請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/49335
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 陳惠美(Hui-Mei Chen) | |
dc.contributor.author | Tsung-Yi Chen | en |
dc.contributor.author | 陳宗億 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-15T11:24:09Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2017-08-30 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2016-08-30 | |
dc.date.issued | 2016 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2016-08-18 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 1. 丁于倩、趙淑員、蘭育慧(2011)。園藝治療提升社區老人身心健康之應用。社區發展季刊,(136),372-382。
2. 王石番(1991)。傳播內容分析法:理論與實證。台北市:幼獅文化事業公司。 3. 王文科、王智弘(2004)。教育研究法。台北市:五南圖書出版股份有限公司。 4. 王俊雄 (2011)。休閒農場成立庇護農場可行性之研究。未出版之碩士論文,國立屏東科技大學農企業管理所,屏東。 5. 王篤強(2010)。社會福利民營化的在省思。通識研究集刊,(5),39-52。 6. 司徒達賢(2001)。非營利組織:經營管理研修粹要。台北市:洪建全教育文化基金會。 7. 林木泉譯。Lewis, C. A. 著(2008)。園藝治療入門。台北市:洪葉文化。 8. 林立、林杏足(2013)。冒險治療之自然體驗團體對社會退縮青少年介入影響之研究。體驗教育學報,(7),60-96。 9. 林佳儀(2009)。休閒農場與銀髮族照護體系策略聯盟可行性之研究。未出版之碩士論文,國立屏東科技大學農企業管理所,屏東。 10. 林俊德、江璇(2012)。融入團體操作之園藝治療活動對安養中心老人之成效觀察。國立臺中科技大學通識教育學報,(1),195-205。 11. 江珮儀(2004)。應用寵物治療於護理之家之經驗分享。長期照護雜誌,8(2),118-124。 12. 李崇信(2002)。身心障礙者與庇護工場之我見。就業安全,(7),64-69。 13. 吳明珠、鄭勝分(2012)。庇護工場轉型社會企業之研究。身心障礙研究季刊, 10(2),148-162。 14. 吳秀照(2007)。台中縣身心障礙者就業需求:排除社會障礙的就業政策探討。社會政策與社會工作學刊,11(2),149-198。 15. 吳崇旗、謝智謀(2006)。探討戶外冒險教育的效益。中華體育季刊,20(3), 43-53。 16. 吳芝儀、李奉儒譯(1995)。Patton, M. Q.著(1990)。質的評鑑與研究。台北市:桂冠。 17. 吳佳晏(2012)。園藝治療對癌症患者生活品質之效益。未出版之碩士論文,台灣大學園藝研究所,台北。 18. 巫潞琳(2012)。運用園藝治療活動在亞斯伯格兒童之個案研究。未出版之碩士論文,台灣大學園藝研究所,台北。 19. 尚榮安譯(2001)。Yin, R. K.著(1994)。個案研究法。台北市:弘智文化。 20. 周芬姿、吳穌、陳嫣芬、羅瑞玉、林春鳳、劉德誠(2013)。老人休閒活動設計與規劃。台北市:華都文化。 21. 周月清、傅凱祺、傅立葉、蔡宜思、高森永、秋泯科、鄭文輝、辛炳隆、謝佳宜(2005)。我國長期照顧服務輸送之初探:目標原則、服務對象、提供方式與服務項目。台灣社會福利學刊,4(2),97-138。 22. 李翠玲(2010)。園藝治療與療癒庭園對特殊學生課程設計與校園環境建置之意涵與運用。國小特殊教育,(49),33-40。 23. 李采娟、賴玫君、楊文惠、張麗雅、邱怡玟、李佳霙、呂美華、林正介(2001)。護理之家成本分析研究。中台灣醫學科學雜誌,6(4),223-232。 24. 姚蘊慧(2004)。社會福利民營化的再省思。通識研究集刊,(5),39-52。 25. 孫煒(2006)。非營利組織績效評量的問題與對策。政治科學論叢,(28),163-202。 26. 許智傑、謝政廷(2009)。寵物治療的基本概念。諮商與輔導,(278),2-6。 27. 許佩蓉、張俊喜、林靜宜、林壽惠、李世代(2006)。機構式長期照護綜論。台灣老年醫學雜誌,1(4),198-215。 28. 許永忠(2005),組織特性、員工福利、員工態度之關聯性研究—以北部地區服務業員工為實證對象。中原學報,33(4),801-819。 29. 郭毓仁(2005)。治療景觀與園藝療法。台北市:詹氏。 30. 張俊彥(2012)。療癒景觀與園藝治療。造園景觀雜誌,(73),2-13。 31. 張建隆(2006)。園藝活動提升慢性精神病患認知功能。未出版之碩士論文,台灣大學園藝研究所,台北。 32. 陳金城(2010)。企業管理。新北市:千華數位文化。 33. 陳彥睿、陳榮五(2010)。園藝治療專輯。彰化縣:農委會台中農改場。 34. 陳惠美(2005)。遊憩治療理論與應用之發展。旅遊健康學刊,4(1),13-32。 35. 陳惠美(2008)。園藝治療實施與適用評估方法。園藝治療效益評估及活動設計。張俊彥(編),(pp. 2-31)。臺北:中華民國人與植物協會。 36. 陳惠美(2012)。園藝治療之基本概念。造園景觀雜誌,(73),25-33。 37. 陳惠美、凃宏明、廖惠曦(2012)。療癒庭園設計原則。造園景觀雜誌,(73),14-23。 38. 陳惠美、黃雅鈴(2005)。園藝治療之理論與應用。中國園藝,51(2),135-144。 39. 陳宗億、陳惠美(2014)。老年人參與休閒農場的核心利益與休閒阻礙之探討。2014的16屆休閒、遊憩、觀光學術研討會論文集,147-148。 40. 陳萬淇(1995)。個案研究法。台北市:華泰書局。 41. 馮理詮、李乙明(2010)。創造力與學業成就影響之研究。中華資優教育學會,10(2),33-60。 42. 葉明理(2013)。動物輔助治療。全人照顧理論與輔助療法之應用。台北市:匯華。 43. 葉明理、廖華芳、陳秀宜(2002)。台灣的動物輔助治療。臺灣醫學,6(1), 102-106。 44. 葉明理、陳美麗(2012)。淺談輔助療法的專業化進程-以台灣動物輔助治療發展為例。領導護理,13(3),11-23。 45. 葉明理、陳美麗、徐亞瑛(2012)。運用治療犬方案於失智症長者照護之成效探討。旅遊健康學刊,11(1),65-77。 46. 詹火生(2000)。社會政策。蔡漢賢(編),社會工作辭典,(pp. 291)。台北:內政部。 47. 鄒菲(2006)。內容分析法的理論與實踐研究。評價與管理,4(4),71-77。 48. 楊驊驍(2005)。新聞價值新探。鄭州大學學報 (哲學社會科學版),38(4), 157-160。 49. 趙碧華(2004)。社會福利民營化執行面的評估檢視:以大台北地區公設民營機構為例。東吳社會工作學報,(24),89-137 50. 賴兩陽、吳來信、彭淑華、曾中明、鄭麗雯(2008)。社會福利服務。