進階搜尋


 
系統識別號 U0026-0812200913545765
論文名稱(中文) 台灣南部中高層住宅永續健康因子於設計評估之研究
論文名稱(英文) The Evaluation study on Sustainable Health Factors During the Planning Stage in South area of Taiwan
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 建築學系專班
系所名稱(英) Department of Architecture (on the job class)
學年度 95
學期 2
出版年 96
研究生(中文) 謝慶旺
研究生(英文) Chin-Woung Hsiesh
電子信箱 n77901677@mail.ncku.edu.tw
學號 n7790167
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
論文頁數 94頁
口試委員 指導教授-江哲銘
口試委員-周伯丞
口試委員-林芳銘
中文關鍵字 健康因子  AHP層級分析法  永續建築 
英文關鍵字 AHP method  Sustainable building  Health factor 
學科別分類
中文摘要 近年來人類賴以生存的全球氣候及環境異變,使得永續發展議題開始受到全球的重視,其概念自從1980年代提出(IUCN、UNEP and WWF,1980),便受到全世界注目與關心,並於1992年巴西里約地球高峰會議後,永續發展更是成為世界各國對於環境的共識。在「永續建築」議題上,2000年永續建築國際會議中曾定義:永續思考操作事項是從建材、建築物到都市尺度,並具備生態、經濟、社會文化因素,更需反映區域性特色,以建構適當的模型執行與達成。
在本研究調查結果顯示,針對設計施工單位及投資商為主要評估對象,調查結果顯示建築物耐久性為較關注之項目,建議後研究針對使用者對象來進行相關調查分析,此一現象值得現階段台灣地區建築環境效率評價更進一步探討其原因。
本研究使用專家問卷及運用層級分析法(Analytic Hierarchy Process)分析,針對評估系統的評估內容架構,設計專家諮詢問卷,經過層級分析法的層級計算,挑選出適合台灣南部中高層住宅在建築永續性的評估項目,以建立適合台灣地區應用之評估系統。
根據案例初步操作評估之分析結果,權重值之前三高為『F.耐久性』的0.182、『G.社會與經濟面』的0.162、『A.基地選擇、開發與發展』的0.143,其次為『C.環境負荷』、『D.室內空氣品質』、『B.能源與資源消耗』、『E.機能性與操作性』。亦表示『F.耐久性』、『G.社會與經濟面』、『A.基地選擇、開發與發展』等三項為本研究全體專家之優先決策 (Priority) 的評估面向。
經由關聯性分析探討台灣南部地區住宅大樓以永續健康觀點,於規劃設計階段之可行性分析統計結果,整體而言,專家領域之間並無顯著的差異性,評估面向之權重值亦具有相當之可信度。
英文摘要 Global climate and different to change environment that mankind depend on for existence in recent years, is it continue development topic begin paying attention to global forever to make, since 1980 times propose (IUCN, UNEP and WWF, 1980) its concept ,Fixed one's eyes on by the whole world and care, and after inviting the summit meeting of the earth in Brazil 1992, develop and become the common understanding of the environment of countries all over the world especially continuously forever. In the topic, built and defined in the international conference continuously forever in 2000: Think continuously forever that it is from building materials, building to city yardstick to operate the item, possess the ecology, economy, social cultural factor, need to reflect the regional characteristic even more, in order to build and construct the proper model to carry out and reach.
Show in this research investigation result, to designing unit in charge of construction and investor in order to assess the target mainly, the investigation result shows the durability of the building is a project that relatively pays close attention to, study to investigate and analyse relevantly to user's marriage partner after proposing, this phenomenon is worth appraising and going still one step further to probe into its reason in environmental efficiency of building of Taiwan of the present stage.
This research uses expert's questionnaire and uses the analytic approach of the level ( Analytic Hierarchy Process) Analyse, to assessing the systematic assessment content structure, design the special family and consult the questionnaire, calculate through the level of the analytic approach of the level, select the suitable south of Taiwan to hit the high residential building in the continuing assessment project forever of the building, in order to set up the assessment system that suitable Taiwan used.
Operate the analysis result assessed tentatively according to the case, the Three Tenors, for 0.182, 0.162 " G.: society and economy ", 0.143 that " A.: base choose, develop and develop " of " F.: durability " before weight value, secondly for " C.: environmental load ", " D.: indoor air quality", " B.: energy and resource consume", " E.: function and person who operate ". Also express " F.: durability ", " G.: society and the economy ", " A.: base choose, develop and develop " three based on one research all preferential decision of expert (Priority) Assessment face.
Via analysing and probing into the southern areas house building of Taiwan relatedly in order to continue the health view forever, analyse statistics of feasibility of design phase on planning,whole but speech, there is no apparent difference between the expert fields, assess the weight value faced and also have a suitable credibility.
論文目次 目 錄
目錄
表目錄
圖目錄

