進階搜尋


   電子論文尚未授權公開,紙本請查館藏目錄
(※如查詢不到或館藏狀況顯示「閉架不公開」,表示該本論文不在書庫,無法取用。)
系統識別號 U0026-0902201922441600
論文名稱(中文) 地區淹水保護標準訂定架構之探討
論文名稱(英文) Investigating and Establishing Framework for the Regional Flood Protection Standard
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 都市計劃學系
系所名稱(英) Department of Urban Planning
學年度 107
學期 1
出版年 108
研究生(中文) 片山貴裕
研究生(英文) Takahiro Katayama
學號 P26057010
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
論文頁數 71頁
口試委員 指導教授-張學聖
口試委員-鄒克萬
口試委員-石豐宇
口試委員-黃泰霖
口試委員-葉如萍
中文關鍵字 地區淹水保護標準  成本效益分析  整體治水規劃 
英文關鍵字 Regional Flood Protection Standard  Cost Benefit Analysis  Overall Flood Management 
學科別分類
中文摘要 依各國近年來水患治理之經驗得知,傳統防洪工程思維已無法妥適因應全球氣候變遷對都市地區帶來之衝擊。於此,目前多數國家皆十分重視整體治水規劃,並針對地區訂定「保護標準」,試圖以工程及非工程兩者之減災手法,回應地區水患治理議題。然而,台灣於保護標準發展方面仍停留在較為微觀之思維,惟針對部分重要設施制訂保護標準,且對於地區如何訂定保護標準之研究及政策指導極為有限。

爰此,本研究以「保護標準」作為研究標的,一方面回顧及釐清保護標準之理論基礎,另一方面則蒐集彙整各國於訂定保護標準時所採用之原則與方法,用以分析其中之優缺點及使用限制。經由分析相關文獻及多國案例後,於考量國內現況條件下,本研究擇定以政府治水效率最大化之方式作為保標標準訂定原則,提出採成本效益分析法評估之保護標準訂定架構,並探討此架構之可操作性。

本研究以臺中市大里溪流域作為驗證示範地區。首先,以八種不同降雨強度資料模擬各自之淹水情境,接著,分別計算各保護標準情境下所需之「工程成本」與其產生之「經濟效益」,最後則以成本效益分析法進行方案之比較分析,並探尋驗證地區合宜之保護標準。經由驗證分析之結果顯示,本研究發現於益本比最大化原則下,若將驗證地區的之保護標準訂定為五年重現期距時,其經濟效率最為顯著,而其他方案亦具經濟可行性,於此,本研究認為以檢驗保護標準之訂定係有益於舒緩都市水患之目標之一。最終,本研究以研究設計所建立之保護標準訂定架構為基礎,並加以闡述未來保護標準訂定時應考慮之評估項目,透由多元討論建構出國內保護標準訂定之完整架構,希冀上述研究流程、方法及結果,於未來能有效作為相關研究與規劃單位之參考。
英文摘要 According to worldwide flood control experience, the traditional methods of the construction of floodways cannot fully react to the changes in the hydrological environment, which is caused by the rapid development of urbanization and global climate change. In recent years, many countries have high regards to the overall flood management, proposing “protection standards” through structural and nonstructural ways to respond to regional flood management issues. However, Taiwan still adopts a rather micro perspective in developing protection standards, meaning that only some of the important facilities in Taiwan currently set protection standards while there is still a lack of guidance and policy towards the regional area.

Hence, this study introduces “protection standards” as the research target. On the one hand, it clarifies and defines the theoretical basis of the protection standards. On the other hand, it collects methods and principles adopted by various countries in order to analyze the pros and cons, in addition to the use restrictions, of the protection standards. Based on foreign case studies and Taiwan’s current situation, the study selected the method of maximizing efficiency as a basis and proposed a constructed framework of protection standards through “cost-benefit analysis”, thus examining the operability of this structure.

