Skip navigation

DSpace

機構典藏 DSpace 系統致力於保存各式數位資料(如:文字、圖片、PDF)並使其易於取用。

點此認識 DSpace
DSpace logo
English
中文
  • 瀏覽論文
    • 校院系所
    • 出版年
    • 作者
    • 標題
    • 關鍵字
    • 指導教授
  • 搜尋 TDR
  • 授權 Q&A
    • 我的頁面
    • 接受 E-mail 通知
    • 編輯個人資料
  1. NTU Theses and Dissertations Repository
  2. 共同教育中心
  3. 生物多樣性國際碩士學位學程
請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件: http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/104175
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位值語言
dc.contributor.advisor洪詩涵zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisorShih-Han Hungen
dc.contributor.author李若云zh_TW
dc.contributor.authorGyslaine Niyokwizeraen
dc.date.accessioned2026-08-24T16:21:21Z-
dc.date.available2026-08-25-
dc.date.copyright2026-08-24-
dc.date.issued2026-
dc.date.submitted2026-08-13 13:09:48-
dc.identifier.citation1. Akçakese, A., Demirel, M., Yolcu, A. F., Gümüş, H., Ayhan, C., Sarol, H., ... & Stoica, L. (2024). Nature relatedness, flow experience, and environmental behaviors in nature-based leisure activities. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1397148.
2. Andersson, E., Barthel, S., & Ahrné, K. (2007). Measuring social–ecological dynamics behind the generation of ecosystem services. Ecological applications, 17(5), 1267-1278.
3. Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Sutherland, L. A. (2011). Visitors’ memories of wildlife tourism: Implications for the design of powerful interpretive experiences. Tourism management, 32(4), 770-779.
4. Barbett, L., Stupple, E. J., Sweet, M., Schofield, M. B., & Richardson, M. (2020). Measuring actions for nature—development and validation of a pro-nature conservation behaviour scale. Sustainability, 12(12), 4885.
5. Berman, M. G., Jonides, J., & Kaplan, S. (2008). The cognitive benefits of interacting with nature. Psychological science, 19(12), 1207-1212.
6. Berto, R. (2014). The Role of Nature in Coping with Psycho-Physiological Stress: A Literature Review on Restorativeness. Behavioral Sciences, 4(4), 394-409.
7. Buchmann, C. (2009). Cuban home gardens and their role in social–ecological resilience. Human Ecology, 37(6), 705-721.
8. Cai, K., Cheng, Y., Fountain, J., Guo, L., Fu, B., & Ni, H. (2026). How Does Rural Tourscape Influence Tourists’ Environmentally Responsible Behavior? The Mediating Role of Nature Relatedness and Place Attachment. Agriculture, 16(6), 639.
9. Camacho-Cervantes, M., Schondube, J. E., Castillo, A., & MacGregor-Fors, I. (2014). How do people perceive urban trees? Assessing likes and dislikes in relation to the trees of a city. Urban ecosystems, 17(3), 761-773.
10. Capaldi, C. A., Dopko, R. L., & Zelenski, J. M. (2014). The relationship between nature connectedness and happiness: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in psychology, 5, 92737.
11. Cardinale, B. J., Duffy, J. E., Gonzalez, A., Hooper, D. U., Perrings, C., Venail, P., ... & Naeem, S. (2012). Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature, 486(7401), 59–67.
12. Carrus, G., Scopelliti, M., Lafortezza, R., Colangelo, G., Ferrini, F., Salbitano, F., ... & Sanesi, G. (2015). Go greener, feel better? The positive effects of biodiversity on the well-being of individuals visiting urban and peri-urban green areas. Landscape and urban planning, 134, 221-228.
13. Central Weather Administration. (2026). Monthly meteorological data: December 2025–May 2026. Ministry of Transportation and Communications, Republic of China. Retrieved June 10, 2026, from https://www.cwa.gov.tw/V8/C/C/Statistics/monthlydata.html
14. Chen, X., & Liu, P. (2024). Place attachment promotes pro-environmental behaviors: The mediating role of nature relatedness. In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol. 536, p. 01001). EDP Sciences.
15. Cilliers, S., Cilliers, J., Lubbe, R., & Siebert, S. (2012). Ecosystem services of urban green spaces in African countries – perspectives and challenges. Urban Ecosystems, 16(4), 681–702.