新北市:國立空中大學。 51. 蔡漢賢(2000)。社會工作辭典。台北市:內政部社區發展雜誌社。 52. 蔡馥陞譯。Barney, J. B. & Hesterly, W. S. 著(2008)。策略管理與競爭優勢。台北市:台灣培生教育。 53. 蔡岡廷、蘇世斌、翁子傑(2011)。高齡勞工的健康與工作能力。中華職業醫學雜誌,18(4),239-246。 54. 劉運康(1985)。慢性精神科個案之社會賦歸:談社會復歸之涵意,基本條件與類型。職能治療學會雜誌,(3),9-14。 55. 盧嬿羽(2011)。園藝治療團體方案對第二型糖尿病患者心理健康效益之研究。未出版之碩士論文,台北護理健康大學生死教育與輔導研究所,台北。 56. 謝佳容(2003)。老年人認知功能的指標測量與應用。健康科學期刊,5(4),387-395。 57. 羅淑芬、孔秀美、曾美蓮、林淑娟、張秀香(2003)。寵物治療在護理專業領域之臨床應用。護理雜誌,50(1),93-97。 58. 行政院(2012)。長期照護服務法草案,下載日期:2015/02/20,取自:http://ppt.cc/oRaE8 59. 行政院主計處(2011)。中華民國行業標準分類,下載日期:2015/02/20,取自:http://ppt.cc/x8AzJ 60. 內政部(2011)。100年社會福利服務機構概況調查結果摘要分析,下載日期:2015/03/05,取自:http://ppt.cc/Wlq5V 61. 內政部(2011)。100年身心障礙者生活狀況及各項需求評估調查報告,下載日期:2015/01/26,取自:http://ppt.cc/dY87l 62. 台北市媒體服務代理商協會 (2014)。台灣媒體白皮書,下載日期:2015/05/13,取自:http://www.maataipei.org/upload/1402549858.pdf 63. 衛生福利部統計處(2014)。身心障礙者人數按縣市及年齡別。下載日期:2015/04/24。取自:http://ppt.cc/tRggL 64. 衛生福利部保護服務司(2014)。97年至103年家庭暴力事件各類型件數。下載日期:2015/05/01。取自:http://www.mohw.gov.tw/cht/DOPS/DH4_P.aspx?f_list_no=806&fod_list_no=4620&doc_no=42890 65. 衛生福利部(2015)。全國身心障礙福利機構一覽表。下載日期:2015/07/09。取自:http://www.sfaa.gov.tw/SFAA/Pages/List.aspx?nodeid=460 66. 衛生福利部(2014)。老人長期照顧機構暨安養機構一覽表。下載日期:2014/12/23。取自:http://www.sfaa.gov.tw/SFAA/Pages/List.aspx?nodeid=366 67. 衛生福利部(2014)。兒童安置及教養機構一覽表。下載日期:2014/12/23。取自:http://www.sfaa.gov.tw/SFAA/Pages/List.aspx?nodeid=520 68. 衛生福利部(2014)。婦女福利服務中心聯絡一覽表。下載日期:2014/12/23。取自:http: http://www.sfaa.gov.tw/SFAA/Pages/List.aspx?nodeid=751 69. 農委會(2010)。農業發展條例。下載日期:2014/12/23。取自:http://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawContent.aspx?PCODE=M0020001 70. Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, 10, (pp. 123-167). Greenwich, CT: JAI. 71. AHTA (2015). About Horticultural Therapy, Retrieved October 31, 2015, from http://ahta.org/horticultural-therapy 72. Alvarez, A. G. & Stauffer, G. A. (2001). Musings on adventure therapy. Journal of Experiential Education, 24(2), 85-91. 73. Austin, N. E., Johnston, M. A. Y., & Morgan, L. L. (2006). Community gardening in a senior center: a therapeutic intervention to improve the health of older adults. Therapeutic Recreation Journal, 40(1), 48-56. 74. Babiak, K., & Thibault, L. (2009). Challenges in multiple cross-sector partnerships. Nonprofir and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38(1), 117-143. 75. Barnicle, T., & Midden, K. S. (2003). The effects of a horticulture activity program on the psychological well-being of older people in a long-term care facility. HortTechnology, 13(1), 81-85. 76. Bartley, M., Sacker, A., & Clarke, P. (2004). Employment status, employment conditions, and limiting illness: Prospective evidence from the British household panel survey 1991–2001. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 58(6), 501-506. 77. Berget, B., Ekeberg, Ø., & Braastad, B. O. (2008). Animal-assisted therapy with farm animals for persons with psychiatric disorders: effects on self-efficacy, coping ability and quality of life, a randomized controlled trial. Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health, 4(1), 9. 78. Beemer, F., Camps, T., & Kastelein, N. (2007). Alliance management in social markets in the Netherlands: outcomes of practical reflections. Journal on Chain and Network Science, 7(2), 85-94. 