請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/94524完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 林楨家 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Jen-Jia Lin | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 陳冠縈 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | Kuan-Yin Chen | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-08-16T16:31:59Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2024-08-17 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2024-08-16 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2024 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2024-08-10 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | 英文文獻
Adler, F.R., Tanner, C. (2013). Urban Ecosystems: Ecological Principles for the Built Environment. Cambridge, New York. Alonso, W. (1964). Location and Land Use. Harvard University Press. Anguelovski I (2016) From toxic sites to parks as (green) LULUs? New challenges of inequity, privilege, gentrification, and exclusion for urban environmental justice. Journal of Planning Literature 31: 23–36. Anguelovski, I., Connolly, J. J., Cole, H., Garcia-Lamarca, M., Triguero-Mas, M., Baró, F., Martin, N., Conesa, D., Shokry, G., Pérez del, P. C., Ramos, L. A., Matheney, A., Gallez, E., Oscilowicz, E., Máñez, J. L., Sarzo, B., Beltrán, M. A.,& Minaya, J. M. (2022). Green gentrification in European and North American cities. Nature Communications, 13(1), 1-13. Anguelovski, I., Connolly, J. J., Masip, L., & Pearsall, H. (2018). Assessing green gentrification in historically disenfranchised neighborhoods: a longitudinal and spatial analysis of Barcelona. Urban Geography, 39(3), 458-491. Anguelovski, I., Connolly, J., & Brand, A. L. (2018). From landscapes of utopia to the margins of the green urban life: For whom is the new green city? City, 22(3), 417-436. Anselin, L. (2002). Under the hood issues in the specification and interpretation of spatial regression models. Agricultural Economics, 27(3), 247-267. Baker, D. M., & Lee, B. (2019). How does light rail transit (LRT) impact gentrification? Evidence from fourteen US urbanized areas. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 39(1), 35-49. Baltagi, B.H., Li, D. (2004). Prediction in the Panel Data Model with Spatial Correlation. In: Anselin, L., Florax, R.J.G.M., Rey, S.J. (eds) Advances in Spatial Econometrics. Advances in Spatial Science. Barro, R. J., & Lee, J. W. (2013). A new data set of educational attainment in the world, 1950-2010. Journal of Development Economics, 104, 184-198. Bedimo-Rung, A. L., Mowen, A. J., & Cohen, D. A. (2005). The significance of parks to physical activity and public health: A conceptual model. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28(2), 159-168. Boone, C. G., Buckley, G. L., Grove, J. M., & Sister, C. (2009). Parks and people: An environmental justice inquiry in Baltimore, Maryland. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 99(4), 767-787. Borjas, G. J. (1989). Economic theory and international migration. International Migration Review, 23(3), 457-485. Bowler, D. E., Buyung-Ali, L. M., Knight, T. M., & Pullin, A. S. (2010). Urban greening to cool towns and cities: A systematic review of the empirical evidence. Landscape and Urban Planning, 97(3), 147-155. Bramley, G. (1993). The impact of land use planning and tax subsidies on the supply and price of housing in Britain. Urban Studies, 30(1), 5-30. Braswell, T. H. (2018). Fresh food, new faces: community gardening as ecological gentrification in St. Louis, Missouri. Agriculture and Human Values, 35(4), 809-822. Butler, T., & Robson, G. (2003). London Calling: The Middle Classes and the Re-Making of Inner London. Berg Publishers, Oxford. Capasso Da Silva, D., King, D. A., & Lemar, S. (2019). Accessibility