16. Clayton, S., Colléony, A., Conversy, P., Maclouf, E., Martin, L., Torres, A. C., ... & Prévot, A. C. (2017). Transformation of experience: Toward a new relationship with nature. Conservation letters, 10(5), 645-651.
17. Collado, S., Evans, G. W., & Sorrel, M. A. (2017). The role of parents and best friends in children's pro-environmentalism: Differences according to age and gender. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 54, 27-37.
18. Corley, J., Okely, J. A., Taylor, A. M., Page, D., Welstead, M., Skarabela, B., ... & Russ, T. C. (2021). Home garden use during COVID-19: Associations with physical and mental wellbeing in older adults. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 73, 101545.
19. Cox, D. T., & Gaston, K. J. (2015). Likeability of garden birds: Importance of species knowledge & richness in connecting people to nature. PLoS ONE, 10(11), e0141505.
20. Cox, D. T., Shanahan, D. F., Hudson, H. L., Plummer, K. E., Siriwardena, G. M., Fuller, R. A., ... & Gaston, K. J. (2017). Doses of neighborhood nature: The benefits for mental health of living with nature. AIBS Bulletin, 67(2), 147–155.
21. Dallimer, M., Irvine, K. N., Skinner, A. M., Davies, Z. G., Rouquette, J. R., Maltby, L. L., ... & Gaston, K. J. (2012). Biodiversity and the feel-good factor: Understanding associations between self-reported human well-being and species richness. BioScience, 62(1), 47–55.
22. Damptey, F. G., Opuni-Frimpong, N. Y., Arimiyaw, A. W., Bentsi-Enchill, F., Wiafe, E. D., Abeyie, B. B., ... & Opuni-Frimpong, E. (2022). Citizen science approach for assessing the biodiversity and ecosystem service potential of urban green spaces in Ghana. Land, 11(10), 1774.
23. Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55(1), 34–43
24. Dodge, R., Daly, A., Huyton, J., & Sanders, L. (2012). The challenge of defining wellbeing. International Journal of Wellbeing, 2(3), 222–235. https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v2i3.4
25. Duan, Y., Bai, H., Yang, L., Li, S., & Zhu, Q. (2024). Impact of seasonal changes in urban green spaces with diverse vegetation structures on college students' physical and mental health. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 16277.
26. Elmqvist, T., Setälä, H., Handel, S. N., van der Ploeg, S., Aronson, J., Blignaut, J. N., ... & de Groot, R. (2015). Benefits of restoring ecosystem services in urban areas. Current opinion in environmental sustainability, 14, 101-108.
27. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior research methods, 41(4), 1149-1160.
28. Freeman, C., Dickinson, K. J. M., Porter, S., & van Heezik, Y. (2012). “My garden is an expression of me”: Exploring householders’ relationships with their gardens. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32(2), 135–143.
29. Fritz, M. S., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2007). Required sample size to detect the mediated effect. Psychological science, 18(3), 233-239.
30. Fuller, R. A., Irvine, K. N., Devine-Wright, P., Warren, P. H., & Gaston, K. J. (2007). Psychological benefits of greenspace increase with biodiversity. Biology Letters, 3(4), 390–394.
31. Galhena, D. H., Freed, R., & Maredia, K. M. (2013). Home gardens: a promising approach to enhance household food security and wellbeing. Agriculture & Food Security, 2(1), 8.
32. Garcia-Bustos, V. (2025, January). Conservation attitudes and perceived biodiversity among divers on the spanish mediterranean coast: insights from local ecological knowledge. In Oceans (Vol. 6, No. 1, p. 4). MDPI.
33. Gaston, K. J. (2024). Characterizing personalized ecologies. Journal of Zoology, 322(4), 291-308.
34. Gómez-Baggethun, E., & Barton, D. N. (2013). Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. Ecological Economics, 86, 235–245.
35. Haase, D., Larondelle, N., Andersson, E., Artmann, M., Borgström, S., Breuste, J., ... & Elmqvist, T. (2014). A quantitative review of urban ecosystem service assessments: Concepts, models, and implementation. Ambio, 43(4), 413–433.
36. Habel, J. C., Gossner, M. M., & Schmitt, T. (2021). Just beautiful?! What determines butterfly species for nature conservation. Biodiversity and Conservation, 30(8), 2481-2493.