79. Boardman, J. (2003). Work, employment and psychiatric disability. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 9(5), 327-334. 80. Bock, B. B., & Oosting, S. J. (2010). A classification of green care arrangements in Europe. The Economics of Green Care in Agriculture. Loughborough: Loughborough University. 81. Braastad, B. (2005). Green care in agriculture. COST action proposal. Norway: Norwegian University of Life Sciences. 82. Burchardt, T., Le Grand, J. and Piachaud, D. (2002). Degrees of Exclusion: Developing a Dynamic, Multidimensional Measure. In J. Hills, J. Le Grand, and D. Piachaud (eds.) Understanding Social Exclusion, pp. 30-43, New York: Oxford University Press. 83. Burls, A. P. (2007). Ecotherapy: a therapeutic and educative model. Journal of Mediterranean Ecology, (8), 19-25. 84. CHTA (2015).About Horticultural Therapy and Therapeutic Horticulture. http://www.chta.ca/about_ht.htm. 85. Chalquist, C. (2009). A look at the ecotherapy research evidence. Ecopsychology, 1(2), 64-74. 86. Caldwell, D. F., Chatman, J., O’Reilly III, C. A., Ormiston, M., Lapiz, M. (2008). Implementing strategic change in a health care system: The importance of leadership and change readiness. Health Care Manage Rev, 33(2), 124-133. 87. Cole, E., Erdman, E. & Rothblum, E. D. (1994). Wilderness therapy for woman: The power of Adventure. New York: Harrington Park Press. 88. Cooper Marcus, C., & Barnes M. (1995). Gardens in healthcare facilities: Uses, therapeutic benefits, and design recommendations.USA:The Center for Health Design, Inc. 89. Cooper Marcus, C., & Barnes M. (1999). Healing gardens: Therapeutic benefits and design recommendations. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 90. Daudelin, M. W. (1997). Learning from experience through reflection. Organizational Dynamics, 24(3), 36-48. 91. Davis, B. E. (2011). Rooftop hospital gardens for physical therapy: A post-occupancy evaluation. Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 4(3), 14-44. 92. Dessein, J., & Bock, B. (2010). The Economics of Green Care in Agriculture. Loughborough: Loughborough University Press. 93. Dobbs, T. L., & Pretty, J. N. (2004). Agri-environmental stewardship schemes and “Multifunctionality”. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 26(2), 220-237. 94. Driest, P. F. (2006). Long-term care in europe. Farming for Health (pp. 101-106). The Netherlands: Springer. 95. Elings, M. (2006). People-plant interaction: the physiological, psychological and sociological effects of plants on people. Farming for Health (pp. 43-55). The Netherlands: Springer. 96. Elings, M., & Hassink, J. (2006). Farming for health in the Netherlands. Farming for Health (pp. 163-179). The Netherlands: Springer. 97. Elings, M., & Hassink, J. (2008). Green care farms, a safe community between illness or addiction and the wider society. Journal of Therapeutic Communities, 29(3), 310-322. 98. Elsen, T. V., Günther, A., & Pedroli, B. (2006). The contribution of care farms to landscapes of the future: a challenge of multifunctional agriculture. Farming for Health (pp. 91-100). The Netherlands: Springer. 99. Ferrell, O. C., Hirt, G., & Ferrell, L.(2006)Business: A Changing World. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. 100. Fine, A. H.(2010). Handbook on animal-assisted therapy: Theoretical foundations and guidelines for practice. America: Academic Press. 101. Fjeldavli, E. (2006). The lay beliefs about farming for health. Farming for Health (pp. 73-90). The Netherlands: Springer. 102. Friedel, S., Mathijs, E., & Van Molle, L. (2010). Policy and frames regarding social farming and green care in Flanders and at the EU level. Belgium: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven. 103. Gammonley, J., & Yates, J. (1991). Pet projects: animal assisted therapy in nursing homes. Journal of Gerontological Nursing,17(1), 12-15. 104. Glaister, K. W., & Falshaw, J. R. (1999). Strategic planning: still going strong?. Long Range Planning, 32(1), 107-116. 105. Gillis, H. L., & Gass, M. A. (2004). Adventure therapy with groups. Handbook of Group Counseling and Psychotherapy (pp.593-605). NY: Norton-Sage, 106. Goodban, A., & Goodban, D. (1990). Horticultural therapy: A growing concern, part 1.Brit. J. Occup. Therap., (53), 425-429 107. Hassink, J., & Van Dijk, M. (Eds.). (2006). Farming for Health: Green-care farming across Europe and the United States of America. The Netherlands: Springer Science & Business Media. 108. Hassink, J., Elings, M., Zweekhorst, M., van den Nieuwenhuizen, N., & Smit, A. (2010). Care farms in the Netherlands: Attractive empowerment-oriented and strengths-based practices in the community. Health & Place, 16(3), 423-430. 109. Hassink, J., Zwartbol, C., Agricola, H. J., Elings, M., & Thissen, J. T. N. M. (2007). Current status and potential of care farms in the Netherlands. NJAS-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 55(1), 21-36. 110. Hassink, J., Grin, J., & Hulsink, W. (2015). New practices of farm-based community-oriented social care services in the Netherlands. Journal of Social Service Research, 41(1), 49-63. 111. Haubenhofer, D. K., Elings, M., Hassink, J., & Hine, R. E. (2010). The development of green care in western european countries. Journal of Science and Healing, 6(2), 106-111. 112. Haugan, L., Nyland, R., Fjeldavli, E., Meistad, T., & Braastad, B. O. (2006). Green care in Norway: Farms as a resource for the educational, health and social sector. Farming for Health (pp. 109-126). The Netherlands: Springer. 113. Herzog, T. R., Black, A. M., Fountaine, K. A., & Knotts, D. J. (1997). Reflection and attentional recovery as distinctive benefits of restorative environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17(2), 165-170. 114. Heliker, D., Chadwick, A., & O’Connell, T. (2001). The meaning of Gardening and the effects on perceived well being of a gardening project on diverse populations of elders. Activities, Adaptation & Aging, 24(3), 35-56. 115. Hine, R., Peacock, J., & Pretty, J. (2008). Care farming in the UK: Contexts, benefits and links with therapeutic communities. Therapeutic Communities, 29(3), 245-260. 116. Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. 117. Iancu, S. C., Zweekhorst, M. B. M., Veltman, D. J., van Balkom, J. L. M., Bunders, J. F. G.(2015). Outsourcing mental health care services? The practice and potential of community-based farms in psychiatric rehabilitation. Community Ment Health Journal, (51), 175-184. 