多元功能 ; 灣寶社區 ; Multifunctional Agriculture ; Multiple Functions of Farmland ; Wanbau Community ; Zone Expropriation

期刊名称

臺灣土地研究

卷期/出版年月

18卷1期(2015 / 05 / 01)

页次

45 - 81

内容语文

繁體中文

中文摘要

苗栗縣後龍科技園區(位在苗栗縣後龍鎮灣寶里)的區段徵收計畫,因為當地農民極力抗爭反對,最後經內政部區域計畫委員會審議不通過。既有研究多以質化方法得到結果指出,當地農民反對徵收是起於對農地具有多元價值功能的認知。本文則以李克特態度量表,對灣寶里的農民進行問卷調查,並比較徵收區農民(農地位於徵收計畫範圍內之農民)及非徵收區農民(農地不在徵收計畫範圍內之農民),對於農地價值功能認知的差異。調查結果顯示,徵收區農民對農地多元價值功能的認知普遍高於非徵收區的農民。本文認為,這種情況可能是因為要避免農地被徵收,被徵收區的農民吸收了農地多元價值功能的觀點,並做為抗爭徵收的論述基礎所致。

英文摘要

The zone expropriation project of the Houlong Industry Park (HIP) did not bring into effect due to strong protest by local farmers. Many studies conducted by qualitative research methods suggest that local farmers having high awareness of multiple functions of farmland would protest zone expropriation. This paper adopts Likert's scale questionnaires to explore the attitude of farmers living in Wanbau community towards farmland functions. The local farmers were divided into two groups (group 1 and group 2). Group 1 was made up of the local farmers who own or rent farmland inside HIP, and group 2 the local farmer do not own or rent farmland inside HIP. We compared the attitude towards multiple functions between these two groups. The result shows that group 1 has a higher percentage in agreeing with multiple functions of farmland than group 2. This paper suggests a possible reason for this obtained result: group 1 attempt to avoid zone expropriation in the name of multiple functions of farmland and thus they absorb the arguments of multiple functions of farmland.