37. Hartig, T., Mitchell, R., de Vries, S., & Frumkin, H. (2014). Nature and health. Annual Review of Public Health, 35, 207–228.
38. Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford publications.
39. Hayes Hursh, S., Perry, E., & Drake, D. (2024). What informs human–nature connection? An exploration of factors in the context of urban park visitors and wildlife. People and Nature, 6(1), 230-244.
40. Hedblom, M., Heyman, E., Antonsson, H., & Gunnarsson, B. (2014). Bird song diversity influences young people’s appreciation of urban landscapes. Urban For. Urban Green. 13, 469–474.
41. Hordley, L. A., & Fox, R. (2024). Wildlife-friendly garden practices increase butterfly abundance and species richness in urban and arable landscapes. Science of the Total Environment, 929, 171503.
42. Hoyle, H., Hitchmough, J., & Jorgensen, A. (2017). All about the ‘wow factor’? The relationships between aesthetics, restorative effect and perceived biodiversity in designed urban planting. Landscape and urban planning, 164, 109-123.
43. Hung, S. H. (2025). Does perceived biophilic design contribute to human well-being in urban green spaces? A study of perceived naturalness, biodiversity, perceived restorativeness, and subjective vitality. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 107, 128752.
44. Igartua, J. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2021). Mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: Concepts, computations, and some common confusions. The Spanish journal of psychology, 24, e49.
45. James, P., Hart, J. E., Banay, R. F., & Laden, F. (2016). Exposure to greenness and mortality in a nationwide prospective cohort study of women. Environmental health perspectives, 124(9), 1344.
46. Jenkins, M., Lee, C., Houge Mackenzie, S., Hargreaves, E. A., Hodge, K., & Calverley, J. (2022). Nature-based physical activity and hedonic and eudaimonic wellbeing: The mediating roles of motivational quality and nature relatedness. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 783840. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.783840
47. Jennings, V., Larson, L., & Yun, J. (2016). Advancing sustainability through urban green space: Cultural ecosystem services, equity, and social determinants of health. International Journal of environmental research and public health, 13(2), 196.
48. Johansson, M., Gyllin, M., Witzell, J., & Küller, M. (2014). Does biological quality matter? Direct and reflected appraisal of biodiversity in temperate deciduous broad-leaf forest. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 13(1), 28–37.
49. Joye, Y., & Bolderdijk, J. W. (2015). An exploratory study into the effects of extraordinary nature on emotions, mood, and prosociality. Frontiers in psychology, 5, 1577.
50. Joye, Y., & van den Berg, A. E. (2011). Is love for green in our genes? A critical analysis of evolutionary assumptions in restorative environments research. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 10(4), 261–268.
51. Kabisch, N., Korn, H., Stadler, J., & Bonn, A. (2017). Nature-based solutions to climate change adaptation in urban areas: Linkages between science, policy and practice. Springer Nature.
52. Kabisch, N., Qureshi, S., & Haase, D. (2014). Human–environment interactions in urban green spaces — A systematic review of contemporary issues and prospects for future research. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 50, 25–34.
53. Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 169–182.
54. Keltner, D., & Haidt, J. (2003). Approaching awe, a moral, spiritual, and aesthetic emotion. Cognition and emotion, 17(2), 297-314.
55. Keniger, L. E., Gaston, K. J., Irvine, K. N., & Fuller, R. A. (2013). What are the benefits of interacting with nature? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 10(3), 913–935.
56. Korpelainen, H. (2023). The role of home gardens in promoting biodiversity and food security. Plants, 12(13), 2473.
57. Kumar, B. M., & Nair, P. K. R. (2004). The enigma of tropical homegardens. Agroforestry Systems, 61, 135–152.
58. Lange, F. (2023). Behavioral paradigms for studying pro-environmental behavior: A systematic review. Behavior Research Methods, 55(2), 600-622.
59. Lim, V. C., Sing, K. W., Chong, K. Y., Jaturas, N., Dong, H., Lee, P. S., ... & Wilson, J. J. (2022). Familiarity with, perceptions of and attitudes toward butterflies of urban park users in megacities across East and Southeast Asia. Royal Society Open Science, 9(11).