in practice: 20-minute city as a sustainability planning goal. Sustainability, 12(1), 129. Cervero, R., & Duncan, M. (2006). Which reduces vehicle travel more: Jobs-housing balance or retail-housing mixing? Journal of the American Planning Association, 72(4), 475-490. Checker, M. (2011). Wiped out by the “greenwave”: Environmental gentrification and the paradoxical politics of urban sustainability. City & Society, 23(2), 210-229. Chen, Y., & Rosenthal, S. S. (2008). Local amenities and life-cycle migration: Do people move for jobs or fun? Journal of Urban Economics, 64(3), 519-537. Chen, Y., Xi, H., & Jiao, J. (2023). What Are the Relationships between Public Transit and Gentrification Progress? An Empirical Study in the New York–Northern New Jersey–Long Island Areas. Land, 12(2), 358. Chen, Y., Xu, Z., Byrne, J., Xu, T., Wang, S., & Wu, J. (2021). Can smaller parks limit green gentrification? Insights from Hangzhou, China. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 59, 127009. Chiesura, A. (2004). The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landscape and Urban Planning, 68(1), 129-138. Cho, S. H., Bowker, J. M., & Park, W. M. (2006). Measuring the contribution of water and green space amenities to housing values: An application and comparison of spatially weighted hedonic models. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 31(3), 485-507. Clark, E. (1988). The rent gap and transformation of the built environment: Case studies in Malmö 1860–1985. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 70(2), 241-254. Clark, W. A. V., & Maas, R. (2015). Interpreting migration through the prism of reasons for moves. Population, Space and Place, 21(1), 54-67. Cohen, D. A., McKenzie, T. L., Sehgal, A., Williamson, S., Golinelli, D., & Lurie, N. (2007). Contribution of public parks to physical activity. American Journal of Public Health, 97(3), 509-514. Cole, H. V., Triguero-Mas, M., Connolly, J. J., & Anguelovski, I. (2019). Determining the health benefits of green space: Does gentrification matter? Health & Place, 57, 1-11. Coulson, N. E., & Fisher, L. M. (2009). Housing tenure and labor market impacts: The search goes on. Journal of Urban Economics, 65(3), 252-264. Crompton, J. L. (2001). The impact of parks on property values: A review of the empirical evidence. Journal of Leisure Research, 33(1), 1-31. Curran, W. (2004). "Gentrification and the nature of work: Exploring the links in Williamsburg, Brooklyn." Environment and Planning A, 36(7), 1243-1258. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1). Davidson, M., & Lees, L. (2005). New-build ‘gentrification’and London's riverside renaissance. Environment and Planning A, 37(7), 1165-1190. Des Rosiers, F., Thériault, M., Kestens, Y., & Villeneuve, P. (2002). Landscaping and house values: An empirical investigation. Journal of Real Estate Research, 23(1-2), 139-162. Dooling, S. (2009). Ecological gentrification: A research agenda exploring justice in the city. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 33(3), 621-639. Douglas, I. and James, P. (2014). Urban Ecology: An Introduction. Routledge, New York. Elhorst, J. P. (2014). Spatial Econometrics: From Cross-sectional Data to Spatial Panels. Springer, Heidelberg. Escobedo, F. J., Kroeger, T., & Wagner, J. E. (2011). Urban forests and pollution mitigation: Analyzing ecosystem services and disservices. Environmental Pollution, 159(8-9), 2078-2087. Fan, Y., Das, K. V., & Chen, Q. (2011). Neighborhood green, social support, physical activity, and stress: Assessing the cumulative impact. Health & Place, 17(6), 1202-1211. Freeman, L. (2005). Displacement or succession? Residential mobility in gentrifying neighborhoods. Urban Affairs Review, 40(4), 