|Abstract: ||摘要:水為自然資源的重要組成成分,亦是人類與其他生物賴以生存的必要物質,故水資源開發利用與經濟發展及環境生態保護之間須取得平衡,方能保證區域水資源永續利用,而區域水資源永續利用指標體系能對區域水資源永續利用現況進行評價,發掘存在問題的癥結,進而對水資源永續利用進行規劃與制訂合理政策,然而指標體系內容涵蓋廣泛,故本研究僅針對指標體系中有關水資源永續利用指標及水資源永續利用指標體系架構建立方面,進行較深入的探討,以為建構水資源永續利用指標體系奠定重要基石。 本研究首先就傳統水資源管理與永續水資源管理之差異與重要性進行比較,並綜合建議八項指標評選原則作為篩選適合國內水資源永續利用指標的依據,並採聯合國建議之驅動力-狀態-回應(D-S-R)架構分析整理國內外有關水資源指標與本研究建議之指標共146個,經由本研究群討論與國外利用情形及資料可行性將146個指標刪減至46個,並利用專家問卷方式進行指標篩選,本研究共發出92份問卷對象包括產、官、學等專業人士,共回收問卷65份,有效問卷為52份,經專家主觀篩選與相關分析後將再指標刪減為35個,其中代表驅動力指標有13個、狀態指標有11個、回應指標有11個,並參考修正聯合國永續發展委員會所制訂之永續發展指標定義與計算方法,將建議的35個指標依概念、特徵、計算方法及資料取得等方式制訂水資源永續利用指標定義與計算方法。 水資源永續利用指標體系架構係利用專家問卷與因子分析的方法確立,分析結果顯示水資源永續指標體系架構可分為四層,第一層為目標層;第二層為子目標層,包括4個子目標(組織法規、經濟活動與災害防治、水資源管理與流域水資源);第三層為議題層,包括10個議題;第四層為指標層,其中包括35個指標。 為確立水資源永續利用指標體系架構間各指標項目權重,則採問卷調查配合德爾裴技法、層次分析法、灰色統計法進行分析,調查對象係針對第一次調查專家群中選取具代表性的專家做為調查對象,調查共發出30份問卷,回收24份問卷,有效問卷數為18份,由分析結果顯示各指標項目權重之優先次序尚稱合理,且三個方法所獲之結果差異不大,故本研究將各指標項目之權重值取三方法所獲結果之平均值訂之,綜上述步驟,可初步建立國內水資源永續利用指標及其體系架構。 由於水資源永續利用指標體系架構之建立涉及了社會、經濟與生態環境等複雜因素與國內外之可比性,因此收集的資料愈完整,就愈能獲得合理與完整的水資源永續利用指標體系,故日後尚需隨資料的充裕不斷予以修正。|
abstract:Water is the essential component of natural resources, and it is also the necessity for people and living species. For assuring sustainable use of water resources, there must has a balance point among water resources development, economic development, and environmental protection. Indicators are an essential component in the overall assessment of the performance towards water use. In addition, indicators clearly show whether we are on the right track and in what direction we are headed. Consequently, reasonable water management policy can be raised based on the information provided by these indicators. But existing indicators do not adequately serve this purpose, and thus indicators of sustainable are needed. This study will focus on identifying a set of sustainable indicators for water resources and defining a framework for their organization to make indicators available to decision-makers at different levels. Firstly, we compare the difference between conventional and sustainable water management. The eight selected principles serve as guidelines for the entire assessment process including the choice and design of indicators and their interpretation and communication of the result. The Driving force-State-Response framework (DSR) is adopted, which was developed by the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) in 1995, as a tool for organizing information on sustainable development and for developing, presenting and analyzing indicators of sustainable development. Based on the above criteria, 146 indicators are selected. For the reason that indicators should be developed and used at different levels, with different scales and components, the indicator tool should be able to produce a range of information from local to global, from detailed to aggregated and from scientific to policymaking. These indicators are then screened by the methods of brainstorming, questionnaire investigation, and correlation analysis. Finally, 35 indicators are left and recommended as sustainable indicators for water resources. Among them, 13 serve as driving-force indicators, 11 as status indicators, and other 11 as response indicators. Subsequent, the methodology sheets, which include brief definition, placement in the framework, significance, description, sources of data etc., for each of the indicators are prepared. For establishing the hierarchical structures of those indicators, both questionnaire investigation and factor analysis are employed. From the analysis, hierarchy with four levels are recommended from factor analysis. The first hierarchy level has a single objective, the sustainable water use. The second hierarchy level has four objectives, institution and regulations, economic activities and hazard prevention, water management, and regional water resources. The third hierarchy level has ten objectives. The fourth hierarchy level has the 35 indicators considered. The established hierarchical structure of those indicators requires information about the relative importance of each objective. Many techniques for collecting the judgments of decision makers concerning the relative value of criteria have been suggested. Here, we will deal with three techniques which are popular being used: Delphi method, AHP method and Gray statistic method. In the investigation, 30 questionnaires are issued and only 18 are returned and analyzed. From the analysis, results obtained from these three methods tell a little difference. Therefore, the final weighting for each objectives takes as an arithmetical average values obtained from these three methods. Construction of sustainable indicators and hierarchical structure of those indicators require information related to society, economics, environment, and international comparison. Hence, they have to be modified and improved as more data are available.