請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/840完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 馬鴻文 | |
| dc.contributor.author | Yen-Yu Wu | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 吳衍諭 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-05-11T05:11:03Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2020-07-10 | |
| dc.date.available | 2021-05-11T05:11:03Z | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2019-07-10 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2019 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2019-07-03 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 1. Ahmed, K., Sanchéz-Triana, E., 2008. Using strategic environmental assessment to design and implement public policy. In: Ahmed, K., Sanchéz-Triana, E. (Eds.), Strategic Environmental Assessment for Policies. The World Bank, Washington DC.
2. Bina, O. 2008. Context and systems: Thinking more broadly about effectiveness in Strategic Environmental Assessment in China. Environ. Manag. 42, 717–733. 3. Bonifazi, A.; Rega, C.; Gazzola, C. 2011. Strategic environmental assessment and the democratization of spatial planning. J. Environ. Assess. Policy Manag. 13, 9–37. 4. Barriball, KL., While, A. 1994. Collecting data using a semi‐structured interview: a discussion paper. Journal of Advanced Nursing 19, 328 – 335. 5. Brown, A L., Thérivel, R., 2000. Principles to guide strategic environmental assessment methodology. Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais. 18(3), 183-190. 6. Bras-Klapwijk, R. M. 1999. Adjusting Life Cycle Assessment Methodology for Use in Public Policy Discourse. Delft: Delft University of Technology: 280. 7. Bond, A., Morrison-Saunders, A., Howitt, R. 2013. Framework for comparing and evaluating sustainability assessment practice. In Sustainability Assessment: Pluralism, Practice and Progress; Bond, A., Morrison-Saunders, A., Howitt, R., Eds.; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, pp. 117–131. 8. Björklund, A. 2012. Life cycle assessment as an analytical tool in strategic environmental assessment. Lessons learned from a case study on municipal energy planning in Sweden. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 32, 82–87. 9. Bergesen, J.D., Ramirez, A., Vega, M.I., Shi, L. 2013. Integrated life-cycle assessment of electricity-supply scenarios confirms global environmental benefit of low-carbon technologies. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 112, 6277–6282. 10. Bidstrup, M., Pizzol, M., Schmidt, J.H., 2015. Life Cycle Assessment in spatial planning- a procedure for addressing systemic impacts. J. Clean. Prod. 91, 136-144. 11. Chaker, A., K. El-Fadl, L.Chamas and B. Hatjian. 2006. A review of strategic environmental assessment in 12 selected countries. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 26:15-56. 12. Cornejo, F., Janssen, M., Gauldreault, C., Samson, R., Stuart, P.R. 2005. Using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) as a tool to enhance Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA). Chem. Eng. Trans. 7, 521–528. 13. Connelly, S., Richardson, T. 2005. Value-driven SEA: Time for an environmental justice perspective? Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 25, 391–409. 14. Cohen, Michael D., James G. March, Johan P. Olsen. 1972. A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 1-25 15. Cashmore, M., A, Bond., D, Cobb. 2008. The role and functioning of environmental assessment: Theoretical reflections upon an empirical investigation of causation. Journal of Environmental Management. 1233–1248. 16. Dixon, R.K., McGowan, E., Onysko, G., Scheer, R.M. 2010. US energy conservation and efficiency policies: challenges and opportunities. Energy Pol, 38 (11), pp. 6398-6408 17. Dryzek, J.S. 2000. Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK. 18. Dalal-Clayton, B., Sadler, B. 2011. Sustainability Appraisal: A source And Reference Guide to International Experience; Earthacan: London, UK 19. Dalkmann, H., Jiliberto, R.H., Bongardt, D. 2004. Analytical strategic environmental assessment (ANSEA) developing a new approach to SEA. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 24, 385–402 20. DeJong, G.F., 2000. Expectations, gender, and norms in migration decision-making. Population Studies 54, 307–319. 21. Ecoinvent Centre. 2014. Ecoinvent version 3.0.1 [Online]. Available: http://www.ecoinvent.org/ 22. European Union (EU). Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the Assessment of the Effects of Certain Plans and Programmes on the Environment. Off. J. Eur. Communities L 2001, 197, 30–37. 23. Ekins, P., Simon, S., Deutsch, L., Folke, C., De Groot, R. 2003. A framework for the practical application of the concepts of critical natural capital and strong sustainability. Ecol. Econ. 44, 165–185. 24. Fischer, T.B. 2007. Theory and Practice of Strategic Environmental Assessment—Towards a More Systematic Approach; Earthscan: London, UK. 25. Fiorino, D. 1990. Citizen participation and Environmental Risk: A survey of institutional mechanism Science. Technol. Hum. Values. 15, 226–243. 26. Fylan, F. Chapter 6: Semi-structured interviewing. In A Handbook of Research Methods for Clinical and Health Psychology, 1st ed.; Miles, J., Gilbert, P., Eds.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2005. 27. Finnveden, G., Nilsson, M., Johansson, J., Persson, Å., Moberg, Å., Carlsson, T., 2003. Strategic environmental assessment methodologies- applications within the energy sector. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 23(1), 91-123. 28. Finnveden, G., Moberg, Å., 2005. Environmental systems analysis tools– an overview. J. Clean. Prod. 13(12), 1165–73. 29. Feldmann and Khademian, 2008. The Continuous Process of Policy Formulation, in Strategic Environmental Assessment for Policies: An Instrument for good Governance, ed. Kulsum Ahmed., Ernesto Sanchéz-Triana, 37-59. Washington DC: World Bank. 30. Gluker, A., Driessen, P., Kolhoff, A., Runhaar, H. 2013. Public participation in environmental impact: Why, who and how? Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 43, 104–111. 31. Gasparatos, A., El-Haram, M., Horner, M., 2008. A critical review of reductionist approaches for assessing the progress towards sustainability. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 28: 286–311 32. Gibson, R. 2006. Beyond the pillars: Sustainability assessment as a framework for effective integration of social, economic and ecological considerations 33. Gao, J., Kørnøv, L., Christensen, P., 2013. Do indicators influence communication in Chinese SEA processes. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 43, 121–128 34. Gursel, A.P., Ostertag, C., 2017. Comparative life-cycle impact assessment of concrete manufacturing in Singapore. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22, 237–255 35. Goedkoop, M., Heijungs, R., Huijbregts, M. A. J., De Schryver, A., Struijs, J. and van Zelm, R., 2009. ReCiPe 2008: A life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and endpoint levels. First edition. Report i: Characterization. The Netherlands, Ruimte en Milieu, Ministerie van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieubeheer. 36. Humbert, S., Schryver, A.D., Bengoa, X., Margni, M., Jolliet, O., 2012. IMPACT 2002+: User guide draft for version Q2.21. Quantis. http://www.quantis intl.com/index.php. 37. Hertwich, E. G., Gibon, T., Bouman, E. A., Arvesen, A., Suh, S., Heath, G. A., Bergesen, J. D., Ramirez, A., Vega, M. I., Shi, L., 2013. Integrated life-cycle assessment of electricity-supply scenarios confirms global environmental benefit of low-carbon technologies. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 112(20), 6277-82. 38. IMPACT 2002+: User guide draft for version Q2.21. Quantis. http://www.quantis-intl.com/index.php. 39. Illsley, B., Jackson, T., Deasley, N. 2014. Spheres of public conversation: Experiences in strategic environmental assessment. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 44, 1–10. 40. ISO, 2006a. ISO 14040:2006. Environmental Management – Life Cycle Assessment – Principles and Framework. International Organization for Standartization. 41. Jiliberto, R. 2012. Recognizing the institutional dimension of strategic environmental assessment. Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais. 29, 133–140. 42. Jolliet, O., Margni, M., Charles, R., Humbert, S., Payet, J., Rebitzer, G., Rosenbaum, R., 2003. IMPACT 2002+: a new life cycle impact assessment methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 8, 324–330. 43. Jeswani, H.K., Azapagic, A., Schepelmann, P., Ritthoff, M., 2010. Options for broad- ening and deepening the LCA approaches. J. Clean. Prod. 18(2), 120-127. 44. Kørnøv, L., Thissen, W. 2000. Rationality in decision- and policy-making: Implications for strategic environmental assessment. Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais. 18, 191–200 45. Kickert ,W J., Klijn, EH., Koppenjan, JF. 1997. Managing Complex Networks: Strategies for the Public Sector. Sage Publications: London. 46. Kingdon JW. 1995. Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Harper Collins: New York. 47. Lobos, V., Partidário, M. 2014. Theory versus practice in Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2014, 48, 34–46. 48. Liou, ML., Yu YH., 2004. The development and implementation of strategic environmental assessment in Taiwan. Environ. Impact Asses. Rev. 24(3), 337-50. 49. Larrey-Lassalle P., Catel L., Roux P., Rosenbaum R., Lopez-Ferber M., Junqua G., Loiseau E.,2017. An innovative implementation of LCA within the EIA procedure: Lessons learned from two Wastewater Treatment Plant case studies. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 63, 95–106. 50. Li, T., Wang, H., Deng, B., Ren, W., Xu, H. 2016. Strategic environmental ssessment performance factors and their interaction: An empirical study in China. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 59, 55–60. 51. Lamorgese, L., Geneletti, D. 2013. Sustainability principles in strategic environmental assessment: A framework for analysis and examples from Italian urban planning. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 42, 116–126. 52. Morrison-Saunders, A., Hodgson, N. Applying sustainability principles in practice: Guidance for assessing individual proposals. In Proceedings of the IAIA09 Impact Assessment and HumanWell-Being, 29th Annual Conference of the International Association for Impact Assessment, Accra, Ghana, 16–22 May 2009; Available online: http://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/1707/1/Applying_Sustainability_Principles_2009.pdf (accessed on 24 November 2018). 53. Monteiro, M.B., Partidário, M.R. 2017. Governance in Strategic Environmental Assessment: Lessons from the Portuguese practice. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 65, 125–138 54. Miller, W.L., Crabtree, B.F. 1992. A template approach to text analysis: Developing and using codebooks. In Doing Qualitative Research, 1st ed.; Miller, W.L., Crabtree, B.F., Eds.; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA. pp. 93–109. 55. Morrison-Saunders, A.; Fisher, T.B. 2006. What is wrong with EIA and SEA anyway? A sceptic’s perspective on sustainability assessment. J. Environ. Assess. Policy Manag. 8, 19–39. 56. Mah, D., Hills, P. 2014. Participatory governance for energy policy-making: A case study of the UK nuclear consultation in 2007. Energy Policy. 74, 340–351. 57. Morero, B., Rodriguez, M.B., Campanella, E.A., 2015. Environmental impact assessment as a complement of life cycle assessment. Case study: upgrading of biogas. Bioresour. Technol. 190, 402–407. 58. Manuilova, A., Suebsiri, J., Wilson, M., 2009. Should Life Cycle Assessment be part of the Environmental Impact Assessment? Case study: EIA of CO2 capture and storage in Canada. Energy Procedia. 1, 4511–4518. 59. McCluskey, D., E. João, 2011. The promotion of environmental enhancement in strategic environmental assessment. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev., 31: 344-351 60. McLauchlan, A., João, E. 2012. The inherent tensions arising from attempting to carry out strategic environmental assessments on all policies, plans and programmes. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 36, 23–33. 61. Nitz, T., Brown, AL., 2001. SEA must learn how policy making works. J Environ. Assess. Policy Manag. 3(3), 329-342. 62. Nilsson, M., Dalkmann, H. 2001. Decision making and strategic environmental assessment. J. Environ. Assess. Policy Manag. 3, 305–327. 63. Noble, B.F. 2002. The Canadian experience with SEA and sustainability. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 22, 3–16. 64. Noble, B., Nwanekezie, K. 2017. Conceptualizing strategic environmental assessment: Principles, approaches and research directions. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 62, 165–173. 65. Nooteboom, S. 2006. Adaptive Networks. The Governance for Sustainable Development. Eburon, Delft 66. O’Faircheallaigh, C. 2010. Public participation and environmental impact assessment: Purposes, implications, and lessons for public policy making. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 30, 19–27. 