The study selected Dali River basin at Taichung City as operational demonstration region. First of all, the flooding simulation was carried out through eight different data set of rainfall intensity. Second, the projected cost and the resulting economic benefit is calculated separately for each protection standard scenario. Finally, the cost-benefit analysis method compared the various data and evaluated the appropriate protection standards in the region. According to the research analysis and the principles of the maximizing benefit-cost ratio, the economic efficiency is the most significant if the protection standard of the experimented area is set to 5 year return period, while other schemes are also economically feasible. Consequently, the establishment of the inspected protection standards is an essential goal to avert disastrous urban flooding. To conclude, this study is designed based on the framework of the protection standards, and through diversified discussion a complete established framework of protection standards suitable for domestic region to operate is constructed. Ideally, this research’s workflow, procedure, and findings can be prospectively utilized as a reference in future studies and planning.
論文目次 摘要 I
致謝 VII
目錄 VIII
表目錄 X
圖目錄 XI
第一章、緒論 1
第一節、研究動機 1
第二節、研究目的 4
第三節、研究範疇 5
壹、名詞定義 5
貳、空間範疇 6
第四節、研究流程 7
第二章、文獻回顧 9
第一節、風險管理理論概述 9
壹、風險定義 9
貳、風險管理架構 11
參、小結 16
第二節、保護標準內涵與訂定方法 17
壹、何謂「保護標準」 17
貳、保護標準訂定方法 19
參、小結 26
第三節、保護標準國外案例 28
壹、荷蘭案例 28
貳、日本案例 34
參、美國案例 37
肆、小結 38
第四節、保護標準計算方式 39
壹、成本效益分析 39
貳、成本效益項目探討 40
參、保護標準研擬 42
第三章、研究設計 44
第一節、研究設計架構 44
第二節、研究地區概述 46
第三節、保護標準訂定步驟 48
壹、各保護標準下之效益估計 48
貳、各保護標準下之成本估計 50
參、益本比 (B/C Ratio) 計算 51
第四章、驗證分析 54
第一節、各保護標準下之效益與成本 54
壹、效益面 54
貳、成本面 58
第二節、研究成果與分析 59
第五章、結論與建議 61
第一節、結論 61
第二節、研究建議 64
參考文獻 67
附錄 71
附錄一、淹水潛勢圖改版歷程 71
參考文獻 1. Alexander, D. (2000). Confronting Catastrophe: New Perspectives on Natural Disasters. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Benouar, D. & Mimi, A. (2001). Improving emergency management in algeria. Papar presented at the Global Alliance International Workshop on Disaster Reduction.
3. Dassanayake, D.R. & Oumeraci, H. (2010). Framework and Methods for the Evaluation of Intangible Losses and their Integration in Coastal Flood Risk Analysis. State of the Art Report. Leichtweiß-Institute for Hydraulic Engineering and Water Resources, Technische Universität Braunschweig, 80 p.
4. De Bruijn, K. M., R. van Buren. & K. Roscoe. (2008). Mapping casualty risk in the Netherlands; locational and group risk.
5. De Bruijn K. M., Beckers J. & Van der Most H. (2010). Casualty risks in the discussion on new flood protection standards in The Netherlands, in: Flood Recovery, Innovation and Response II, edited by: De Wrachien, D., Proverbs, D., Brebbia, C. A., Mambretti, S., WIT Press, 73–83.
6. De León, V., & Carlos, J. (2006). Vulnerability: a conceptual and methodological review. UNU-EHS.
7. Eijgenraam, C. J.J. (2006). Optimal safety standards for dike-ring areas. CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis: CPB Discussion Paper 62.
8. European Maritime Safety Agency. (2015). Risk Acceptance Criteria and Risk Based Damage Stability. Final Report, Part 1: Risk Acceptance Criteria.
9. François Molle. (2009). River-basin planning and management: The social life of a concept. Geo forum, 40(3): 484–494.
10. Government of the Netherlands, Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment & Ministry of Economic Affairs. (2015). National Water Plan 2016-2021.
11. Hallegatte S., Green C., Nicholls RJ. & Corfee-Morlot J. (2013). Future flood losses in major coastal cities, Nature Climate Change, 3(9), 802-806.
12. Hallegatte S. (2017). A Normative Exploration of the Link Between Development, Economic Growth, and Natural Risk, EconDisCliCha, 1:5–31.
13. Hammer, W. (1972). Handbook of System and Product Safety. Prentice-Hall.
14. HSE. (2001). Reducing risks, HSE’s decision-making process protecting people. HSE books.
15. ICE - Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE). (2001). Learning to Live with Rivers. Final Report of the ICE’s Presidential Commission the Review the Technical Aspects of Flood Risk Management in England and Wales, London.