60. Lindemann-Matthies, P., & Matthies, D. (2018). The influence of plant species richness on stress recovery of humans. Web Ecology, 18(2), 121–128.
61. Luck, G. W., Davidson, P., Boxall, D., & Smallbone, L. (2011). Relations between urban bird and plant communities and human well-being and connection to nature. Conservation Biology, 25(4), 816–826.
62. Lumber, R., Richardson, M., & Sheffield, D. (2017). Beyond knowing nature: Contact, emotion, compassion, meaning, and beauty are pathways to nature connection. PloS one, 12(5), e0177186.
63. Ma, J. (2022). Interaction with nature indoor: Psychological impacts of houseplants care behaviour on mental well-being and mindfulness in Chinese adults. International journal of environmental research and public health, 19(23), 15810.
64. Ma, K., & Wu, L. (2025). Perceived biodiversity of public green space and mental well-being. Environmental Research, 269, 120878.
65. Mace, G. M., Norris, K., & Fitter, A. H. (2012). Biodiversity and ecosystem services: a multilayered relationship. Trends in ecology & evolution, 27(1), 19-26.
66. Mackay, C. M., & Schmitt, M. T. (2019). Do people who feel connected to nature do more to protect it? A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 65, 101323.
67. Marselle, M. R., Hartig, T., Cox, D. T., De Bell, S., Knapp, S., Lindley, S., ... & Bonn, A. (2021). Pathways linking biodiversity to human health: A conceptual framework. Environment International, 150, 106420.
68. Marselle, M. R., Martens, D., Dallimer, M., & Irvine, K. N. (2019). Review of the mental health and well-being benefits of biodiversity. In Biodiversity and health in the face of climate change (pp. 175–211). Springer, Cham.
69. McKinney, M. L. (2006). Urbanization as a major cause of biotic homogenization. Biological conservation, 127(3), 247-260.
70. Methorst, J., Rehdanz, K., Mueller, T., Hansjürgens, B., Bonn, A., & Böhning-Gaese, K. (2021). The importance of species diversity for human well-being in Europe. Ecological Economics, 181, 106917.
71. Milfont, T. L., & Duckitt, J. (2010). The environmental attitudes inventory: A valid and reliable measure to assess the structure of environmental attitudes. Journal of environmental psychology, 30(1), 80-94.
72. Mitchell, R., & Popham, F. (2008). Effect of exposure to natural environment on health inequalities: An observational population study. The Lancet, 372(9650), 1655–1660.
73. Naparin, M., & Karsudjono, A. J. (2025). Wetland conservation tourism marketing: the effects of perceived sustainability and biodiversity knowledge on environmental awareness and pro-environmental behavior in Bakut Island. Cogent Social Sciences, 11(1), 2486552.
74. Nesbitt, L., Meitner, M. J., Girling, C., Sheppard, S. R., & Lu, Y. (2019). Who has access to urban vegetation? A spatial analysis of distributional green equity in 10 US cities. Landscape and Urban Planning, 181, 51-79.
75. Nisbet, E. K., Shaw, D. W., & Lachance, D. G. (2020). Connectedness with nearby nature and well-being. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities, 2, 18.
76. Nisbet, E. K., & Zelenski, J. M. (2013). The NR-6: A new brief measure of nature relatedness. Frontiers in psychology, 4, 813.
77. OECD. (2013). OECD guidelines on measuring subjective well-being. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264191655-en
78. Passmore, H. A., Yargeau, A., & Blench, J. (2022). Wellbeing in winter: testing the noticing nature intervention during winter months. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 840273.
79. Pauleit, S., Ambrose-Oji, B., Andersson, E., Anton, B., Buijs, A., Haase, D., ... & van den Bosch, C. K. (2019). Advancing urban green infrastructure in Europe: Outcomes and reflections from the GREEN SURGE project. Urban forestry & urban greening, 40, 4-16.
80. Peel, M. C., Finlayson, B. L., & McMahon, T. A. (2007). Updated world map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 11(5), 1633–1644.
81. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior research methods, 40(3), 879-891.
82. Prévot, A. C., Clayton, S., & Mathevet, R. (2018). The relationship of childhood upbringing and university degree program to environmental identity: Experience in nature matters. Environmental Education Research, 24(2), 263-279.