67. OECD, 2006. Applying strategic environmental assessment: good practice guidance for development cooperation. Organization for Economic Development and Cooperation, Development Assisstance Committee 68. OECD. 2010. Strategic environmental assessment and adaption to climate change, Advisory Note New York: OECD 69. Partidário, M.R. 2000. Elements of an SEA framework – improving the added-value of SEA, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 20: 647-663. 70. Petts, J. 1999. Handbook of environmental impact assessment. Blackwell, Oxford 71. Partidario, M.R. 2007. Scales and associated data—What is enough for SEA needs? Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 27, 460–478. 72. Pope, J., Annandale, D., Morrison-Saunders, A. 2004. Conceptualizing sustainability assessment. Eviron. Impact Assess. Rev. 24, 595–616. 73. Pope, J., Bond, A., Morrison-Saunders, A., Retief, F., 2013. Advancing the theory and practice of impact assessment: setting the research agenda. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 41, 1-9. 74. Rebitzer, G., T. Ekvall, R. Frischknecht, D. Hunkeler, G. Norris, T. Rydberg, W. Schmidt,S. Suh, B. Weidema and D. Pennington. 2004. Life cycle assessment part 1: Framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, and applications. Environmental International 30(5): 701-720. 75. Rega, C., Baldizzone, G. 2015. Public participation in Strategic Environmental Assessment: A practitioners’ perspective. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 50, 105–115. 76. Rozema, J., Bond, A., Cashmore, M., Chilvers, J. 2012. An investigation of environmental and sustainability discourses associated with the substantive purposes of environmental assessment. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 33, 80–90. 77. Runhaar, H., Driessen, P.P.J. 2007. What makes strategic environmental assessment successful environmental assessment? The role of context in the contribution of SEA to decision-making. Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais. 25, 2–14. 78. Richardson, T. 2005. Environmental assessment and planning theory: Four short stories about power, multiple rationality, and ethics. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 25, 341–365. 79. Stoeglehner, G. 2004. Integrating Strategic Environmental Assessment into community development plans—A case study from Austria. Eur. Environ. 14, 58–72. 80. Stoeglehner, G., Brown, A.L., Kørnøv, L. 2009. SEA and planning: ‘ownership’ of strategic environmental assessment by the planners is the key to its effectiveness. Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais. 27, 111–120. 81. Stoeglehner, G. 2010. Enhancing SEA effectiveness: Lessons learnt from Austrian experiences in spatial planning. Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais. 28, 217–231 82. Slunge, D., Nooteboom, S., Ekstrom, A., Dijkstra, G., Verheem, R. 2009. Conceptual Analysis and Evaluation Framework for Institution-Centered Strategic Environmental Assessment; Working Paper; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA 83. Sheate, W., Partidário, M.R. 2010. Strategic approaches and assessment techniques—Potential for knowledge brokerage towards sustainability. Environ. Impact Assess Rev. 30, 278–288. 84. Sadler, B., Aschemann, R., Dusik, J., Fischer, T., Partidario, M., Verheem, R. 2011. Handbook of Strategic Environmental Assessment, 1st ed.; Routledge: London, UK. 85. Stinchcombe, K., Gibson, B. 2001. Strategic Environmental Assessment as a means of pursuing sustainability: Ten advantages and ten challenges. J. Environ. Assess. Policy Manag.3, 343–372. 86. Slootweg, R. and Jones, M. 2011. Resilience thinking improves SEA: a discussion paper. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 29(4): 263–276. 87. Stirling, A. 2005. Opening up or closing down? Analysis, participation and power in the social appraisal of technology. In Science and Citizens: Globalization and the Challenge of Engagement, 1st ed.; Leach, M., Scoones, I., Wynne, B., Eds.; Zed Books: London, UK. pp. 218–231. 88. Steg, L., Perlaviciute, G., Van Der Werff, E. 2015. Personality and social psychology understanding the human dimensions of a sustainable energy transition. Front. Psychol. 6 89. Therivel, R., Partidario, M.R. 1996. The Practice of Strategic Environmental Assessment. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd 90. Therivel, R. 2004. Strategic Environmental Assessment in action. London: Earthscan 91. Therivel, R., Christian, G., Craig, C., Grinham, R., Mackins, D., Smith, J. 2009. Sustainability focused impact assessment: English experiences. Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais. 27, 155–168. 92. Tetlow, M., Hanusch, M. 2012. Strategic environmental assessment: The state of the art. Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais. 30, 15–24. 93. Thabrew, L., Wiek, A., Ries, R., 2009. Environmental decision making in multi-stakeholder contexts: applicability of life cycle thinking in development planning and implementation. J. Clean. Prod. 17, 67–76. 94. Tajima, R., Fischer, TB., 2013. Should different impact assessment instruments be integrated? Evidence from English spatial planning. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 41, 29-37. 95. Tukker, A., 2000. Life cycle assessment as a tool in environmental impact assessment. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 20(4), 435-56. 96. Thissen, W. 2000. Strategic environmental assessment at a crossroads. Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais. 18, 174–176. 97. Kuldna, P., Peterson, K., Kuhi-Thalfeldt, R. 2015. Knowledge brokering on emissions modeling in Strategic Environmental Assessment of Estonian energy policy with special reference to the LEAP model. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 54, 55–60. 98. Jha-Thakur, U., Gazzola, P., Peel, D., Fischer, T.B., Kidd, S. 2009. Effectiveness of strategic environmental assessment—The significance of learning. Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais. 27, 133–144. 99. Vicente, G.; Partidario, M.R. 2006. SEA—Enhancing communication for better environmental decisions. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 26, 696–706. 100. Webler, T., Kastenholz, H., Renn, O. 1995. Public participation in impact assessment: A social learning perspective. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 15, 443–463. 101. UNEP. 2005. UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. Life Cycle Approaches: the Road from Analysis to Practice. http://www.unep.fr/shared/publications/pdf/DTIx0594xPA-Road.pdf. 102. UNEP, 2002. Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Assessment: Towards an Integrated Approach. 103. West, C., Borzuchowska, J., Ferreia, A. SEA application in the UK, Poland and Portugal—A consultant’s perspective. In Proceedings of the IAIA Special Conference on SEA, Prague, Czech Republic, 21–23 September 2011. 104. World Bank. 2012. Strategic Environmental Assessment in Policy and Sector Reform-Conceptual Model and Sector Reform. Available online: http://web.worldbank.org/ (accessed on 16 January 2016). 105. Wallington, T., Bina, O., Thissen, W. 2007. Theorising strategic environmental assessment: fresh perspectives and future challenges. Environ Impact Assess Rev, 27, pp. 569-584 106. White, L., Noble, B.F. 2013. Strategic environmental assessment for sustainability: A review of a decade of academic research. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 42, 60–66. 107. Wu, Y.-Y., Ma, H.-W. 2018. Analysis of strategic environmental assessment in Taiwan energy policy and potential for integration with life cycle assessment. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 71, 1–11. 108. Židonienė, S., Kruopienė, J., 2015. Life cycle assessment in environmental impact assessments of industrial projects: towards the improvement. J. Clean. Prod. 106, 533-540. 109. 葉俊榮，2001。環境理性與制度抉擇。台北市：翰蘆圖書出版有限公司。 110. 林水波、莊順博。2009。〈政策利基—以台中縣市合併、台北縣市 合併為例〉。《台灣公共行政與事務系所聯合會（TASPAA） 年會暨「全球化下新公共管理趨勢與挑戰—理論與實踐」國際 研討會》。2009 年 5 月 23-24 日。高雄：國立中山大學公共事務管理研究所 111. 林鼎傑，2010。應用空間特殊性生命週期評估於台灣PVC供應鏈之環境衝擊與環境債分析，國立台灣大學，環境工程研究所碩士論文。 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/handle/123456789/840 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 政策環境影響評估制度(簡稱政策環評)在歐盟制定了政策環評指令後(2001年)，被各國應用在更多的實際案例上。政策環評制度目前在台灣已累計一些經驗(實施過30個案例)，包含作成徵詢意見、補正中還有已退回的案件。其中，能源開發政策環評屬於少數的全國性，牽涉利益相關人甚廣的案例。從一開始政策研擬，到福島核災後的撤回，以及撤回後相關單位仍然在做許多的準備工作，包含了各種替代方案研擬、數場專家會議、範疇界定會議以及公開說明會。本研究選取的案例為福島核災後，能源局於內部已完成的能源開發政策環評報告書(包含2015年開完分區說明會)的版本，但並無送進環保署。此版本為目前能源政策環評的最新版本(至2019年)。研究的主要目標為探討目前政策環評在應用上的限制，包含兩大層面，一為衝擊評估方法的不成熟，二為政策規劃中環境思考與整合的挑戰。第一個層面本研究整合生命週期評估法於政策環評流程，並探討政策規劃、範疇界定會議以及衝擊評估上的整合效益。第二個層面則利用深度訪談及模板分析法，訪談21位能源開發政策環評的利益關係人，探討目前政策環評程序中，環境思考的挑戰以及如何進一步強化環境思考的效益。