第一章 緒論 1-1
1 - 1 研究動機與目的 ..............................................................1-1
1-1.1 研究動機 .........................................................1-1
1-1.2 研究目的 ........................................................1-4
1 - 2 相關文獻回顧 .......................................................1-5
1-2.1 國內外「永續發展」趨勢 ................................1-7
1-2.2 國際永續建築發展歷程.....................................1-8
1-2.3 各國永續建築評估指標.......................................1-12
1-2.4 研究方法...........................................................1-15
1 - 3 研究對象與範圍 .............................................................1-17
1 - 4 研究步驟與流程 .............................................................1-19
1-4.1 研究步驟 .....................................................1-19
1-4.2 研究流程 .....................................................1-21
第二章 永續觀點之規劃設計 2-1
2 - 1 永續健康建築........................................2-1
2-1.1國際永續發展.............................2-2
2-1.2綠建材設計相關政策.....................2-2
2 - 2 永續建築評估…................................2-4
2-2.1 GB-Tool永續建築評估系統發展概述.......2-5
2 – 3 台灣地區實質環境永續性評估項目群......2-6
2 - 4 小結-運用永續健康建築觀點於建築規劃設計...2-8
第三章 研究方法與調查設計 3-1
3 - 1 研究調查方法..........................................3-2
3-1.1 統計量化原理.....................................3-2
3-1.2層級分析法.........................................3-4
3-1.3集中趨勢判定.......................................3-11
3-1.4區別分析..............................................3-12
3 - 2 問卷調查設計.............................................3-13
3-2.1 問卷內容架構...............................................3-13
3-2.2 問卷調查對象...........................................3-21
3-2.3 問卷權重結果......................................3-22
第四章 調查結果分析 4-1
4 - 1 專家問卷組成分析......................................4-1
4 - 2集中趨勢檢定.............................................4-2
4-2.1 第一階段全體專家調查結果之分..............4-3
4-2.2 第二階段專家分群調查結果之分析...............4-4
4-2.3 第二層評估項目調查結果之檢定分析...............4-7
4-2.4 調查結果綜合分析...................................4-9
4-2.5 全體專家及問卷調查結果分析..................4-10
4 - 3 評估內容之關聯性分析.................................................4-13
4-3.1 投資者與設計施工者為影響因子之差異性判定..4-13
4 - 4 小結..........................................................................4-15
第五章 結論與建議 5-1
5 - 1 結論 5-1
5 - 2 後續研究建議 5-4
■ 參考文獻
■ 附錄
參考文獻 參考文獻
一、中文部份

C1 江哲銘,2004,永續建築導論,建築情報雜誌社出版
C2 江哲銘、張桂鳳等人,2004,GB-Tool整體建築環境評估工具本土化應用之初探—以2002永續建築國際會議之案例分析,中華民國建築學會第十六屆建築研究成果發表會論文集
C3 張桂鳳、江哲銘等人,2004,國外永續建築評估系統GBTOOL 與CASBEE的比較,中華民國建築學會第十六屆建築研究成果發表會論文集
C4 賴啟銘,1999,建築物理環境DSR指標之研究,博士論文—國立成功大學建築研究所
C5 王秀芳,1998,永續都市建築物理環境因子之研究—以亞熱帶氣候台灣地區為例,碩士論文—國立成功大學/建築研究所
C6 Dianna Lopez Barnett and William D. Browning(劉安平 譯),2004,永續建築入門(A Primer on Sustainable Building)
C7 李公哲等1998年,永續發展導論,教育部環境保護小組策劃
C8 張益誠應用因子分析法為台灣地區建構永續發展趨勢評估指標系統,博士論文—國立台灣大學環境工程學研究所
C9 許卜仁,2003,永續運輸指標與策略之整合模式,碩士論文—國立交通大學交通運輸研究所
C10 林青蓉,2001,利用模糊理論建構永續性都市競爭力評估架構,碩士論文—中華大學建築與都市計畫研究所
C11 郭彥宏,2003,環境永續性指數之計算分析與在台灣之應用,碩士論文—暨南國際大學/土木工程學系
C12 陳育甄,2002,模糊層級分析法應用於城際運具選擇模式之研究,碩士論文—國立成功大學都市計畫研究所
C13 柳雅瀞,2002,模糊德菲層級分析法應用於岩體分類之研究,碩士論文—國立成功大學資源工程學系
C14 葉晉嘉,1997,應用模糊理論於公共政策研究,碩士論文—國立中興大學公共行政及政策研究所
C15 林政賢,2004,綠建築評估指標適用性之研究,成功大學建築研究所碩士論文
C16 謝玉玲,2001,文化展演設施建設需求評估指標之研究,成功大學建築研究所碩士論文
C17 永續運輸之量化指標研究,(91年交通部運輸研究所、淡江大學運輸科學研究所合作計畫)
C18 台灣永續發展指標(for CEPD) (國科會)
C19 劉兆漢,2003,「永續台灣的願景與策略」整合計畫:辦公室計畫,2003永續發展科技與政策研討會
C20 葉俊榮,2003,永續台灣評估系統—永續指標與政策檢討,2003永續發展科技與政策研討會
C21 馮正民、吳玉珍、曾國雄,2003,台灣永續運輸的願景與發展策略,2003永續發展科技與政策研討會
C22 陳家豪、李育明等人,2003,本土化生命週期評估技術及其應用之研究,2003永續發展科技與政策研討會