主题分类 基礎與應用科學 > 永續發展研究
参考文献
  1. 王俊豪、方珍玲、陳美芬(2012)。農地多功能利用指標系統之建構。臺灣土地研究,15(1),31-71。
    連結:
  2. 李承嘉、方怡茹、廖本全、王玉真、藍逸之(2011)。台灣農地功能之研究:一般民眾與農民態度及空間差異的比較。台灣土地研究,13(2),29-67。
    連結:
  3. 孫窮理,2010,要科技園區苗縣政治動作頻頻灣寶農民北上護良田政院仍踢皮球,苦勞網,http://www.coolloud.org.tw/node/52085。[ 最後瀏覽日期:2012/6/16]
  4. Arov uori, K. and J. Kola, 2006, Farmers' choice on multifunctionality targeted policy measures. http://www.tiedekirjasto.helsinki.fi:8080/dspace/bitstream/197/649/1/DP1.pdf [ 最後瀏覽日期:2012/4/10]
  5. 內政部營建署,2011,「苗栗縣後龍科技園區案」內政部區域計畫委員會不同意開發,內政部營建署網站,http://www.cpami.gov.tw/chinese/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=12329&Itemid=54。[ 最後瀏覽日期:2012/6/16]
  6. 苗栗縣政府,2007,後龍科技園區開發計畫可行性規劃報告,苗栗縣政府網站,http://gisapsrv02.cpami.gov.tw/ncland/upfile/515/ 參、民眾申請閱覽.pdf。[ 最後瀏覽日期:2011/5/08]
  7. Griffithm, J. W., 2011, Measuring public preferences for and the economic value of the multifunctionality of agriculture in the United States. Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl%3furl_ver=Z39.88-2004%26res_dat=xri:pqdiss%26rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation%26rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:3460307 [ 最後瀏覽日期:2012/3/18]
  8. van Dijk, T. (2005): Land banking principle - A reconnaissance for conditions and practical constrains for application of the land banking principle in the Netherlands, Wageningen University..
  9. HYYTIÄ, N. and J. Kola, 2005, Citizen's attitudes towards multifunctional agriculture, Dept. Economics and Management, Helsinki Univ. Discussion Paper nº 8. http://www.mm.helsinki.fi/mmtal/abs/DP8.pdf[最後瀏覽日期:2012/4/10]
  10. Estrada, E. M., J. A. G. Limón, F. E. G. Fernández and E. V. Toscano, 2007, Individuals' opinion on agricultural multifunctionality performance, Documentosde trabajo, No.6. http://www.iesaa.csic.es/archivos/documentostrabajo/2005/06-05.pdf [ 最後瀏覽日期:2012/4/10]
  11. Brouwer, F.(ed.)(2004).Sustaining Agriculture and the Rural Environment.Cheltenham:Edward Elgar.
  12. Cloke, P.(ed.),Marsden, T.(ed.),Mooney, P.(ed.)(2006).Handbook of Rural Studies.London:Sage Publications.
  13. Goetz, S. J.(ed.),Shortle, J. S.(ed.)Bergstrom, J. C.(ed.)(2005).Land Use Problems and Conflicts: Causes, Consequence and Solutions.London:Routledge.
  14. Hall, C.,MvVittie, A.,Moran, D.(2004).What does the public want from agriculture and the countryside? A review of evidence and methods.Journal of Rural Studies,20,211-222.
  15. Ilbery, B.(ed.)(1998).The Geography of Rural Change.London:Longman.
  16. Ives, C. D.,Kendal, D.(2013).Value and attitude of the urban public towards periurban agricultural land.Land Use Policy,34,80-90.
  17. Mander, Ü.(ed.),Wiggering, H.(ed.),Helming, K.(ed.)(2007).Multifunctional Land Use: Meeting Future Demands for Landscape Goods and Services.Berlin:Springer.
  18. OECD(2001).Multifunctionality: towards an analytical framework- summary and conclusions.
  19. Phillips, M.(1998).The restructuring of social imaginations in rural geography.Journal of Rural Studies,14(2),121-153.
  20. Potter, C.,Tilzey, M.(2005).Agricultural policy discourses in the European post-Fordist transition: neoliberalism, neomercantilism and multifunctionality.Progress in Human Geography,29(5),581-600.
  21. Reason, P.(ed.),Bradbury, H.(ed.)(2001).Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice.London:Sage Publication.
  22. Renting, H.,Rossing, W. A. H.,Groot, J. C. J.,van der Ploeg, J. D.,Laurent, C.,Perraud, D.,Stobbelaar, D. J.,van Ittersum, M. K.(2009).Expolring multifunctional agriculture: a review of conceptual approaches and Prospects for an integrative transitional framework.Journal of Environmental Management
  23. van Huylenbroeck, G.(ed.),Durand, G.(ed.)(2003).Multifunctional Agriculture: A New Paradigm for European Agriculture and Rural Development.Hampshire:Ashgate.
  24. van Huylenbroeck, G.,Vandermeulen, V.,Mettepenningen, E.,Verspecht, E.(2007).Multifunctionality of agriculture: a review of definitions, evidence and instruments.Living Reviews in Landscape Research,1,3.
  25. Wilson, G. A.(2010).Multifunctional 'quality' and rural community resilience.Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers,35,364-381.
  26. Wilson, G. A.(2009).The spatiality of multifunctional agriculture: a human geography perspective.Geoforum,40,269-280.
  27. Yrjölä, T.,Kola, J.(2004).Consumer preferences regarding multifunctional agriculture.International Food and Agribusiness Management Review,7(1),78-90.
  28. Zasada, I.(2011).Multifunctional peri-urban agriculture - A review of societal demands and the provision of goods and services by farming.Land Use Policy,28,639-648.
  29. 王俊豪。農地多功能利用範疇及界定指標之探討。農地資源與利用政策研討會─農業多功能利用政策與規劃研討會論文集
  30. 作山巧(2006)。農業の多面的機能を巡る国際交涉。東京:筑波書房。
  31. 吳明隆(2007)。SPSS 統計應用學習實務:問卷分析與應用統計。臺北市:知城數位科技。
  32. 吳貞儀(2011)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立政治大學地政學系。
  33. 李宜璇(2011)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立臺北大學都市計劃研究所。
  34. 李承嘉(2012)。農地與農村發展政策—新農業體制下的轉向。臺北市:五南圖書股份有限公司。
  35. 邱皓政(2005)。量化研究法(二)統計原理與分析技術。臺北市:雙葉書廊有限公司。
  36. 酒井隆(2004)。問卷設計、市場調查與統計分析實務入門。臺北縣:博誌文化。
  37. 陳順宇(2000)。多變量分析。台北:華泰書局。
  38. 黃瑞祺(2001)。現代與後現代。臺北市:巨流圖書公司。
  39. 楊國樞編、文崇一編、吳聰賢編、李亦園編(1982)。社會及行為科學研究方法。臺北市:東華書局。
  40. 葉菁凰(2012)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立臺北大學都市計劃研究所。
  41. 廖安定(2001)。農業政策與農業法規。農政與農情,103
  42. 劉奇(2007)。21 世紀農業的新使命─多功能農業。合肥:安徽人民出版社。
  43. 蕭景楷、黃錦堂(2003)。農業多功能性的意義和價值。博學,1,131-141。
  44. 賴思妤(2011)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立臺北大學不動產與城鄉環境學系。
被引用次数
  1. 林文苑(2022)。宜蘭縣農地土地利用變遷分析之研究-以溪北地區為例。建築與規劃學報,21(1&2),1-19。
  2. 謝宗恒(2019)。新北市城鄉邊緣地帶之農耕體驗價值:兼論價值對地方情感與親環境行為影響。戶外遊憩研究,32(2),1-37。