118. Kane, R. A., & Kane, R. L. (1987). Long-term care: Principles, programs, and policies. New York: Springer. 119. Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. America: Cambridge University Press. 120. Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 169-182. 121. Kassarjian, H. (1977). Content analysis in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 4(1), 8-18. 122. Katcher, A. H., & Beck, A. M. (2010). Newer and older perspectives on the therapeutic effects of animals and nature. Handbook on animal-assisted therapy: Theoretical foundations and guidelines for practice, (pp. 49-58). The Netherlands: Elsevier Inc. 123. Kawamura, N., Niiyama, M., & Niiyama, H. (2007). Long-term evaluation of animal-assisted therapy for institutionalized elderly people: a preliminary result. Psychogeriatrics, 7(1), 8-13. 124. Kellert, S. R., & Wilson, E. O. (1993). The biophilia hypothesis.Island Press. 125. Leck, C., Evans, N., & Upton, D. (2014). Agriculture-Who cares? An investigation of “care farming” in the UK. Journal of Rural Studies, (34), 313-325. 126. Lafrance, C., Garcia, L. J., & Labreche, J. (2007). The effect of a therapy dog on the communication skills of an adult with aphasia. Journal of Communication Disorders, 40(3), 215-224. 127. Maller, C., Townsend, M., St Leger, L., Wilson, C. H., Pryor, A., Prosser, L., Moore, M. (2009). Healthy parks, healthy people: The health benefits of contact with nature in a park context. The George Wright Forum, 26(2), 51-83. 128. Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370-396. 129. Meerburg, B. G., Korevaar, H., Haubenhofer, D. K., Blom-Zandstra, M., & Van Keulen, H. (2009). The changing role of agriculture in Dutch society. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 147(05), 511-521. 130. Mettepenningen, E., Dessein, J., Calus, M., & Huylenbroeck, G. V.(2010). Green care in the framework of multifunctional agriculture. The Economics of Green Care in Agriculture. Loughborough: Loughborough University Press. 131. Narayanasamy, A., Clissett, P., Parumal, L., Thompson, D., Annasamy, S., & Edge, R.(2004). Responses to the spiritual needs of older people. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 48(1), 6-16. 132. Neuberger, K., Stephan, I., Hermanowsk, R., Flake, A., Post, F. J., & van Elsen, T. (2006). Farming for Health: aspects from Germany. Farming for Health (pp. 193-211). The Netherlands: Springer. 133. Odendaal, J. S. J. (2000). Animal-assisted therapy-magic or medicine. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, (49), 275-280. 134. O'haire, M. (2010). Companion animals and human health: Benefits, challenges, and the road ahead. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 5(5), 226-234. 135. Partanen, U., Lilja, T., Kurppa, S., & Soini, K. (2006). Farming for health in Finland. Farming for Health (pp. 135-146). The Netherlands: Springer. 136. Plunkett, W. R., Attner R. F., & Allen, G. S. (2005). Management: Meeting and Exceeding Customer Expectations. Thomson South-Western. 137. Relf, P. D. (1973). Horticulture: a therapeutic tool. J. Rehab. 39(1), 27-29. 138. Relf, P. D. (2005). The therapeutic values of plants. Pediatric Rehabilitation, 8(3), 235-237. 