天然災害社會脆弱度指標之建立及評估：以鄉鎮層級為例

Establishing and Assessing Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) of Natural Disasters: Town Level Application

10.6149/JDM.2014.0302.04

楊惠萱(Hui-Hsuan Yang)；陳怡臻(Yi-Chen Chen)；李欣輯(Hsin-Chi Li)

社會脆弱度 ； 層級分析法 ； 能力評估 ； Social vulnerability ； Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) ； Capacity assessment

災害防救科技與管理學刊

3卷2期（2014 / 09 / 01）

71 - 93

繁體中文

本文藉由發展社會脆弱度指標（SVI）架構作為量性評估方法中，指標選取的核心範疇，有4分類，12次類，並利用層級分析法（AHP）決定權重值，進行臺灣各鄉鎮市區社會脆弱度評估。利用專家問卷測得之權重以四分類中的暴露量與減災整備為高，顯示專家認為社會脆弱度主要受前兩者影響較大。在暴露量中，又以人口的權重較高，減災整備則較重視防治工程類。依據評估架構，選定24項指標項目進行SVI計算，因指標項目中有特定災害情境關聯性較高的項目，如水利工程設施量、山坡地超限利用比，因此將綜合評估結果劃分為水災社會脆弱度及坡地災害社會脆弱度。結果顯示桃園縣中壢市及南投縣水里鄉分別為水災及坡地災害社會脆弱度最高的鄉鎮市區，主要影響原因除專家加權效果外，暴露量高及減災整備能力較差為其主要影響因素。災害後果風險（outcome risk）的降低，並非僅著眼於對危害的監測技術，而是在平時如何改善或降低脆弱性，SVI可協助災害管理者瞭解一地區之弱點，並依據評估結果排定推動相關防減災政策之優先順序，降低災害後果風險。

According to social vulnerability definition, this paper developed Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) framework for disaster risk management. The framework have two levels, the first level consisted of four major elements: exposure, mitigation and preparedness capacity, response capacity, recovery capacity. Second level is developed by classifying the details of each element. According to the framework, 24 indicators were selected to represent each element. This research adopted AHP method to decide the weight of each element and each sub-classification by analyzing the survey data answered by a group of experts and professionals in disaster management field to derive an aggregate SVI score of each town. Through SVI assessment, regional vulnerability can be described more concretely and completely. With the experts' point of view, exposure, mitigation and preparedness capacity are more important than response and recovery capacity. The results were divided into two types, SVI of Flood and SVI of landslide, it shows that the places with higher density of population, more economic activities, lack of mitigation measures and strategies are more vulnerable, such as Jungli city of Taoyuan county and Shueili Town of Nantou county. SVI is a trigger to reveal the weak points toward disaster risks in societies and regions, further, SVI can provide the priorities to execute mitigation measures for disaster risk management.