463-491. Gascon, M., Triguero-Mas, M., Martínez, D., Dadvand, P., Forns, J., Plasència, A., & Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J. (2015). Mental health benefits of long-term exposure to residential green and blue spaces: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(4), 4354-4379. Gaston, K. J., Ávila-Jiménez, M. L., & Edmondson, J. L. (2008). Managing urban ecosystems for goods and services. Journal of Applied Ecology, 45(3), 758-762. Gibbons, S., Mourato, S., & Resende, G. (2014). The amenity value of English nature: A hedonic price approach. Environmental and Resource Economics, 57(2), 175-196. Giles-Corti, B., Broomhall, M. H., Knuiman, M., Collins, C., Douglas, K., Ng, K., ... & Donovan, R. J. (2005). Increasing walking: how important is distance to, attractiveness, and size of public open space?. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28(2), 169-176. Gill, S. E., Handley, J. F., Ennos, A. R., & Pauleit, S. (2007). Adapting cities for climate change: the role of the green infrastructure. Built Environment, 33(1), 115-133. Glaeser, E. L., & Gyourko, J. (2003). The impact of building restrictions on housing affordability. Federal Reserve Bank of New York Economic Policy Review, 9(2), 21-39. Glaeser, E. L., Kolko, J., & Saiz, A. (2001). Consumer city. Journal of Economic Geography, 1(1), 27-50. Glass, R. (1964). London: Aspects of Change. MacGibbon & Kee, London. Grube-Cavers, A., & Patterson, Z. (2015). Urban rapid rail transit and gentrification in Canadian urban centres: A survival analysis approach. Urban Studies, 52(1), 178-194. Ha, S. K. (2004). Housing renewal and neighborhood change as a gentrification process in Seoul. Cities, 21(5), 381-389. Hamnett, C. (2003). Gentrification and the middle-class remaking of inner London, 1961-2001. Urban Studies, 40(12), 2401-2426. Handy, S., Cao, X., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2005). Correlation or causality between the built environment and travel behavior? Evidence from Northern California. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 10(6), 427-444. Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2007). The role of education quality in economic growth. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper (No. 4122). Harris, A. (2012). Art and gentrification: Pursuing the urban pastoral in Hoxton, London. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(2), 226-241. Harris, J. R., & Todaro, M. P. (1970). Migration, unemployment and development: A two-sector analysis. The American Economic Review, 60(1), 126-142. Harvey, D. (2006). Limits to Capital. Verso, London. Harvey, D. (2008). The Right to the City. New Left Review, London. Harvey, D. (2010). Social Justice and The City (Vol. 1). University of Georgia press., Athens Heidkamp, C. P., & Lucas, S. (2006). Finding the gentrification frontier using census data: The case of Portland, Maine. Urban Geography, 27(2), 101-125. Helms, A. C. (2003). Understanding gentrification: An empirical analysis of the determinants of urban housing renovation. Journal of Urban Economics, 54(3), 474-498. Heynen, N., Perkins, H. A., & Roy, P. (2006). The political ecology of uneven urban green space: The impact of political economy on race and ethnicity in producing environmental inequality in Milwaukee. Urban Affairs Review, 42(1), 3-25. Immergluck, D., & Balan, T. (2018). Sustainable for whom? Green urban development, environmental gentrification, and the Atlanta Beltline. Urban Geography, 39(4), 546-562. Jenks, M., & Jones, C. (Eds.). (2009). Dimensions of the Sustainable City. Springer, London. Jim, C. Y. (2004). Green-space preservation and allocation for sustainable greening of compact cities. Cities, 21(4), 311-320. Jim, C. Y., & Chen, W. Y. (2006). Impacts of urban environmental elements on residential housing prices in