139. Relf, P. D. (2006). Agriculture and health care. Farming for Health: Green-care farming across Europe and the United States of America (Vol. 13). Springer Science & Business Media. 140. Ross, L. A. (1997). Elderly patients’ perceptions of their spiritual needs and care: A pilot study. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 26, 710-715. 141. Savas, E. S., & Savas, E. S. (2000). Privatization and public-private partnerships . New York: Chatham House. 142. Schols, J. M., & van der Schriek-van Meel, C. (2006). Day care for demented elderly in a dairy farm setting: positive first impressions. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 7(7), 456-459. 143. Sempik, J., & Aldridge, J. (2006). Care farms and care gardens: horticulture as therapy in the UK. Farming for Health (pp. 147-161). The Netherlands: Springer. 144. Sempik, J., Hine, R., & Wilcox, D. (2010). Green care: A conceptual framework, a report of the working group on the health benefits of green care, COST 866, green care in agriculture. UK: Loughborough University. 145. Sams, M. J., Fortney, E. V., & Willenbring, S. (2006). Occupational therapy incorporating animals for children with autism: A pilot investigation. Journal of Occupational Therapy, 60(3), 268-274. 146. Söderback, I., Söderström, M., & Schälander, E. (2004). Horticultural therapy: the healing garden and gardening in rehabilitation measures at Danderyd Hospital Rehabilitation Clinic, Sweden. Pediatric rehabilitation, 7(4), 245-260. 147. Stigsdotter, U., & Grahn, P. (2002). What makes a garden a healing garden. Journal of therapeutic Horticulture, 13(2), 60-69. 148. Swortzel, K. (1995). SWOT analysis: Management tool for initiating new programs in vocational schools. Journal of Vocational and Technical Education, 12(1), 1-11. 149. Ulrich, R. (1984). View through a window may influence recovery. Science, 224, 420-421. 150. Ulrich, R. S., Dimberg, U. & Driver, B.L. (1991). Psychophysiological indicators of leisure benefits. PA: Venture Publishing Inc. 151. Vadnal, K.(2006). Farming for health in Slovenia. Farming for Health (pp. 249-269). The Netherlands: Springer. 152. Visier, L. (1998). Sheltered employment for persons with disabilities. International Labour Review, 137(3), 347-365. 153. Wiesinger, G., Neuhauser, F., & Putz, M. (2006). Farming for Health in Austria: farms, horticultural therapy, animal-assisted therapy. Farming for Health (pp. 233-248). Springer Netherlands. 154. Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia. America: Harvard University Press. 155. World Health Organization (2006). Constitution of the World Health Organization. Retrieved October 31, 2015, from:http://www.who.int/governance/eb/who_constitution_en.pdf 156. Yin, R. K. (1991). Case study research: Design and methods.America: Sage Publications. 157. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. America: Sage Publications. 158. Zeisel, J., & Tyson, M. (1999). Alzheimer’s treatment gardens. Healing Gardens. Therapeutic Benefits and Design Recommendations (pp.437-504), New York: John Wiley & Sons. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/49335 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 台灣的弱勢族群人數逐年攀升,有庇護安置、生心理治療等需求,而歐美國家照護機構常運用綠色照護(Green Care)的概念,將園藝植物、動物等自然元素,融合健康照護理念。協助生心理或社會條件缺損的國民增加日常活動與社交互動,增進生心理健康,提升生活品質,相當適合台灣社福機構運用,故綠色照護在台灣社福機構逐漸萌芽發展。然而,過去研究多個別探討綠色照護對某一類個案所帶來的效益。較少以執行的社福機構為研究對象,探討其執行綠色照護的成果與困境。此外,農場是國外照護機構常見的綠色照護的場域,近年來台灣社福機構也開始應用,但過去研究也較少探討社福機構農場的運作模式,因此本研究的目的為1)了解台灣社福機構執行綠色照護的現況;2)比較有農場與無農場的綠色照護、產生的效益以及可能面對的困難;3)探討社福機構農場執行綠色照護的操作、管理方式以及困境應對作為;4)比較不同模式的綠色照護農場之規劃管理差別。
