透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.14.70.203
  • 學位論文

防災社區推動成效評估方法之探討-以新北市土石流自主防災社區為例

A Study on the Performance Evaluation Method of Disaster Resistant Community – the Case of Mudslide Disaster Resistant Community in New Taipei City

指導教授 : 詹士樑
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


近年來各國政府積極推動防災社區,強調由社區民眾的互動參與,期將防災觀念深耕至社區基層,達到全民防災之目的。我國防災社區亦推動一段時日,透過由上而下的計畫指導,投入經費、人才或是災害風險資訊等資源,希望能夠達成政策計畫上的多目標要求。然而,對於防災社區計畫執行後實質評估成效之方式或是「投入」與「產出」的效益分析的評估方式,尚待進一步探討,故本研究先討論防災社區推動成效的評估準則,選定較早推行且較具規模的土石流自主防災社區,並以易受土石流災害威脅的新北市地區,共47個土石流自主防災社區,作為研究對象,進行成效評估分析。 本研究首先透過文獻回顧與模糊德爾菲法,篩選出適宜之防災社區評估項目,再利用問卷設計,於社區進行問卷調查作為各評估項目資料蒐集,最後則以資料包絡分析法與TOPSIS法進行實證分析,評估其新北市土石流自主防災社區之實際成效,並進一步分析比較兩方法論的應用。 由研究結果可得知,在投入項/成本準則中的關鍵評估準則包括:災害防救教育訓練與課程、防災資訊、政府補助、成立防救災應變組織以及專業團隊輔助;產出項/效益準則中的關鍵評估準則則包括:強化社區防救災能力、建立自主推動能力。而於資料包絡分析法與TOPSIS法的實證研究中,有效率且表現為優良的防災社區,多數於「自主舉辦防救災活動之次數」、「自主舉辦防救災活動之參與人數」以及「與相關團隊繼續合作」有較顯著的表現。而進一步比較資料包絡分析法與TOPSIS法,發現此兩種績效評估方法對於評估準則的權重設定不同,而使得結果相異,未來相關單位對於土石流自主防災社區欲進行績效評估時,需注意這些會影響結果的重要因素。

並列摘要


It’s been an effort for many governments to actively promote disaster resistant community by advocating community participation. Our government also tried to achieve the purpose through top-down planning. However, the appropriate approach to assess the effectiveness of the policy implementation is still under development. Thus, this study chooses 47 Mudslide Disaster Resistant Community in New Taipei City, which are the earliest and most representative, to establish a performance evaluation method for the evaluation of the disaster resistant community implementation . In this study, we first collect the disaster resistant community performance indicators by literature review. Secondly, by using Fuzzy Delphi Technique to filter the most important indicators. Furthermore, we collected the primary data of indicators through community survey. In the end, we respectively assess the Performance of Mudslide Disaster Resistant Community in New Taipei City through Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), and analyze the difference between two methods. According to the results, the study concludes that the input/cost criterion includes: Disaster Prevention and Response Training Courses, Disaster Prevention Information, Government Subsidies, Establishment of Disaster Response Organizations; and output /benefit criteria includes: Strengthen community’s disaster resistant and response capacity, Establish the ability of self-propelled and self-resistant. According the DEA and TOPSIS analysis of this study, those efficient and well performance community mostly are more significant in criterion: “the number of self-disaster-prevention drills”, “the number of participants of self-disaster-prevention drills”, “cooperation with relevant organizations.” After we compare these two methods, we find the weights of the assessment criterion play the main role in the analysis results.

參考文獻


41. 羅億田(2006)。防災社區推動機制之研究。國立臺北科技大學土木與防災研究所碩士論文,台北市。
8. 李旭哲(2005)。公共工程執行機關績效評估模式之建立。國立台北科技大學土木與防災研究所,台北市。
17. 周瑞生(2015)。災害防救深耕計畫事後績效評估系統之建立。104年災害防救應用科技方案成果說明會議。
38. 蕭再安(2015)。災害防救績效評估系統之建立-以台鐵南迴線為例。104年災害防救應用科技方案成果說明會議。
7. 汪漢英、黃文聰、黃開義、畢威寧(2007)。應用資料包絡分析法之大學學系績效評估實證研究。人文暨社會科學期刊,3(2):55-66。

延伸閱讀