83. Pritchard, A., Richardson, M., Sheffield, D., & McEwan, K. (2019). The relationship between nature connectedness and eudaimonic well-being: A meta-analysis. Journal of Happiness Studies, 21(3), 1145–1167.
84. Richardson, M., Passmore, H.-A., Barbett, L., Lumber, R., Thomas, R., & Hunt, A. (2020). The green care code: How nature connectedness and simple activities help explain pro-nature conservation behaviors. People and Nature, 2(3), 821–839.
85. Rozario, K., Oh, R. R. Y., Marselle, M., Schröger, E., Gillerot, L., Ponette, Q., ... & Bonn, A. (2024). The more the merrier? Perceived forest biodiversity promotes short‐term mental health and well‐being—A multicentre study. People and Nature, 6(1), 180-201.
86. Rozario, K., Shaw, T., Marselle, M., Oh, R. R. Y., Schröger, E., Giraldo Botero, M., ... & Bonn, A. (2025). Perceived biodiversity: Is what we measure also what we see and hear?. People and Nature, 7(8), 2019-2037.
87. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 141–166.
88. Samuelsson, K., Barthel, S., Colding, J., Macassa, G., & Giusti, M. (2020). Urban nature as a source of resilience during social distancing amidst the coronavirus pandemic.
89. Sandifer, P. A., Sutton-Grier, A. E., & Ward, B. P. (2015). Exploring connections among nature, biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human health and well-being: Opportunities to enhance health and biodiversity conservation. Ecosystem Services, 12, 1–15.
90. Schultz, P. W., Gouveia, V. V., Cameron, L. D., Tankha, G., Schmuck, P., & Franěk, M. (2005). Values and their relationship to environmental concern and conservation behavior. Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 36(4), 457-475
91. Scopelliti, M., Carrus, G., Adinolfi, C., Suarez, G., Colangelo, G., Lafortezza, R., ... & Sanesi, G. (2016). Staying in touch with nature and well-being in different income groups: The experience of urban parks in Bogotá. Landscape and Urban Planning, 148, 139–148.
92. Seto, K. C., Fragkias, M., Güneralp, B., & Reilly, M. K. (2011). A meta-analysis of global urban land expansion. PloS one, 6(8), e23777.
93. Shwartz, A., Turbé, A., Julliard, R., Simon, L., & Prévot, A. C. (2014). Outstanding challenges for urban conservation research and action. Global environmental change, 28, 39-49
94. Shwartz, A., Tzunz, M., Gafter, L., & Colléony, A. (2023). One size does not fit all: The complex relationship between biodiversity and psychological well-being. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 86, 128008.
95. Soga, M., & Gaston, K. J. (2023). Nature benefit hypothesis: Direct experiences of nature predict self‐reported pro‐biodiversity behaviors. Conservation Letters, 16(3), e12945.
96. Southon, G. E., Jorgensen, A., Dunnett, N., Hoyle, H., & Evans, K. L. (2018). Perceived species-richness in urban green spaces: Cues, accuracy and well-being impacts. Landscape and Urban Planning, 172, 1–10.
97. Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of environmental psychology, 29(3), 309-317.
98. Stern, P. C. (2000). New environmental theories: toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of social issues, 56(3), 407-424.
99. Tam, K. P. (2013). Concepts and measures related to connection to nature: Similarities and differences. Journal of environmental psychology, 34, 64-78.
100. Topp, C. W., Østergaard, S. D., Søndergaard, S., & Bech, P. (2015). The WHO-5 Well-Being Index: a systematic review of the literature. Psychotherapy and psychosomatics, 84(3), 167-176.
101. Tzoulas, K., Korpela, K., Venn, S., Yli-Pelkonen, V., Kaźmierczak, A., Niemela, J., & James, P. (2007). Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using Green Infrastructure: A literature review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 81(3), 167–178.
102. Ulrich, R. S. (1983). Aesthetic and affective response to natural environment. In Behavior and the natural environment (pp. 85–125). Boston, MA: Springer US.
103. United Nations. (1992). Convention on Biological Diversity. United Nations. https://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf
104. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. (2019). World Urbanization Prospects: The 2018 Revision (ST/ESA/SER.A/420). New York, NY: United Nations. https://population.un.org/wup/assets/WUP2018-Report.pdf
105. Webb, E. L., & Kabir, M. E. (2009). Home gardening for tropical biodiversity conservation. Conservation Biology, 23(6), 1641-1644.
