社區觀光發展關鍵成功因素之研究

依據2017年衛生福利部統計，全臺經主管單位核定立案的社區發展協會總計為6,839個。因社區型態組合的不同，有都會型社區、城鄉型社區、臨海型社區、山地型社區、農村型社區、部落型社區……等，因社區多元型態組合的不同，社區的資源型態亦為不一，社區觀光發展資源條件多寡，關係到社區觀光發展能否成功的關鍵。所以挖掘社區觀光資源重要性是惟關鍵，從社區資源調查，如文化、歷史、人物、古蹟、遺址、自然、生態、景點、河川、地形、地貌、特產、小吃、族群、宗教、表演、節慶、體驗、學習、生活、運動、靈性、電影……等，彙整出有利於社區觀光發展的條件。本研究從國內挑選出6個發展社區觀光成功的社區及學者專家、政府相關單位中，找出發展社區觀光的關鍵成功因素，並藉以實證的科學分析後，希冀找出社區觀光發展的重要指標，提供政府單位輔導社區發展，亦或是準備發展或發展中之社區作為後續參考之策略與方向。本研究旨在建構社區觀光發展關鍵成功因素屬性評估。本研究採用三個階段進行，第一階段依據文獻採內容分析法-從六個社區觀光發展成功案例及參考過往文獻，初步擬出四大構面因素「環境資源」、「人文歷史」、「民眾合作」、「觀光投資」之訪談大綱。第二階段再找出五個熱心參與社區，現職社區幹部及里長做深度訪談，萃取其中關鍵成功因素加入四大構面標的因素「環境資源」、「人文歷史」、「民眾合作」、「觀光投資」，八個次指標因素及二十一個第三層級標的因素衡量指標，其中於「環境資源」中的第二層級「自然景觀」新增第三層級標的因素「季節性景觀」。第三階段邀請16位產、官、學、業者等專家進行問卷填寫，藉以層級程序分析法進行問卷分析。研究結果發現第一層級標的四大構面因素，其權重值以「B人文歷史」構面權重值為0.380 最高排名第一、其次為「A環境資源」構面權重值為0.317排名第二、「C民眾合作」構面權重值為0.198排名第三、「D觀光投資」構面權重值為0.105排名第四。第二層級總體評估準則因素評估值標共分為8個，其權重值以「B2古蹟建築」權重值為0.196 最高排名第一、其次為「B1歷史背景」權重值為0.184排名第二、其次為「A1自然景觀」權重值為0.159 排名第三、其次為「A2社區特色」權重值為0.158排名第四、其次為「C1居民合作」權重值為0.105 排名第五、其次為「C2當地導覽」權重值為0.093排名第六、其次為「D1政府合作」權重值為0.062 排名第七、最後為「D2休閒遊憩投資」權重值為0.043 排名第八。第三層級總體評估準則因素評估值標共分為21個，經與主要標的進行串聯權重計算後，學者專家認為「B2Ⅰ 在地古蹟建築」是所有評估指標中最為重要的，整體權重為0.1257 ，其次依序為「B1Ⅰ 社區在地古人事蹟」評估指標整體權重值為0.0936排名第二、「B1Ⅱ 社區在地歷史文化」評估準則整體權重值0.0903排名第三、「A2Ⅰ 特色景點挖掘」評估準則整體權重值0.0745 排名第四、「B2Ⅱ 在地廟宇建築」評估準則整體權重值0.0704 排名第五。而最後三名為「D2Ⅱ 公共休閒設施的建置」權重值為0.0161排名第十九，其次依序為「D1Ⅲ 專家學者的輔導」權重值為0.0124排名第二十，最後為「D2Ⅰ 增設遊客造訪社區代步工具」權重值為0.0098排名最後。希望研究結果能提供有意發展觀光之社區及政府對經費補助給社區的方式作為討論的方針，並提供相關議題之學術研究。

