民眾對社會住宅弱勢保障比率態度之影響因素分析

An Analysis of the Factors Impacting Public Attitudes Toward the Ratio Reserved for the Disadvantaged in Social Housing

陳冠儒(Kuan-ju Chen)

社會住宅 ； 社會住宅態度 ； 混居 ； NIMBY ； Social housing ； attitude towards social housing ； mixed living ； NIMBY

住宅學報

30卷1期（2021 / 06 / 01）

1 - 26

繁體中文

社會住宅經常面臨不要在我家後院（not in my back yard, NIMBY）的問題，並遭到當地社區反對。考量上述爭議，本研究利用2015年住宅狀況抽樣調查的14,275筆樣本進行次序邏輯斯迴歸分析。實證結果發現，擁有自用住宅、教育程度較高、年紀較長數對社會住宅弱勢保障比率有顯著負向影響，無自有住宅家戶、家中有身心障礙者則較支持提高社會住宅弱勢保障比率。其次，家戶5年內有搬遷、民眾贊成興建及有意願申請社會住宅時對社會住宅弱勢保障比率亦有顯著正向影響。第三，附近環境美化與管理維護滿意度對於提高社會住宅弱勢保障比率亦有顯著正向影響，但鄰里環境中不同類型設施對弱勢保障比率會有不同的影響效果。最後，都市化程度較高的城市，民眾較支持提高社會住宅弱勢保障比率，但位於都會區周邊城市居民對提高社會住宅弱勢保障比率的支持度較低，顯示民眾對社會住宅弱勢保障比率態度存在明顯地區差異。

Social housing is often opposed by local communities due to the NIMBY (not in my back yard) issue. This study utilizes the 14,275 sets of data in the 2015 Report on the Housing Status Survey in order to perform an ordered regression analysis. The empirical results firstly indicate that variables such as home ownership, higher levels of education, and old age have a more significant negative influence on attitudes toward the ratio reserved for the disadvantaged in social housing. However, renters and families with disabilities are more supportive of increasing the ratio reserved for the disadvantaged in social housing. Secondly, when there are families that have moved within the past 5 years and the general public is willing to approve and register for social housing, there is a high level of approval for the ratio reserved for the disadvantaged in social housing. Third, the satisfaction level of the public towards their neighborhood environment has a significant positive effect on the ratio reserved for the disadvantaged in social housing, but the effects of the different facilities vary. Finally, citizens in cities with a higher degree of urbanization are more likely to approve of the ratio reserved for the disadvantaged in social housing. However, citizens located in the peripheral areas of cities are less supportive. The results of the study show that there is a geographical difference in the public's attitude towards mixed-living social housing.