Guangzhou (China). Landscape and Urban Planning, 78(4), 422-434. Jim, C. Y., & Chen, W. Y. (2006). Perception and attitude of residents toward urban green spaces in Guangzhou (China). Environmental Management, 38, 338-349. Kabisch, N., & Haase, D. (2014). Green justice or just green? Provision of urban green spaces in Berlin, Germany. Landscape and Urban Planning, 122, 129-139. Kahn, M. E. (2007). Gentrification trends in new transit‐oriented communities: Evidence from 14 cities that expanded and built rail transit systems. Real Estate Economics, 35(2), 155-182. Kong, F., Yin, H., & Nakagoshi, N. (2007). Using GIS and landscape metrics in the hedonic price modeling of the amenity value of urban green space: A case study in Jinan City, China. Landscape and Urban Planning, 79(3-4), 240-252. Krueger, A. B., & Summers, L. H. (1988). Efficiency wages and the inter-industry wage structure. Econometrica, 56(2), 259-293. Kuo, F. E., & Sullivan, W. C. (2001). Environment and crime in the inner city: Does vegetation reduce crime? Environment and Behavior, 33(3), 343-367. Kweon, B. S., Sullivan, W. C., & Wiley, A. R. (1998). Green common spaces and the social integration of inner-city older adults. Environment and Behavior, 30(6), 832-858. Lees, L., Slater, T., & Wyly, E. (2008). Gentrification. Routledge, New York Ley, D., & Dobson, C. (2008). Are there limits to gentrification? The contexts of impeded gentrification in Vancouver. Urban Studies, 45(12), 2471-2498. Liang, C., Huang, Y., Yip, T. L., & Li, V. J. (2022). Does rail transit development gentrify neighborhoods? Evidence from Hong Kong. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 155, 354-372. Lin, J. (2002). Gentrification and transit in northwest Chicago. Journal of the Transportation Research Forum, 41(4), 175-191. Lin, J. J., & Chung, J. C. (2017). Metro-induced gentrification: A 17-year experience in Taipei. Cities, 67, 53-62. Lin, J. J., Yai, T., & Chen, C. H. (2022). Temporal changes of transit-induced gentrification: A forty-year experience in Tokyo, Japan. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 112(1), 247-265. Lin, T. G., Xia, J. C., Robinson, T. P., Goulias, K. G., Church, R. L., Olaru, D., Cao, X., & Han, R. (2014). Spatial analysis of access to and accessibility surrounding train stations: A case study of accessibility for the elderly in Perth, Western Australia. Journal of Transport Geography, 39, 111-120. Liu, R., Greene, R., Yu, Y., & Lv, H. (2022). Are migration and settlement environment-driven? Environment-related residential preferences of migrants in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 377, 134263. Logan, J. R., & Molotch, H. L. (1987). Urban Fortunes: The Political Economy of Place. University of California Press, Berkeley. Loughran, K. (2014). Parks for profit: The high line, growth machines, and the uneven development of urban public spaces. City & Community, 13(1), 49-68. Luttik, J. (2000). The value of trees, water and open space as reflected by house prices in the Netherlands. Landscape and Urban Planning, 48(3-4), 161-167. Maas, J., Verheij, R. A., Groenewegen, P. P., de Vries, S., & Spreeuwenberg, P. (2006). Green space, urbanity, and health: How strong is the relation? Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 60(7), 587-592. Madureira, H., Andresen, T., & Monteiro, A. (2011). Green structure and planning evolution in Porto. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 10(2), 141-149. Maia, A. T. A., Calcagni, F., Connolly, J. J. T., Anguelovski, I., & Langemeyer, J. (2020). Hidden drivers of social injustice: uncovering unequal cultural ecosystem services behind green gentrification. Environmental Science & Policy, 112, 254-263. Massoni, E. S., Barton, D. N., Rusch, G. M., & Gundersen, V. (2018). Bigger, more diverse and better? Mapping structural diversity and its recreational value in urban green spaces. Ecosystem Services, 31, 502-516. McCue, T., & Kling, J. (1994). Real estate returns and the macroeconomy: some empirical evidence from real estate investment trust data, 1972-1991. Journal of Real Estate Research, 9(3), 277-287. Molloy, R., Smith, C. L., & Wozniak, A. (2011). Internal migration in the United States. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 25(3), 173-196. Moskowitz, P. E. (2017). How to Kill a City: Gentrification, Inequality, and the Fight for the Neighborhood. Hachette UK, London. Neuvonen, M., Sievänen, T., Tönnes, S., & Koskela, T. (2007). Access to green areas and the frequency of visits–A case study in Helsinki. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 6(4), 235-247. Niemelä, J. (1999). Ecology and urban planning. Biodiversity & Conservation, 8, 119-131. Oaxaca, R. (1973). Male-female wage differentials in urban labor markets. International Economic Review, 14(3), 693-709. Oreopoulos, P., & Petronijevic, U. (2013). Making college worth it: A review of research on the returns to higher education. The Future of Children, 23(1), 41-65. Padeiro, M., Louro, A., & da Costa, N. M. (2019). Transit-oriented development and gentrification: A systematic review. Transport Reviews, 39(6), 733-754. Pearsall, H., & Eller, J. K. (2020). Locating the green space paradox: A study of gentrification and public green space accessibility in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Landscape and Urban Planning, 195, 103708. Perna, L. W., & Titus, M. A. (2005). The relationship between parental involvement as social capital and college enrollment: An examination of racial/ethnic group differences. The Journal of Higher Education, 76(5), 485-518. Pratt, A. C. (2009). Urban regeneration: From the arts 'feel good' factor to the cultural economy: A case study of Hoxton, London. Urban Studies, 46(5-6), 1041-1061. Psacharopoulos, G., & Patrinos, H. A. (2004). Returns to investment in education: A further update. Education Economics, 12(2), 111-134. Quinton, J., Nesbitt, L., & Sax, D. (2022). How well do we know green gentrification? A systematic review of the methods. Progress in Human Geography, 46(4), 960-987. Rigolon, A. (2016). A complex landscape of inequity in access to urban parks: A literature review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 153, 160-169. Rigolon, A., & Németh, J. (2020). Green gentrification or ‘just green enough’: Do park location, size and function affect whether a place gentrifies or not? Urban Studies, 57(2), 402-420. Rigolon, A., Collins, T., Kim, J., Stuhlmacher, M., & Christensen, J. (2024). Does gentrification precede and follow greening? Evidence about the green gentrification cycle in Los Angeles and Chicago. Landscape and Urban Planning, 248, 105095. Schneider, M., & Yin, L. (2011). The Impact of School Facilities on Student Achievement: Experiences from the DC Public School System. National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities, Washington, D.C. Seto, K. C., Reenberg, A., Boone, C. G., Fragkias, M., Haase, D., Langanke, T., Marcotullio, P., Munroe, D. K., Olah, B., & Simon, D. (2012). Urban land teleconnections and sustainability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(20), 7687-7692. Sharifi, F., Nygaard, A., Stone, W. M., & Levin, I. (2021). Green gentrification or gentrified greening: Metropolitan Melbourne. Land Use Policy, 108, 105577. Sieg, H., Smith, V. K., Banzhaf, H. S., & Walsh, R. (2004). Estimating the general equilibrium benefits of large changes in spatially delineated public goods. International Economic Review, 45(4), 1047-1077. Sjaastad, L. A. (1962). The costs and returns of human migration. Journal of Political Economy, 70(5, Part 2), 80-93. Smith, N. (1979). Toward a theory of gentrification a back to the city movement by capital, not people. Journal of the American Planning Association, 45(4), 538-548. Smith, N. (1987). Gentrification and the rent gap. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 77(3), 462-465. Smith, N. (1996). The New Urban Frontier: Gentrification and the Revanchist City. Routledge, London. Smith, N. (2002). New globalism, new urbanism: Gentrification asaglobal urban strategy. Antipode, 34(3), 427-450. Stanners, D., & Bourdeau, P. (1995). Europes Environment: The Dobris Assessment. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg. Stessens, P., Canters, F., Huysmans, M., & Khan, A. Z. (2020). Urban green space qualities: An integrated approach towards GIS-based assessment reflecting user perception. Land Use Policy, 91, 104319. Stuhlmacher, M., Kim, Y., & Kim, J. E. (2022). The role of green space in Chicago’s gentrification. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 71, 127569. Sugiyama, T., Leslie, E., Giles-Corti, B., & Owen, N. (2008). Associations of neighbourhood greenness with physical and mental health: Do walking, social coherence and local social interaction explain the relationships? Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 62(5), e9-e9. Talen, E. (2005). New Urbanism and American Planning: The Conflict of Cultures. Routledge, London. Tobler, W. R. (1970). Spectral Analysis of Spatial Series. Library Photographic Service, University of California, Berkeley. Todaro, M. P. (1969). A model of labor migration and urban unemployment in less developed countries. The American Economic Review, 59(1), 138-148. Troy, A., & Grove, J. M. (2008). Property values, parks, and crime: A hedonic analysis in Baltimore, MD. Landscape and Urban Planning, 87(3), 233-245. Tsou, K. W., Hung, Y. T., & Chang, Y. L. (2005). An accessibility-based integrated measure of relative spatial equity in urban public facilities. Cities, 22(6), 424-435. Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A., & Zelson, M. (1991). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11(3), 201-230. Wang, J., & Lau, S. S. Y. (2009). Gentrification and Shanghai’s new middle-class: Another reflection on the cultural consumption thesis. Cities, 26(2), 57-66. Wen, M., Zhang, X., Harris, C. D., Holt, J. B., & Croft, J. B. (2013). Spatial disparities in the distribution of parks and green spaces in the USA. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 45(suppl_1), S18-S27. Wolch, J. R., Byrne, J., & Newell, J. P. (2014). Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: The challenge of making cities ‘just green enough’. Landscape and Urban Planning, 125, 234-244. Xiao, Q., & McPherson, E. G. (2002). Rainfall interception by Santa Monica’s municipal urban forest. Urban Ecosystems, 6(4), 291-302. Xu, L., You, H., Li, D., & Yu, K. (2016). Urban green spaces, their spatial pattern, and ecosystem service value: The case of Beijing. Habitat International, 56, 84-95. Xu, M., Xin, J., Su, S., Weng, M., & Cai, Z. (2017). Social inequalities of park accessibility in Shenzhen, China: The role of park quality, transport modes, and hierarchical socioeconomic characteristics. Journal of Transport Geography, 62, 38-50. Zheng, S., & Kahn, M. E. (2013). Does government investment in local public goods spur gentrification? Evidence from Beijing. Real Estate Economics, 41(1), 1-28. Zuk, M., Bierbaum, A. H., Chapple, K., Gorska, K., & Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (2018). Gentrification, displacement, and the role of public investment. Journal of Planning Literature, 33(1), 31-44.. Zukin, S. (1982). Loft Living: Culture and Capital in Urban Change. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Zukin, S. (1987). Gentrification: culture and capital in the urban core. Annual Review of Sociology, 13(1), 129-147. 中文文獻 王千岳(2019)。空間外溢:直接效果與間接效果-以住宅地價之空間外溢為例。地理學報,(94),頁55-71。 王志弘、李涵茹、黃若慈(2013)。縉紳化或便利城市升級?─新北市三重區都市生活支持系統再結構。國家發展研究,12(2),179-229。 王志弘、李涵茹(2015)。綠色縉紳化?臺北都會區水岸住宅發展初探。社會科學論叢,9(2),31-88。 台灣經濟研究院(2001)。台北市萬華、大同地區特色產業調查研究。台北市:台北市商業管理處委託研究報告。 吳振發、詹士樑(2003)。常態化差異植生指數應用於都市綠地品質管制之探討。台灣土地研究,6(2),頁17-42。 吳振發、鄧東波、林裕彬(2000)。台北市各行政區生活素質比較之研究,第三屆造園景觀與環境規劃設計成果研究會論文集 ,頁641-652。 李承嘉(2000)。租隙理論之發展及其限制。臺灣土地研究,1,頁 67-89。 林祖嘉、林素菁(1994)。台灣地區住宅需求價格彈性與所得彈性之估計。住宅學報,(2),頁25-48。 林楨家、黃至豪(2003)。台北捷運營運前後沿線房地屬性特徵價格之變化。運輸計劃季刊,32(4),頁777-800。 張金鶚(1990)。住宅問題與住宅政策之研究。台北市:內政部營建署。 張俊彥(2000)。城鄉居民對休閒綠地需求之研究,觀光研究學報,5(2),頁57-70。 黃仁德(2000)。台北市產業與就業發展策略之研究。台北市:台北市政府研究發展考核委員會。 黃仁德、姜樹翰(1999)。台北都會區的發展變遷與產業策略。台灣銀行季刊,50:4,頁124-150。 黃世孟(1989)。從台北都市計畫歷史探討空間結構變遷特質之研究(AD. 1895-1945)。國立台灣大學建築與城鄉研究學報,(4),頁67-83。 黃孫權(2012)。綠色推土機:九零年代的台北的違建、公園、自然房地產與制度化地景,台北:破周報。 劉小蘭、沈育生、蔡杰廷(2016)。都會區綠地變遷趨勢及其驅動因素之探討-以臺北都會區為例。都市與計劃,43(2),189-227。 劉立偉、黃子珍(2011)。公園綠地空間分布的評析:從漸進規劃的觀點談都市公共設施用地檢討。建築學報,76,頁91-112。 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/94524 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 都市綠化近年來在全球都市規劃研究中佔有著相當重要的地位,都市的綠色地帶成為了都市為居民提供效益的自然與半自然區域,在過去的三十年裡,伴隨著探討都市中綠地與綠化在功能、氣候與健康上有益處的新興文獻,人們也越來越意識到都市綠化可以產生的經濟效益。當規劃完善的綠地出現在於歷史上被邊緣化的區域時,對綠地及周遭基礎設施的投資可能會導致地區的租金和房屋價值的增加,這往往會讓原本即居住於此的低收入居民被取代;同時也由於人們對更宜居都市地區的需求,使得綠色縉紳化(Green Gentrification)構成了當今社會邊緣化都市社區面臨的主要環境正義問題之一。綠地的分配和獲取方面一直以來存在著種族與收入上的巨大的不均,即便都市綠化具有氣候、健康和社會經濟效益,但在許多情況下促成的綠色縉紳化,最終將破壞環境公平和社會正義。
為探討都市綠地對縉紳化的影響,本研究考量研究空間呈現之社會經濟特性,以臺北市最小行政單位里層級作為研究單元,研究單元為臺北市民政局截至民國112年4月底統計共456個里,研究時間設定以社會人口統計資料與綠地空間可取得之年份,為2008年至2022年。本研究回顧過往文獻,使用多個縉紳化指標進行分析,同時基於縉紳化是一個連續的長期演變過程,因此使用「空間追蹤資料模型(Spatial Panel Data Regression Model)」處理時間與空間自相關資料屬性。 研究結果證實,在亞洲城市,臺北市都市綠地引發縉紳化的現象確實發生。值得注意的是,作為在都市發展歷程與歐美國家不同的都市,臺北市在經歷都市化後,並沒有出現都市中心區域明顯衰退的現象,但依然出現綠地對縉紳的影響。過去在綠色縉紳化的實證研究中有一部分文獻強調了可及性對縉紳化的影響,但在本研究結果中,綠地的可及性僅在一項縉紳化指標中呈現顯著影響,顯示都市尺度的不同造成綠地特徵的影響也不同。不同的綠地特徵在不同的縉紳化指標中呈現具有差異的結果,綠地數量與綠地覆蓋比率在較多的縉紳化指標中具有顯著影響性,顯示除了規劃的綠地之外,地區中仍然有許多綠色空間會造就縉紳化的發生,此結果也符合近年來綠色空間呈現多樣化的趨勢。此外研究證實了部分縉紳化指標在空間上的相依性,顯示不同群體對於綠地及綠化空間的偏好,以及綠地帶來開發上的利益會使得縉紳化具有空間上的外溢效果,擁有綠地的地區會對周遭地區正向影響,造成空間群聚的現象。 本研究在學術上補足了過往文獻較為忽略的部分,並提供過往文獻未提供之分析結果。整體而言都市綠地對縉紳化有正向影響,並且在空間上呈現相依性,而透過對臺北市的綠化發展政策之爬梳,顯示臺北市與過往研究的歐美都市案例,人口結構及發展脈絡不同,因此在整體綠化對縉紳化的影響上呈現與研究原始預期不同的結果。在實務上,公部門應認知這些綠色空間的建置將帶來周遭地區的縉紳化,並將此影響納入之後規劃與預算分配的考量之中。本研究證實,規劃綠地的數量與距離對人口遷移比例呈現正向影響,故本研究提出在綠地開發和政策制定過程中,應與原有社區居民協商,確保政策能夠滿足社區內部不同群體的需求,同時進行相關政策的配套措施。另外規劃綠地的面積也與家戶收入中位數、住宅交易價格呈現正向影響,故擴大租金補貼、增加社會住宅,可以減少低收入家庭被迫遷出的狀況發生。同時獎勵周邊的經濟活動運用原有社區勞工,增加工作機會,也能提升原有社區居民的收入。終極目標應是使得人們可以從最初資源的接受者變成資源的給予者,成就具有公平性及包容性的都市空間。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | In recent years, urban greening has held a significant position in global urban planning research. Urban green spaces have become natural and semi-natural areas that provide benefits to city residents. Over the past thirty years, along with emerging literature discussing the functional, climatic, and health benefits of urban green spaces, there has been a growing awareness of the economic benefits that urban greening can generate. When well-planned green spaces appear in historically marginalized areas, investments in green spaces and surrounding infrastructure may lead to increases in property rents and values, often resulting in the displacement of low-income residents who originally lived there. This has made green gentrification one of the primary environmental justice issues faced by marginalized urban communities today. There has long been significant racial and income inequality in the distribution and access to green spaces. Although urban greening offers climatic, health, and socio-economic benefits, the green gentrification it often fosters ultimately undermines environmental fairness and social justice.