1. 吳杰穎、黃昱翔(2011)。颱洪災害脆弱度評估指標之建立：以南投縣水里鄉為例。都市與計畫，38(2)，195-218。
   連結：
2. 李欣輯、楊惠萱(2012)。坡地災害社會脆弱度指標評估與應用。都市與計畫，39(4)，375-406。
   連結：
3. 李欣輯、楊惠萱、廖楷民、蕭代基(2010)。水災社會脆弱性指標之建立。建築與規劃學報，10(3)，163-182。
   連結：
4. 李堅明、陳建智(2010)。臺灣脆弱性指標建構與評估之研究。都市與計畫，37(1)，71-96。
   連結：
5. 林文苑(2011)。「天然災害老人弱勢族群社經脆弱度評估指標」之建立與空間聚集性分析應用。都市與計畫，38(3)，219-243。
   連結：
6. 洪鴻智、陳令韡(2012)。颱洪災害之整合性脆弱度評估─大甲溪流域之應用。地理學報，65，79-96。
   連結：
7. 葉秀珍、陳昭榮(2007)。災害風險管理與其因應制度的探討。臺灣社會福利學刊，6(1)，51-92。
   連結：
8. 蕭煥章(2008)。鄉鎮市區水災脆弱性評估模式之研究。華岡地理學報，21，1-18。
   連結：
9. 災害防救辦公室，2009，《直轄市、縣（市）政府災害防救工作訪評實施計畫》。2014 年3 月5 日， 摘錄自http://www.cdprc.ey.gov.tw/cp.aspx?n=DDE4ECF12E55C0B5
10. Adger, W. N.,Brooks, N.,Graham, B.,Agnew, M.,Eriksen, S.(2004).New Indicators of vulnerability and adaptive capacity.Norwich, UK:Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research.
11. Bankoff, G.(Ed.),Frerks, G.(Ed.),Hilhorst, D.(Ed.)(2004).Mapping vulnerability: Disasters, development and people.Sterling,VA:Earthscan.
12. Blaikie, P.,Cannon, T.,Davis, I.,Wisner, B.(1994).At risk: Natural Hazards, People's vulnerability and disasters.London, UK:Routledge.
13. Chambers, R.(2006).Vulnerability, coping and policy.IDS Bulletin,37(4),33-40.
14. Clark, G. E.,Moser, S. C.,Ratick, S. J.,Dow, K.,Meyer, W. B.,Emani, S.(1998).Assessing the vulnerability of coastal communities to extreme storms: The case of revere, MA., USA.Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change,3,59-82.
15. Cutter, S. L.(1996).Vulnerability to Environmental Hazards.Progress in Human Geography,20,529-539.
16. Cutter, S. L.(2003).The Vulnerability of science and the science of vulnerability.Annals of the Association of American Geographers,93,1-12.
17. Cutter, S. L.,Boruff, B. J.,Shirley, W. L.(2003).Social Vulnerability to Environmental Hazards.Social Science Quarterly,84,242-261.
18. Cutter, S. L.,Mitchell, J. T.,Scott, M. S.(2000).Revealing the vulnerability of people and places: A case study of Georgetown County, South Carolina.Annals of the Association of American Geographers,90,713-737.
19. Dwyer, A.,Zoppou, C.,Nielsen, O.,Day, S.,Roberts, S.(2004).Quantifying social vulnerability: A methodology for identifying those at risk to Natural Hazards.Canberra, Australia:Geoscience Australia.
20. IPCC(2001).Climate change 2001: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability: Contribution of working group II to the third assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
21. Lindell, M. K.(1997).Adoption and implementation of Hazard adjustments.International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters,15,327-453.
22. McLoughlin, D.(1985).A framework for integrated emergency management.Public Administration Review,45,165-172.
23. Messner, F.,Meyer, V.(2005).Flood damage, vulnerability and risk perception-challenges for flood damage research.Flood Risk Management: Hazards, Vulnerability and Mitigation Measures NATO Science Series,67,149-167.
24. OECD(2001).OECD Environmental indicators: Towards sustainable development.Paris, France:Author.
25. Rygel, L.,O'Sullivan, D.,Yarnal, B.(2006).A method for constructing a social vulnerability index: An application to hurricane storm surges in a developed country.Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change,11,741-764.
26. Saaty, T. L.(2003).Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary.European Journal of Operational Research,146,85-91.
27. Saaty, T. L.(1990).How to make a decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process.European Journal of Operational Research,48,9-26.
28. Tapsell, S. M.,Penning-Rowsell, E. C.,Tunstall, S. M.,Wilson, T. L.(2002).Vulnerability to flooding: Health and social dimensions.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, Physical, and Engineering Sciences,360,1511-1525.
29. Tunstall, S.,Tapsell, S.,Fernandez-Bilbao, A.(2007).,London, UK:European Community.
30. Turner, B. L., II,Kasperson, R. E.,Matson, P. A.,McCarthy, J. J.,Corell, R. W.,Christensen, L.(2003).A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,100,8074-8079.
31. Werritty, A.,Houston, D.,Ball, T.,Tavendale, A.,Black, A.(2007).Exploring the social impacts of flood risk and flooding in Scotland.Edinburgh, Scotland:Scottish Executive.
32. Wu, S.-Y.,Yarnal, B.,Fisher, A.(2002).Vulnerability of coastal communities to sea-level rise: A case study of Cape May County, New Jersey, USA.Climate Research,22,255-270.
33. Yang, H.-H.,Li, H.-C.(2010).Analyzing social vulnerability factors of flood disaster in Taiwan.Interpraevent 2010: International Symposium in Pacific Rim, Taipei, Taiwan, April 26-30, 2010: Symposium proceedings,Taipei:
34. 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。
35. 吳杰穎、江宜錦(2008)。臺灣天然災害統計指標體系建構與分析。地理學報，51，65-84。
36. 李美華譯、Babbie, Earl(1998)。社會科學研究方法。臺北市:時英。
37. 林冠慧(2004)。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。
38. 郭俊欽、莊翰華、康良宇(2007)。土石流災區之防災教育初探。環境與世界，15，99-128。
39. 陳志嘉(2007)。臺灣在全球環境變遷下的脆弱性研究與發展。環境與世界，16，47-71。
40. 陳亮全(2009)。國科會專題研究計畫成果報告國科會專題研究計畫成果報告,臺北市:行政院國家科學委員會。
41. 陳建男、葉一隆(2010)。山地部落坡地災害復原評估。農業工程學報，56，61-70。
42. 陳淑慈、張嘉倫、許中立、黃國銘(2003)。土石流疏散避難演練工作執行檢討─以屏東縣春日鄉為例。坡地防災學報，2(2)，39-48。
43. 黃書禮(2002)。建立臺灣永續發展指標系統。臺北市:行政院經濟建設委員會。
44. 鄧振源(2005)。計畫評估：方法與應用（第二版）。基隆市:國立臺灣海洋大學運籌規劃與管理研究中心。

1. 陳彥儒,張國楨,張家浚(2021)。應用手機信令軌跡資料推估通勤道路之時空地震災害風險。地理研究，74，105-141。
2. 陳毅青,宋承恩,王素芬(2020)。整合多尺度自然與行政單元評估南投縣崩塌災害風險。地理學報，96，27-54。
3. 鄧傳忠,曾敏惠,陳宏宇,吳郁玶(2021)。社區災害韌性的探討：以莫拉克颱風災區重建為例。地理學報，99，1-31。
4. 洪啟東、林文苑(2017)。台灣本島網格化災害脆弱度空間分佈評估與OWA 分析應用。地理學報，87，39-78。
5. 李香潔,吳郁玶(2023)。社會福利機構之天然災害風險追蹤分析。臺大社會工作學刊，48，1-36。
6. 林文苑(2018)。社經統合資料空間化與網格化災害脆弱度圖層之城鄉差異評估。災害防救科技與管理學刊，7(2)，81-126。
7. 劉怡君,洪鴻智(2022)。從災害韌性觀點探討流域之脆弱度、衝擊與調適。都市與計劃，49(1)，71-98。