1. Forrest、 R.,黎德星, T. H.(2012)。社會住宅：過去、現在和未來。住宅學報，21(2)，91-99。
   連結：
2. 林偉如, H. J.(2017)。社會福利設施之鄰避紛爭處理方法—兼介紹日本鄰避設施之居民合意形成程序。法令月刊，68(2)，90-115。
   連結：
3. 陳金田, J. T.(2016)。從共用資源治理觀點探討臺北市公共住宅政策。土地問題研究季刊，15(3)，74-87。
   連結：
4. 黃怡潔,江穎慧, Y. H.,張金鶚, C. O.(2017)。臺北市公共住宅對周圍住宅價格之影響。都市與計劃，44(3)，277-302。
   連結：
5. Alnsour J. A.,Hyasat, A. S.(2016).Residential Satisfaction with Low Income Housing in Jordan: Salt City as a Case Study.Journal of Economic Sciences.,3(1),31-44.
6. Barrett, E. J.(2003).The Needs of Elders in Public Housing: Policy Considerations in the Era of Mixed-Income Redevelopment.Journal of Aging & Social Policy,25,218-233.
7. Byrne, M.,Norris, M.(2017).Procyclical Social Housing and the Crisis of Irish Housing Policy: Marketization, Social Housing, and the Property Boom and Bust.Housing Policy Debate,28(1),50-63.
8. Currie, J.,Yelowitz, A.(2000).Are Public Housing Projects Good for Kids.Journal of Public Economics,75(1),99-124.
9. Fitzpatrick, S.,Watts, B.(2017).Competing Visions: Security of Tenure and the Welfarisation of English Social Housing.Housing Studies,32(8),1021-1038.
10. Forte, F.,Russo, Y.(2017).Evaluation of User Satisfaction in Public Residential Housing - A Case Study in the Outskirts of Naples, Italy.IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering,245(1),1-8.
11. Fraser, J. C.,Chaskin, R. J.,Bazuin, J. T.(2013).Making Mixed-Income Neighborhoods Work for Low-Income Households.Cityscape,15(2),83-100.
12. Fraser, J. C.,Kick, E. L.(2007).The Role of Public, Private, Non-profit and Community Sectors in Shaping Mixed-income Housing Outcomes in the US.Urban Studies,44(12),2357-2377.
13. Hyra, D.(2013).Mixed-Income Housing: Where Have We Been and Where Do We Go From Here?.Cityscape,15(2),123-134.
14. Korsu, E.(2016).Building Social Mix by Building Social Housing? An Evaluation in the Paris, Lyon and Marseille Metropolitan Areas.Housing Studies,31(5),598-623.
15. Leung, M. Y.,Yu, J.,Chow, H.(2015).Impact of Indoor Facilities Management on the Quality of Life of the Elderly in Public Housing.Facilities,34(9),564-579.
16. Levy, D. K.,McDade, Z.,Bertumen, k.(2013).Mixed-Income Living: Anticipated and Realized Benefits for Low-Income Households.Cityscape,15(2),15-28.
17. Li, Z. G.,Wu, F. L.(2013).Residential Satisfaction in China’s Informal Settlements: A Case Study of Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou.Urban Geography,34(7),923-949.
18. Livingston, M.,Kearns, A.,Bailey, N.(2013).Delivering Mixed Communities: The Relationship between Housing Tenure Mix and Social Mix in England’s Neighbourhoods.Housing Studies,28(7),1056-1080.
19. Long, J. S.(1997).Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
20. Long, J. S.,Freese, J.(2006).Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata.College Station, TX:Stata Press.
21. Lucio, J.,Hand, L.,Marsiglia, F.(2014).Designing Hope: Rationales of Mixed-Income Housing Policy.Journal of Urnal of Urban Affairs,36(5),891-904.
22. McCormick, N. J.,Joseph, M. L.,Chaskin, R. J.(2012).The New Stigma of Relocated Public Housing Residents: Challenges to Social Identity in Mixed-Income Developments.City & Community,11(3),285-308.
23. Mohit M. A.,Azim, M.(2012).Assessment of Residential Satisfaction with Public Housing in Hulhumale’, Maldives.Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,50,756-770.
24. Mohit, M. A.,Ibrahim, M.,Rashid, Y. R.(2010).Assessment of Residential Satisfaction in Newly Designed Public Low-cost Housing in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.Habitat International,34(1),18-27.
25. Norris, M.,Byrne, M.(2018).Housing Market (In) stability and Social Rented Housing: Comparing Austria and Ireland during the Global Financial Crisis.Journal of Housing and Built Environment,33(2),227-245.
26. Oakley, D. A.,Fraser, J. S.(2016).U.S. Public-Housing Transformations and the Housing Publics Lost in Transition.City & Community,15(4),349-366.
27. Onatu, G. O.(2010).Mixed-income housing development strategy Perspective on Cosmo City, Johannesburg, South Africa.International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysi,3,203-215.
28. Palmer, G. L.(2016).Examining the Effects of Scattered Site Supportive Housing on the Social and Economic Integration of Men Who Are Formerly Homeless and Primarily Black/African American.Journal of Black Studies,47(8),848-868.
29. Pareja-Eastaway, M.,Sánchez-Martínez, T.(2017).More Social Housing? A Critical Analysis of Social Housing Provision in Spain.Critical Housing Analysis,4,124-131.
30. Scally, C. P.,Tighe, J. R.(2015).Democracy in Action? NIMBY as Impediment to Equitable Affordable Housing Siting.Housing Studies,30(5),749-769.
31. Wang, D. G.,Wang, F. L.(2016).Contributions of the usage and affective experience of the residential environment to residential satisfaction.housing Studies,31(1),42-60.
32. Yuan, J. F.,Zheng, X.D.,You, J.,Skibniewski, M. J.(2017).Identifying Critical Factors Influencing the Rents of Public Rental Housing Delivery by PPPs: The Case of Nanjing.Sustainability,9(3),1-22.
33. 內政部營建署2015 《住宅狀況抽樣調查》。 Construction and Planning Agency, Ministry of the interior, R.O.C. (Taiwan).2015 “Report on the housing status survey”.
34. 司法院 2006 〈臺灣臺北地方法院 95 年度重訴字第 542 號民事判決〉 (https://law.judicial.gov.tw/)。Judicial Yuan 2006 “Civil Judgment No. 542 of the 1995 District Court of Taipei District, Taiwan,” (https://law.judicial.gov.tw/).
35. 司法院 2019 〈臺灣臺北地方法院 107 年國字第 5 號民事裁定〉 (https://law.judicial.gov.tw/)。2019 “Taiwan Taipei District Court Civil Ruling No. 5 in 107 years,” (https://law.judicial.gov.tw/).
36. 司法院 2007 〈臺灣高等法院 95 年上易字第 1012 號民事判決〉 (https://law.judicial.gov.tw/)。Judicial Yuan 2007 “Taiwan High Court Civil Judgment No. 1012 of 1995,” (https://law.judicial.gov.tw/).
37. 江尚書, S. S.(2011)。以社會住宅的實踐凝聚城市的進步性。中華民國建築學會會刊雜誌，63，31-34。
38. 林育如, Y. R.(2017)。以「居住穩定」做為社會住宅建構居住安全網的開始。社區發展，158，25-32。
39. 孫一信, Y. X.(2011)。為什麼臺灣需要社會住宅？臺灣需要什麼樣的社會住宅。中華民國建築學會會刊雜誌，63，25-30。
40. 張金鶚, C. O.(2011)。當前社會住宅的期待。中華民國建築學會會刊雜誌，63，31-33。
41. 彭建文, J. W.(2018)。興建社會住宅、活絡租賃住宅市場之政策方向。高齡少子化現象對醫療體系與住宅市場之影響，10，171-181。
42. 監察院2018 〈社會住宅睦鄰戶情形調查報告〉(https://www.cy.gov.tw/)，107 內調 0068 字號。The Control Yuan Republie of China2018 “Investigation report on the situation of good neighbors in social housing,” (https://www.cy.gov.tw/). 107: 68.