研究分兩階段進行,階段一,從新聞電子資料庫收集社福機構執行綠色照護的相關新聞,採用內容分析法,針對機構類型、綠色照護產生的效益與執行困境,分別建構分類類目歸納整理。階段二根據相關文獻與階段一的研究結果發現,台灣執行綠色照護的社福機構以身心障礙福利機構最多,且為了提供服務對象健康照護與保障其公平參與社會、經濟的權利,有較多運用農場活動提供健康照護,發展農事工作提供就業的機會。因此進一步挑選有農場的身心障礙福利機構為研究對象,針對機構成立農場的背景、農場綠色照護營運規畫、和農場成果效益,進行個案機構深入訪談與比較。 研究結果顯示,綠色照護對受照顧者的效益,主要以「改善情緒壓力」、「改善身體機能」和「增加交流互動」為主,此外,有農場與無農場的綠色照護個人效益主要差別在「重返社會接觸」、「增進工作能力」和「獲得就業機會」。呼應受訪的身心障礙福利機構成立農場的動機,是為「增加活動空間」和「提供工作機會」,且認為「穩定情緒」、「增強體能」、「增加智識與工作能力」和「融入社會」是照護農場給服務對象的主要成效;而綠色照護對社福機構本身的效益主要是由有農場的機構獲得,其中「促進自給自足」和「獲得營收回饋」為主要效益,受訪機構則進一步指出「無毒飲食」、「增加員工福利」、「增強機構照護形象」和「作為募款的基礎」是農場帶給機構的效益;而「提供休閒遊憩」、「維護生態」是照護農場常見的社會與環境效益。 社福機構執行綠色照護的困境以「資金不足不穩」和「個案能力限制」的案例較多,而有農場的受訪機構指出,法規政策方面的困境包括私法人不得持有農地,農地農用政策,影響機構建置適合服務對象的農場環境空間,以及農業部門只補助一般農民的天災損失。財務困境方面,機構可與其他團體合作,資源共享降低營運成本,或發展有經濟規模事項、產品做市場區隔和穩定的市場售價來增加營收。人力規劃方面,機構會提供教保員農牧園藝知識培訓,且鼓勵一般農場工作者加強照護知識增加綠色照護的專業度。面對服務對象參與綠色照護的問題,農場活動的執行要領為「適性分組」、「切割工作流程」、「設計輔具」、「成果反饋」,並且透過工作內容調度與適當懲罰,解決服務對象生心理狀況異常和行為偏差問題,也會擬定緊急事件處理規則,做好預防措施降低因能力不足造成的安全風險。最後研究建議政府有條件放寬農業政策對社福機構的限制。機構可多元化綠色照護活動,但需要輔以一項具規模經濟的農業事項主力生產。此外機構應鼓勵人員參與台灣各類綠色照護相關協會的培訓與認證,並將綠色照護目標融入服務對象個別化服務計畫之中。最後,台灣社福機構應在審視組織的資源與能力後,再決定是否自行經營農場,承擔經營責任以增加服務對象與機構的健康與工作效益。在缺乏資源的情況下也可考慮與休閒農場或一般農場進行合作,同樣可以讓服務對象享受綠色照護的效益。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | The number of the disadvantaged prople in Taiwan is rising by year. They all have the demand of the resettlement of asylum, and the demand of care for both physical and mental problem. European countries and America usually provide “Green Care” to these vulnerable groups, which utilize horticultural plant and animal elements etc. combine with health care concepts, to increase their daily activities, social contct opportunities and keep them healthy. It is very suitable for social welfare organization in Taiwan. There has been little research about Green Care concerned social welfare organizations as their research objects, to understand how social welfare organizations implement Green Care and what achievement they obtain and what difficulties they encounter in Green Care process. Most researches are about the benefits brought from green care in different individual cases. Besides, farms are often used to provide green care by Care facilities in foreign countries. There are more and more applications in Taiwan as well. However, there are only little research about the mode of care farm operation. Therefore, the purposes of this research are as follow. First, to find out the green care situation of social welfare organization in Taiwan. Second, to understand the benefits and the potential difficulties comparing the organization with farm to organization without farm. Third, to go into the green care management strategy and the means to plight of social welfare organization. Fourth, to know the difference of green care operation management comparing different mode of Green Care farm.