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) has been implemented in many policies in the European Union since 2001. In Taiwan, SEA has been implemented for 28 cases since 2001, which includes various types of policies. National energy policy is the most challenging type. There are three most important steps in SEA process: alternative planning, scoping, and impact assessment. However, the current limitation of method application affects the effectiveness of SEA. In this case, life cycle assessment (LCA) is integrated with SEA for clarifying the role of LCA in whole SEA process. The method of combining LCA and SEA has been developed and is applied in a case of Taiwan's energy policy. Benefits from LCA in alternative planning, scoping, and impact assessment steps are explored. However, integrating SEA and policy planning processes is challenging owing to institutional challenges and/or political problems. We aimed to explore the challenges of this integration process through in-depth interviews with core stakeholders in Taiwan energy policy making. Our results reveal three main types of challenge related to policy planning, SEA implementation, and difficulties in dealing with environmental issues. The first includes the policy planning model, transparency in the policy planning process, and controversial issues clarification; the second includes the different types of SEA purposes, unclear feedback on policy planning, and public participation limitation; the third includes a lack of knowledge of brokerage processes, scientific uncertainty, the role of the Taiwan EPA (TEPA) for environmental thinking, and the influence of local information in policy planning. The results of this study can be applied to countries that use impact-oriented SEA (currently the most common type of SEA) and consider environmental issues during the energy policy planning process | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-05-11T05:11:03Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-108-F98541201-1.pdf: 1726039 bytes, checksum: 90b19707d78987415a1b12da317717f9 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 一、研究背景 1
1.1 台灣政策環評推動現況及問題 2 1.2 研究架構與流程 5 二、文獻回顧 6 2.1 政策環評現況及其程序 6 2.2 衝擊評估 (impact assessment) 8 2.3 政策環評之衝擊評估方法考量 9 2.4 生命週期評估簡介 9 2.5 生命週期評估應用於衝擊評估 14 2.6 政策環評中的環境思考(environmental thinking in SEA) 16 2.6.1不同的政策規劃模式 16 2.6.2衝擊評估導向政策環評的環境思考 18 2.6.3 策略導向政策環評的環境思考 20 2.6.4 政策規劃中的環境思考 26 2.6.5 環境思考的挑戰 27 三、研究方法 32 3.1生命週期衝擊評估方法與政策環評流程的整合 32 3.1.1 政策環評流程主要程序 32 3.1.2 生命週期評估整合政策環評程序 33 3.2 深度訪談法：如何促進政策環評的環境思考於政策規劃過程 36 四、案例分析 41 五、結果與討論：衝擊評估改善 45 5.1 政策規劃步驟 45 5.1.1環境影響評估法規規範 45 5.1.2 政策環評操作現況 45 5.1.3 LCA 對替代方案的貢獻 48 5.2 範疇界定 50 5.2.1環境影響評估法規規範 50 5.2.2 政策環評操作現況 51 5.2.3 LCA 對於範疇界定的效益 52 5.3 衝擊評估階段：環境面向 54 5.3.1環境影響評估法規規範 54 5.3.2政策環評操作現況 54 5.3.2.1 生命週期盤查資料分析 55 5.3.2.2 生命週期衝擊評估 56 5.3.2.3 生命週期衝擊評估結果闡釋 57 六、結果與討論：整合環境思考在規劃過程的挑戰 63 6.1 政策規劃面向 63 6.2 政策環評操作面向 72 6.3 環境議題面向 85 6.4 政策規劃整合環境思考之探討：可能的改善方向 93 七、討論與政策建議 108 參考文獻 112 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.subject | 生命週期評估 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 政策環評 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 能源政策 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 環境思考 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 衝擊評估 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | environmental thinking | en |
| dc.subject | life cycle assessment | en |
| dc.subject | Strategic environmental assessment | en |
| dc.subject | energy policy | en |
| dc.subject | impact assessment | en |
| dc.title | 台灣政策環境影響評估制度分析:以台灣能源政策為例 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | An Analysis of Taiwan Strategic Environmental Assessment: A Case Study of Taiwan Energy Policy | en |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 107-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 博士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 李公哲,闕蓓德,周桂田,王宏文 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 政策環評,能源政策,環境思考,衝擊評估,生命週期評估, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Strategic environmental assessment,energy policy,environmental thinking,impact assessment,life cycle assessment, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 121 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201901196 | |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2019-07-03 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 工學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 環境工程學研究所 | zh_TW |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 環境工程學研究所 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-108-1.pdf | 1.69 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件，除了特別指名其著作權條款之外，均受到著作權保護，並且保留所有的權利。