106. Wenzel, M., Rowland, Z., Nielsen, K. S., & Lange, F. (2023). The impact of perceived threat and perceived coping efficacy on individual actions toward biodiversity conservation: a registered report. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 88, 102038.
107. White, M. P., Elliott, L. R., Grellier, J., Economou, T., Bell, S., Bratman, G. N., ... & Fleming, L. E. (2021). Associations between green/blue spaces and mental health across 18 countries. Scientific reports, 11(1), 8903.
108. World Health Organization. (2021). Health promotion glossary of terms 2021. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240038349
109. World Health Organization. (2016). Urban green spaces and health: A review of evidence. World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe. https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/345751
110. World Health Organization. (1998). Wellbeing measures in primary health care/the DepCare Project: report on a WHO meeting: Stockholm, Sweden, 12–13 February 1998 (No. WHO/EURO: 1998-4234-43993-62027). World Health Organization. Regional Office for Europe.
111. Young, C., Hofmann, M., Frey, D., Moretti, M., & Bauer, N. (2020). Psychological restoration in urban gardens related to garden type, biodiversity and garden-related stress. Landscape and Urban Planning, 198, 103777.
112. Zhang, Y., van Dijk, T., Tang, J., & van den Berg, A. E. (2015). Green Space Attachment and Health: A Comparative Study in Two Urban Neighborhoods. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(11), 14342–14363.https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph121114342
113. Zuo, C., Ahmad, N. S., Zhou, X., Li, Z., Li, X., Zhang, J., ... & Yang, Y. (2025). Validation of a Chinese version of the Nature Relatedness Scale (NRS-C). Acta psychologica, 259
-
dc.identifier.urihttp://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/104175-
dc.description.abstract隨著都市化快速發展,人們與自然環境及生物多樣性的日常接觸機會逐漸減少,因此小尺度都市綠地在人類福祉與生物多樣性保育中的角色受到越來越多關注。其中,住宅陽台花園作為容易取得且貼近日常生活的綠地形式,仍然缺乏相關研究。本研究探討臺灣都市居民對陽台生物多樣性的感知與心理幸福感、自然連結感以及親自然保育行為之間的關係,並進一步檢驗自然連結感是否具有中介作用,以及相關關係是否因季節而有所差異。本研究於2025年12月至2026年2月(冬季)以及2026年3月至5月(春季)進行兩次問卷調查,共蒐集303位具有住宅陽台的都市居民資料,其中193位有種植陽台植物,110位未種植植物。研究以植物、鳥類及蝴蝶多樣性的感知作為感知生物多樣性指標;自然連結感採用NR-6量表測量;心理幸福感採用WHO-5幸福感量表測量;親自然保育行為則採用調整後的ProCoBS量表測量。資料分析包括描述性統計、獨立樣本t檢定、皮爾森相關分析以及 Hayes PROCESS 中介分析。研究結果顯示,相較於未種植陽台植物者,設有陽台植物的居民具有較高的感知植物多樣性與感知蝴蝶多樣性、較佳的心理福祉,以及較高的園藝保育行為。感知生物多樣性與心理福祉之正向關聯主要出現在設有陽台植物的參與者,而感知生物多樣性與親自然保育行為之正向關聯則在不同組別與季節中皆有觀察到。自然連結感並非普遍適用的中介機制,而是呈現選擇性的中介作用,其效果依不同生物多樣性指標、結果變項及季節而有所不同,並非所有模型皆呈現一致的中介效果。此外,不同季節下部分生物多樣性與研究結果之間的關聯強度存在差異,但陽台植栽與各項正向結果之間的關聯在冬季與春季皆持續存在。本研究顯示,住宅陽台雖屬小尺度綠地,仍可作為重要的人與自然互動空間,促進心理幸福感與生物多樣性保育行為。研究不僅整合了幸福感與保育行為兩項結果變項,也強調感知生物多樣性、主動參與自然及季節脈絡在人類福祉與環境行為中的重要性,為都市生物多樣性與環境心理學研究提供新的實證證據。zh_TW
dc.description.abstractUrbanization has reduced opportunities for everyday contact with biodiversity, increasing interest in the role of small-scale urban green spaces in supporting both human well-being and biodiversity conservation. Among these spaces, residential balcony gardens represent an accessible yet understudied form of urban nature. This study examined the relationships between perceived balcony biodiversity, psychological well-being, nature relatedness, and pro-nature conservation behaviors among urban residents in Taiwan. It further investigated whether nature relatedness served as potential mediator of these relationships and whether the observed patterns varied between winter and spring. A cross-sectional survey was conducted during two seasonal periods: winter (December 2025–February 2026) and spring (March–May 2026). A total of 303 participants with access to residential balconies completed an online questionnaire, including 193 residents with balcony plants and 110 residents without balcony plants. Perceived biodiversity was assessed through perceived plant, bird, and butterfly diversity. Nature relatedness was measured using the NR-6 Scale, psychological well-being using the WHO-5 Well-Being Index, and pro-nature conservation behaviors using an adapted ProCoBS scale. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, independent-samples t-tests, Pearson correlation analyses, and mediation analyses conducted with Hayes’ PROCESS macro. The results showed that residents with balcony plants consistently reported higher perceived plant and butterfly diversity, greater psychological well-being, and stronger gardening conservation behaviors than residents without balcony plants. Perceived biodiversity was positively associated with psychological well-being primarily among participants with balcony plants, while positive associations with pro-nature conservation behaviors were observed across both groups and seasons. Nature relatedness emerged as a selective mediator rather than a universal mechanism, with mediation observed only for specific biodiversity indicators, outcomes, and seasons rather than consistently across all models. Seasonal differences were observed in the strength of specific biodiversity–outcome relationships; however, positive associations with balcony planting remained evident across both winter and spring. The findings highlight the importance of residential balconies as meaningful micro-scale green spaces that are associated with psychological well-being and biodiversity stewardship. The study advances understanding of biodiversity–human relationships by integrating well-being and conservation behaviors within a framework and demonstrates the importance of perceived biodiversity, active engagement with nature, and seasonal context in in understanding human–nature relationships and their associations with psychological well-being and pro-nature conservation behaviors.en
dc.description.provenanceSubmitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2026-08-24T16:21:21Z
No. of bitstreams: 0
en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2026-08-24T16:21:21Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0en
dc.description.tableofcontentsAcknowledgments...................................ii
摘要..............................................iii
Abstract............................................v
Table of Contents.................................vii
List of Figures.....................................x
List of Tables....................................xii
Chapter 1 Introduction..............................1
1.1 General Background..............................1
1.2 Research Purpose................................4
1.3 Research Scope..................................6
1.4 Value of Research...............................7
1.5 Overview........................................9
Chapter 2 Literature Review........................10
2.1 Biodiversity and well-being....................10
2.1.1 Actual Biodiversity and Psychological Well-being..............................................11
2.1.2 Perceived Biodiversity and Psychological Well-being..............................................13
2.2 Biodiversity and Pro-nature Conservation Behaviors..........................................14
2.2.1 Psychological Mechanisms Supporting Conservation Behaviors.............................16
2.2.2 Private Green Spaces and Conservation Behaviors..........................................18
2.3 Seasonal Dynamics in Biodiversity–Well-being Relationships......................................19
2.3.1 Seasonal Variation in Biodiversity and Psychological Well-being...........................19
2.3.2 Seasonal Influences on Pro-Nature Conservation Behaviors..........................................21
2.3.3 Seasonal Dynamics in Balcony Gardens and Micro-scale Green Spaces.................................22
2.4 Psychological Pathways Linking Biodiversity, Well-being, and Behavior...........................23
2.4.1 Restorative Mechanisms: Stress Recovery Theory and Attention Restoration Theory...................23
2.4.2 Nature Relatedness as a Mediating Mechanism..........................................24
2.4.3 Integrating Well-being and Pro-nature Conservation Behaviors Pathways....................26
2.5 Synthesis of Evidence and Gaps.................27
Chapter 3: Methodology.............................30
3.1 Research Framework and Hypotheses..............30
3.2 Research Design................................33
3.3 Study Area and Participant Sampling............34
3.4 Data Collection................................36