關鍵字

社區觀光；人文歷史；環境資源；層級程序分析法；關鍵成功因素

並列摘要

According to the statistics of the Ministry of Health and Welfare in 2017, the total amount of community development associations approved by the competent authorities was 6,839. Due to a variety types of community types, there are metropolitan communities, urban-rural communities, coastal-type communities, mountain-type communities, rural-type communities, tribal communities, etc., due to the diversity of community type, community resource patterns are also different. The key to the success of community tourism development is related to the resources for community tourism development. Therefore, the importance of exploring community tourism resources is the key. By surveying community resource, such as culture, history, people, monuments, sites, nature, ecology, attractions, rivers, terrain, landforms, specialties, snacks, ethnic groups, religion, performances, festivals, experience, study, life, sports, spirituality, film, etc, we can collect the advantages of community to develop local tourism. In this study, we selected six communities and scholars who have successfully developed community tourism, and relevant government agencies to find out the key success factors for community tourism development. By thoroughly empirical scientific analysis, we hope to find out the important indicators of community tourism development, and to provide government to guide community for developing, and even to provide a model or a strategy for developed community or developing community. This study aims to construct an attribute assessment of key success factors for community tourism development, and the study is conducted in three phases. The first phase is based on the literature to conduct content analysis method - from six community tourism development success cases and refer to the past literature, preliminary drafting of four major factors, which are "Environmental Resources", "Human History", “People Cooperation” and “Tourism Investment” for interview. In the second stage, we will find five enthusiastic participating communities, and the current community cadres and lieutenants to conduct in-depth interviews getting the key factors for the success of the four major factors,"Environmental Resources", "Human History", "Popular Cooperation", and "Tourism Investment", and eight indicators and 21 third-level measured indicators. Besides, adding the third-level target “Seasonal Landscape” in the second-level “Natural Landscape” of “Environmental Resources”. In the third stage, 16 experts, officials, academics, and practitioners were invited to fill out the questionnaires, and the questionnaire analysis will be conducted by the hierarchical program analysis method. The results of the study found that on the four major factors, the "B-Human History" accounts for the highest ranking weight value of 0.380, followed by the "A-Environmental Resources" with weight value of 0.317. The weight of the "C-People's Cooperation" is ranked third in the 0.198, and the weight of the "D-Tourism Investment" is the fourth rank with value of 0.105. For the second-level overall evaluation criteria is divided into 8 categories. The highest rating of weight value is “B2 Historic Building” 0.196, and followed by the “B1 Historical Background” weighting value of 0.184. The third one is "A1 Natural Landscape" with the weight value of 0.159, followed by the "A2 Community Features" weight is 0.158, followed by the "C1 Resident Cooperation" weight is 0.105, followed by "C2 Local Guide" with the weight of the list is 0.093, followed by the “D1 Government Cooperation” with a weight of 0.062. The lease value is “D2 Leisure Recreation Investment” with a weight of 0.043 and has the rank eighth. The third-level overall evaluation criteria is divided into 21 categories. After the serial weight calculation of the main standard, scholars believe that “B2I in situ Monument Construction” is the most important of all evaluation indicators, with overall weight is 0.1257. Secondly, the overall weight of the evaluation index of "B1I History related of Ancients of Local Community" is ranked second in 0.0936, the overall weight of the "B1II Community Local History and Culture" evaluated edge is 0.0903, and the evaluation criteria of "A2I Featured Attractions Excavation" of weight value is 0.0745, ranking fourth, and the overall evaluation weight of the “B2II Local Temple Building” evaluation criterion is 0.0704. The last three factors are "D2II Public Leisure Facilities" ranked 19th with the weight value of 0.016, followed by the "D1III Experts and Scholars Asistance " weighting value of 0.0124 ranked 20th, and "D2I Adding Visitors’ Community Travel Tool" has a weight value of 0.0098. It is hoped that the research results will provide a way for the community and government to provide subsidies to the community and as a discussion for academic research on related topics.