二、英文文獻

E1 Nils K. Larsson and Raymond J. Cole, 2001, Green Building Challenge:the development of an idea, Building Research & Information (2001) 29(5), 336–345
E2 Shuzo Murakami, Kazuo Iwamura, Masaaki Sato, Toshiharu Ikaga, and Junko Endo, Comprehensive Assessment System for Building Environmental Efficiency (CASBEE)
E3 IbSteen Olsen. Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs,“Green Building and Life-Cycle Economy”,GBC98
E4 Joel Ann Todd and Susanne Geissler,Gail Lindsey, Regional and cultural issues in environmental performance assessment for building (1999)
E5 Raymond J. Cole and Laura Mitchell ,Customizing and using GBTool:Two Case-study Projects,(1999)
E6 Joel Ann Todd,Drury Crawley,Susanne Geissler,Gail Lindsey,2001,Comparative Assessment of Environmental Performance tools and the role of the Green Building Challenge,(SCI)Building Research & Information
E7 Raymond J. Cole and Nils K. Larsson,1999,GB’98 and GBTool:Background,(SCI)Building Research & InformationE1 Meadows, Donella (1998)Indicators and Information Systems for Sustainable Development, The Sustainability Institute.
E8 Hardi, P. and Zdan, T. (ed.) (1997) Assessing Sustainable Development, Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development.
E9 Dagmar B. Epsten, M.Arch Sandra M.Estrada, Arquitecta, A National Tatiing System(LEED 2.0)as a Source of Benchmarks and Data for GBTool
E10 Tomonari Yashiro,2004, ISO/AW121931 Sustainability in building constructions --Framework for methods of assessment for environmental performance of construction works
E11 ISO/AW14031
E12 ISO/AW14040 Series
E13 Joel Ann Todd,Drury Crawley,Susanne Geissler,Gail Lindsey,Comparative Assessment of Environmental Performance tools and the role of the Green Building Challenge, Building Research & Information(2001)29(5),324-335
E14 Drury Crawley and Ilari Aho, Building environmental assessment methods:applications and development trends, 0961-3218 ©1999 E & FN Spon
E15 Raymond J. Cole,2001, Lessons learned, futre directions and issues for GBC, Building Research & Information(2001)29(5),355-373
E16 Shailja Chandra, 2002,Quantifying uncertainty in whole building assessment methods, Sustainable Building 2002 3rd International Conference
E17 Shailja Chandra, 2002,GB Tool:Scope for User Interface project assistance(Diversifying the end-use), Sustainable Building 2002 3rd International Conference
E18 Wayne B. Trusty, 2002, Integrating LCA Tools in green building rating systems, Sustainable Building 2002 3rd International Conference
E19 Saaty, R.W., 1987,"The Analytic Hierarchy Process-What it is and how it is used", Mathl. Modeling, Vol. 9, No. 3-5, pp. 161-176.
E20 Saaty, Rozann, 1996,"The Analytic hierarchy process and utility theory: Ratio scales and interval scales", Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Simon Frasier University, Burnaby, B. C., Canada, July 12-15, pp. 22-27.
E21 Bill Bordass, Adrian Leaman and Paul Ruyssevelt,2001,Assessing building performance in use 5: conclusions and implications, Building Research & Information (2001) 29(2), 144–157
論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權校內瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2008-08-22起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2008-08-22起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請聯絡圖書館
    聯絡電話:(06)2757575#65773
    聯絡E-mail:etds@email.ncku.edu.tw