3.4.1 Questionnaire Design.........................37
3.4.2 Seasonal Data Collection Design..............42
3.4.3 Seasonal and Environmental Context...........42
3.5 Data Analysis..................................43
Chapter 4. Results.................................47
4.1 Winter Season Results..........................47
4.1.1 Descriptive Analysis.........................47
4.1.2 Group Differences Between Residents with and without Balcony Plants.............................50
4.1.3 Associations Between Perceived Biodiversity, Nature Relatedness, Well-being and Pro-nature Conservation Behaviors.............................52
4.1.4 Mediation Analyses: The Role of Nature Relatedness (NR-6).................................55
4.2 Spring Results.................................63
4.2.1 Descriptive Analysis.........................63
4.2.2 Group Differences Between Participants With and Without Balcony Plants.............................67
4.2.3 Associations Between Perceived Biodiversity, Nature Relatedness, Well-being and Pro-nature Conservation Behaviors.............................69
4.2.4 Mediation Analyses: The Role of Nature Relatedness (NR-6).................................72
4.3 Season and Balcony planting status differences in well-being and pro-nature conservation behaviors..........................................79
Chapter 5: Discussion..............................92
5.1 Overview of Key Findings.......................92
5.2 Group Differences Between Residents with and Without Balcony Plants (H1)........................93
5.3 Associations Between Perceived Biodiversity and Psychological Well-being (H2)......................98
5.4 Associations Between Perceived Biodiversity and Pro-nature Conservation Behaviors (H3)............101
5.5 Mediation Analyses: The Role of Nature Relatedness (H4)..................................103
5.6 Seasonal and Planting Status Differences in Well-being and Pro-nature Conservation Behaviors (H5)..............................................107
5.7 Broader Theoretical and Practical Implications......................................112
5.8 Limitations...................................117
5.9 Future Research Directions....................120
Chapter 6: Conclusion.............................123
References........................................126
Appendix A: Research Ethics Approval Certificate..135
Appendix B: SurveyMonkey Questionnaire............136
Appendix C: Supplementary Regression Analyses.....145
Appendix D: Examples of Participants’ Balconies with Plants............................................146
Appendix E: Key Original Literature Excerpts......148
-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.subject感知生物多樣性-
dc.subject陽台花園-
dc.subject自然連結感-
dc.subject心理幸福感-
dc.subject親自然保育行為-
dc.subjectperceived biodiversity-
dc.subjectbalcony gardens-
dc.subjectnature relatedness-
dc.subjectpsychological well-being-
dc.subjectpro-nature conservation behaviors-
dc.title微綠地對城市生物多樣性和人類健康的益處zh_TW
dc.titleBenefits of Micro-scale Green Spaces for Urban Biodiversity and Human Healthen
dc.typeThesis-
dc.date.schoolyear114-2-
dc.description.degree碩士-
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee張俊彥;丁照棣;張伯茹;Pongsakorn Suppakittpaisarnzh_TW
dc.contributor.oralexamcommitteeChun-Yen Chang;Chau-Ti Ting;Po-Ju Chang;Pongsakorn Suppakittpaisarnen
dc.subject.keyword感知生物多樣性; 陽台花園; 自然連結感; 心理幸福感; 親自然保育行為zh_TW
dc.subject.keywordperceived biodiversity; balcony gardens; nature relatedness; psychological well-being; pro-nature conservation behaviorsen
dc.relation.page171-
dc.identifier.doi10.6342/NTU202602105-
dc.rights.note同意授權(限校園內公開)-
dc.date.accepted2026-08-18-
dc.contributor.author-college共同教育中心-
dc.contributor.author-dept生物多樣性國際碩士學位學程-
dc.date.embargo-lift2029-08-19-
顯示於系所單位:生物多樣性國際碩士學位學程

文件中的檔案:
檔案 描述 大小格式 
ntu-114-2.pdf
  未授權公開取用
4.54 MBAdobe PDF檢視/開啟
ntu-114-2.pdf
  未授權公開取用
4.54 MBAdobe PDF檢視/開啟
顯示文件簡單紀錄


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。

社群連結
聯絡資訊
10617臺北市大安區羅斯福路四段1號
No.1 Sec.4, Roosevelt Rd., Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 106
Tel: (02)33662353
Email: ntuetds@ntu.edu.tw
意見箱
相關連結
館藏目錄
國內圖書館整合查詢 MetaCat
臺大學術典藏 NTU Scholars
臺大圖書館數位典藏館
本站聲明
© NTU Library All Rights Reserved