To explore the impact of urban green spaces on gentrification, this study considered the socio-economic characteristics presented in study area, using the smallest administrative unit in Taipei City, the "Li" level, as the research unit. According to statistics from the Taipei City Civil Affairs Bureau as of the end of April 2023, there were 456 Lis. The study period was set from 2008 to 2022, using available socio-demographic data and green space information. This study revieweds the past literature and used multiple gentrification indicators for analysis. Given that gentrification is a continuous long-term process, the "Spatial Panel Data Regression Model" was used to handle the temporal and spatial autocorrelation among the study observations. The results confirm that in Asian cities, urban green spaces in Taipei City indeed trigger gentrification. Notably, unlike Western cities, Taipei City, after urbanization, did not experience significant decline in central urban areas, yet the influence of green spaces on gentrification is still evident. Some empirical studies on green gentrification emphasize the impact of accessibility on gentrification. However, in this study, accessibility to green spaces only shows significant influence on only one gentrification indicator, indicating that the impact of green space characteristics varies with urban scales. Different green space characteristics present varying results across different gentrification indicators. The number of green spaces and green coverage ratio reveal positive influences on gentrification indicators, suggesting that besides planned green spaces, numerous green spaces in the area also contribute to gentrification. This result aligns with the recent trend of diverse presentations of green spaces. Furthermore, the study confirms the spatial autocorrelation of certain gentrification indicators, showing that different groups' preferences for green spaces and the development benefits brought by green spaces cause gentrification to have spatial spillover effects. Areas with green spaces positively influence surrounding areas, leading to spatial clustering phenomena. This study academically supplements the parts overlooked by past literature and provides analytical results not offered in previous studies. Overall, urban green spaces positively influence gentrification and exhibit spatial autocorrelation. By examining the green development policies of Taipei City, it is evident that the population structure and development context differ from those of Western cities, resulting in outcomes that differ from the initial research expectations regarding the overall impact of greening on gentrification. Practically, public sectors should recognize that the establishment of these green spaces will lead to gentrification in surrounding areas and consider this impact in future planning and budget allocation. This study confirms that the quantity and proximity of planned green spaces positively affect population migration rates. Therefore, it is recommended that during green space development and policy-making processes, negotiations with existing community residents should be conducted to ensure that policies meet the needs of different groups within the community, along with supporting measures for relevant policies. Additionally, the planned green space area positively impacts median household income and residential transaction prices. Hence, expanding rent subsidies and increasing social housing can reduce the forced displacement of low-income families. Moreover, incentivizing surrounding economic activities to employ local community labor and increasing job opportunities can also enhance the income of existing community residents. The ultimate goal should be to enable people to transition from initial resource recipients to resource providers, achieving equitable and inclusive urban spaces. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2024-08-16T16:31:59Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2024-08-16T16:31:59Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝辭 i
摘要 ii Abstract iv 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 第四節 研究流程 11 第五節 研究方法 14 第二章 文獻回顧 15 第一節 都市綠地的空間特徵 15 第二節 縉紳化與都市綠地 20 第三節 綜合評析 33 第三章 研究設計 36 第一節 研究課題 36 第二節 假說研提 48 第三節 驗證方法 62 第四章 資料蒐集與分析 71 第一節 樣本資料蒐集 71 第二節 敘述統計 79 第三節 相關分析 87 第五章 實證分析 93 第一節 模型估計 94 第二節 假說驗證 103 第三節 討論與分析 121 第六章 結論與建議 133 第一節 結論 133 第二節 研究後續建議 136 參考文獻 138 英文文獻 138 中文文獻 148 附錄1 臺北市可縉化里綜合所得總額中位數 149 | - |
| dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
| dc.subject | 都市綠地 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 綠色縉紳化 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 縉紳化 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 追蹤資料廻歸模型 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 空間追蹤資料廻歸模型 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | green gentrification | en |
| dc.subject | panel data regression model | en |
| dc.subject | spatial panel data regression model | en |
| dc.subject | gentrification | en |
| dc.subject | urban green spaces | en |
| dc.title | 綠地對縉紳化之影響 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | The Influence of Green Spaces on Gentrification | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 112-2 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 黃麗玲;趙子元 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Li-Ling Huang;Tzu-Yuan Chao | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | 都市綠地,綠色縉紳化,縉紳化,追蹤資料廻歸模型,空間追蹤資料廻歸模型, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | urban green spaces,green gentrification,gentrification,panel data regression model,spatial panel data regression model, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 151 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202403651 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(限校園內公開) | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2024-08-13 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 工學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 建築與城鄉研究所 | - |
| 顯示於系所單位: | 建築與城鄉研究所 | |
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-112-2.pdf 授權僅限NTU校內IP使用(校園外請利用VPN校外連線服務) | 3.74 MB | Adobe PDF |
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。