This research include two studies. Study one is collecting the news of green care social welfare organization and use content analysis on different social welfare organization、beneficial result and potential problem to build up different category. Study two is according to the result of study one and related references. It turns out that disabled persons’ organization has more opportunities using farm activities to give health care and develop farm work in order to protect them the right to participate in society and economic fairly. Therefore, I choose disabled persons’ organization with farm as my study object to interview deeply and compare different cases from the background of setting up farm, the operation of green care farm, the outcome of the farm. The result shows that the most mentioned effects are improvement of mental stress, physical function and more social contact chance. Furthermore, Green Care with farm has personal effect on returning to society, improvement of work ability, access to jobs opportunities more. Above individual benefits could respond to the outcome of second study that the motivation of disabled persons’ organization setting up farm is to increase activities space and provide job opportunities. In addition, most interviewed organizations attribute stable emotion, better physical function, improvement of intellecture and working ability and participation in society are to Green Care farm.On the other hand, Green Care has two effects for organization itself, operation benefit and finance benefit, usually mentioned by those news of social welfare organizations with farm. The self-sufficient operation and revenue feedback are the main benefit results. Furthermore, providing leisure and recreation activities and maintain environment ecology are common social and environment benefits from care farm. When it comes to the plights of social welfare organization implementing green care, lots of news are relate to Green Care with farm, referring to cases dealing with insufficient funds and ability constrains. Organizations in study two point out that constrains on legislation farmland policy. First, private social welfare organization can’t have the property of farmland. Second, organizations are very hard to build suitable farm environment to service objects because the policy of farmland only for agriculture use. Third, when disaster happens, social welfare organization can’t get financial subsidy due to the beneficiary is for normal farmer not for social welfare organizations. To deal with the financial plight the organization can cooperate with others, which will decrease the operation cost, or focusing on project having economic scale to make market segmentation and make the products price stable, these manner may help organization increase their revenue. As for the human resource plight, the organization will train staffs how to gardening and encourage them to improve care knowledge and skill of Green Care so that they can make up the lack of green care profession. Last but not least, the key manners for excuating Green Care are devided service objects several groups according to their physicial and mental condition、dividing workflow、design assisted tool、achievement feedback. The solutions to solve the plight that people participating in green care, are dispatching work which can solve the problem of mental and behavior, however, sometimes the suitable punishment also solutions as well. In addition, the organization will give rules to emergency for the purpose of precaution. According to the result, researcher suggests that the government shold conditionally lift the restriction of agricultural regulations. Organizations could diversify Green Care activities but still need at least one item as major production. Besides organization should encourage staff to participate training course or certification by various Taiwan Green Care associations, and design individual goal of Green Care. Finally, social welfare organizations should investigate what resource and capability they have. Organizations can consider managing a farm by themselves. Undertake the responsibility to raise the benefits for service objects or their own. However, there still are other choices that organizations can also consider to cooperate with leisure farm or private farm so that they don’t need to worry about the lack of resource. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T11:24:09Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-105-R02628311-1.pdf: 5191333 bytes, checksum: 72ff2bd56b05a803994e1e146c0cf9d3 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員審定書 I
謝誌 II 中文摘要 III Abstract V 目錄 VIII 圖目錄 X 表目錄 XI 第一章 前言 1 第二章 文獻回顧 7 第一節 社會福利照護系統 7 一、社會福利機構 7 二、社福機構長期照護模式 8 三、社福機構照顧服務的管理機制 9 第二節 Green Care 綠色照護 11 一、綠色照護定義 11 二、綠色照護的理論背景 12 三、綠色照護內容 15 四、綠色照護之效益 23 五、機構推行綠色照護之困難與挑戰 31 第三章 第一階段新聞內容分析 35 第一節 研究方法 35 第二節 研究結果 41 一、台灣社福照顧機構執行綠色照護概況 41 二、社福照顧機構執行綠色照護之成效分析 42 三、社福照顧機構執行綠色照護之困境分析 55 第四章 第二階段個案研究 61 第一節 研究方法 61 一、個案研究法 61 二、研究對象 63 三、訪談問題意識與訪談大綱 77 四、訪談資料收集 86 五、資料分析方法 87 第二節 研究結果 89 一、身心障礙福利機構農場成立背景 89 二、身心障礙福利機構農場營運規劃 96 三、農場成果效益 120 四、不同類型農場之比較 124 第五章 結論與建議 127 第一節 研究結論 127 一、台灣社福機構綠色照護的執行狀況 127 二、以農場提供綠色照護的成效 129 三、以農場提供綠色照護的困境及因應 133 第二節 討論與建議 137 一、 論文價值 137 二、 對運用農場提供綠色照護的建議 137 三、 研究限制與未來研究建議 140 參考文獻 142 附錄 個案研究訪談大綱 156 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 台灣社福機構執行綠色照護之探討 | zh_TW |
dc.title | A Study of Implementing Green Care in Taiwan Welfare Institutions | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 104-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 林木泉(Mu-Chuan Lin),王俊豪(Jiun-Hao Wang),林晏州(Yann-Jou Lin),張俊彥(Chun-Yen Chang) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 社福機構,綠色照護,照護農場,成效與困境,管理, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | social welfare organization,green care,care farm,benefits and difficulties,management, | en |
dc.relation.page | 157 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201602739 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2016-08-18 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 生物資源暨農學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 園藝暨景觀學系 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 園藝暨景觀學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-105-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 5.07 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。