16. Jonkman, S.N. (2007). Loss of life estimation in flood risk assessment, Ph.D. thesis, Delft University, The Netherlands.
17. Kind, J. M. (2014). Economically efficient flood protection standards for the Netherlands, J. Flood Risk Manage., 7, 103–117.
18. Lowrance, W.W. (1976). Of Acceptable Risk: Science and the Determination of Safety. Los Altos, CA: William Kaufmann.
19. Macpherson, James A. (2008). Safety, Risk Acceptability, and Morality. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14(3), 377-390.
20. Merz, B., Kreibich, H., Thieken, A. & Schmidtke, R. (2004) Estimation uncertainty of direct monetary flood damage to buildings. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences (4), 153-163.
21. Munger, D. F., Bowles, D. S., Boyer, D. B., Davis, D. W., Margo, D. A., Moser, D. A., Regan, P. J. & Snorteland, N. (2009). Interim tolerable risk guidelines for US Army Corps of Engineers dams. In USSD Workshop on the future of dam safety decision making: combining standards and risk.
22. Olesen, L., Löwe, R. & Arnbjerg-Nielsen, K. (2017). Flood Damage Assessment: Literature review and recommended procedure. Cooperative Research Centre for Water Sensitive Cities, Melbourne, Australia.
23. Penning-Rowsell EC., Priest S., Sally J., Dennis J. & Morris J., (2013). Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management: A Manual for Economic Appraisal. London: Routledge/Taylor & Francis.
24. Sayers, P.B., Hall, J. W. & Meadowcroft, I.C. (2002). Towards risk-based flood hazard management in the UK. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Civil Engineering, 150(5), 36-42.
25. Schanze, J. (2006). Flood risk management - a basic framework. In: Schanze J, Zeman E, Marsalek J (eds) Flood risk management - hazards, vulnerability and mitigation measures. Springer, 149-167.
26. Smith, K. & Ward, R. (1998). Floods: Physical processes and human impacts. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.
27. United Nations, Department of Humanitarian Affairs (UN/DHA). (1992). Internationally agreed glossary of basic terms related to disaster management. UN/DHA, Geneva.
28. United Nations, International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UN/ISDR). (2004). Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives. United Nations Publication, Geneva.
29. Vanem, E. (2012). Ethics and fundamental principles of risk acceptance criteria. Safety Science 50: 958-967.
30. Vatn, J. (1998). A discussion of the acceptable risk problem. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 61:11–19.
31. Vrijling, J.K. (2001). Probabilistic design of water defence systems in the Netherlands. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 74, 337-344.
32. 內政部營建署城鄉發展分署 (2010)。建立易致災區區之安全建地劃設機制與準則(第二期)。
33. 行政院研究發展考核委員會 (2009)。風險管理及危機處理作業手冊。
34. 行政院國家科學委員會 (2011)。臺灣氣候變遷科學報告2011。
35. 經濟部水利署 (2008)。水利建造物工程設計基準之檢討(2/2),總報告。
36. 經濟部水利署水利規劃試驗所 (2009)。防洪工程經濟效益評估之檢討修正。
37. 經濟部水利署 (2014)。修正「流域綜合治理計畫(103-108年)」(核定本)。
38. 經濟部水利署水利規劃試驗所 (2014)。因應氣候變遷下逕流分擔機制之研究–以大里溪為例。
39. 金菊良、魏一鳴、傅強、丁晶 (2002)。洪水災害風險管理的理論框架探討,水利水電技術,第33卷,第40-42頁。
40. 游景雲、王元亨、楊智傑 (2017)。水利工程規劃決策評價概念探討成本效益分析、風險效益分析、風險分析架構及風險控管,土木水利,第四十四卷,第五期。
41. 楊松岳、陳葦庭、林政浩 (2017)。逕流分擔規劃打造韌性城市–以嘉義縣故宮南院周邊排水路為例,土木水利,第四十四卷,第五期。
42. 陳增壽 (2003)。防洪示範區淹水情況模擬與決策支援系統之研究 (三) 子計畫四:鹽水溪流域洪災損害評估模式與資料庫之研究,行政院國家科學委員會補助專題研究計畫成果報告 (NSC 91-2625-Z-002-007),國立台灣大學生物環境系統工程學系。
43. 陳韋伶 (2010)。以水災風險管理觀點評估土地使用調洪策略之研究--以鹽水溪流域為例。國立成功大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文,臺南市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/p8d2p3
44. 陳品先 (2011)。從水災風險管理角度探討土地使用調洪策略之防洪能力—以鹽水溪流域為例。國立成功大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文,臺南市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/wc8j84
45. 經濟部水利署 (2008)。水利建造物工程設計基準之檢討(2/2),綜合治水總結專題報告。
46. 經濟部水利署 (2008)。水利建造物工程設計基準之檢討(2/2),總報告。
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2022-02-12起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2022-02-12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