簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表
研究生： 林昕
Lin, Shin
論文名稱： 探討民眾的風險感知對轉爐石應用於人工礁石之接受度影響
Exploring public risk perception and its impact on the acceptance of basic oxygen furnace slags used in artificial reefs
指導教授： 劉大綱
Liu, Ta-Kang
學位類別： 碩士
Master
系所名稱： 工學院 - 海洋科技與事務研究所
Institute of Ocean Technology and Marine Affairs
論文出版年： 2021
畢業學年度： 109
語文別： 中文
論文頁數： 102
中文關鍵詞： 轉爐石 、人工礁石 、風險感知 、海洋環境 、問卷調查
外文關鍵詞： basic oxygen furnace slags, artificial reefs, risk perception, marine environment, questionnaire
相關次數： 點閱：218  下載：0 
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報

    • 從1970年代開始，海洋沙漠化的問題逐漸浮現，海水中的鐵離子濃度下降可能為原因之一，根據日本與韓國的實務經驗發現，轉爐石中鈣、鐵、磷與矽的成分可做為藻類生長所需的養分提供，將之製成人工礁石對於海洋整體基礎生產力之提升具有助益。轉爐石為鋼鐵業在煉鋼過程中所產生的副產品，我國轉爐石的年產量約為160萬噸，在配合政府5+2循環經濟政策背景下，推動轉爐石應用於人工漁礁，不僅可改善海洋環境及復育沿海棲地，亦符合循環經濟之政策目標。
    轉爐石以往因不適當之利用，導致民眾產生對其成分與其應用之疑慮，是以本研究透過問卷調查的方式，以釐清民眾對於轉爐石的顧慮因素。經由文獻蒐集的結果，發現風險感知的概念對於政策推行及其接受度的影響至關重要，故研究問卷設計亦以風險感知的概念，以探討民眾對轉爐石製成人工漁礁政策推行之接受度。研究結果顯示(1)男性群體、具較高經濟收入群體、居住地靠近海洋與較常從事海洋活動群體，對於轉爐石或資訊有較多的認識與關注，然而大致上民眾缺乏對轉爐石製成人工礁石之認知與關注；(2)民眾與專家在判斷轉爐石對於海洋環境之影響因素，存有風險判斷的落差，凸顯強化風險溝通之重要性；(3) 民眾對於轉爐石的重金屬成分有較明顯程度的擔憂，且重視政府與投放區域民眾之溝通說明，又對於居住地海域環境被作為投放場域，呈現鄰避效應(not in my back yard, NIMBY)；(4)民眾判斷轉爐石的海域利用接受度方面，明顯會受到政府在進行相關檢測作為與資訊發布是否足以信賴的影響，對轉爐石礁有認識的群體亦呈現較高的接受度。
    最後，研究建議指出，可藉由科普的方式以強化知識傳遞，並善用大眾媒體與新興社交媒體以作為民眾與決策者之間的溝通管道。此外，促進公民參與和資訊公開，對於民眾認識與接受轉爐石之海域利用發展將有所助益。

    The decrease in seaweed has caused sea desertification since 1970s. The results of the demonstration projects in Japan and South Korea showed that the iron leached from the Basic oxygen furnace slags (BOF slags) can promote the growth of the seaweed. Thus, the use of BOF slags as a nutrient resource showed a positive effect to the marine productivity. BOF slags are the byproduct of steelmaking and the annual output in Taiwan is about 1.6 million tons. In order to successfully utilize BOF slags as recyclable materials, the reuse of BOF slags as a marine resource in Taiwan is now promoted by the government. The objective in this study was aimed to explore the influence factors of public acceptance related to the utilization of BOF slags in artificial reefs. In conclusion, to strengthen public knowledge about the marine utilization of BOF slags and improve the public trust in the government, the government should disseminate the knowledge and strengthen risk communication with stakeholders. Besides, information disclosure and public participation were the key factors affecting government trust. Finally, this study provided the foundation for policymakers and subsequent researchers.

    摘 要 i Abstract ii 誌 謝 vii 目 錄 viii 表目錄 xi 圖目錄 xiv 第一章 緒論 1 1.1 研究背景與動機 1 1.2 研究目的 3 1.3 研究流程 4 第二章 文獻回顧 5 2.1 轉爐石應用於人工礁石之發展背景及環境影響 5 2.1.1 台灣轉爐石再利用之政策推行背景 5 2.1.2 日韓台發展轉爐石應用在海洋領域的實例 8 2.1.3 以層級分析法為轉爐石對海洋生態環境之專家問卷評估 14 2.2 關注知識與風險感知對政策發展接受度之影響探討 16 2.2.1 關注知識 17 2.2.2 風險感知之概念 17 2.2.3 風險感知於政策發展影響之應用實例 19 第三章 研究方法 29 3.1 研究設計 29 3.2 問卷設計與發放調查 30 3.2.1 問卷設計 30 3.2.2 樣本數量設定 35 3.2.3 問卷機制設定 35 3.2.4 問卷發放調查 36 3.3 統計分析方法 36 3.3.1 描述性統計 36 3.3.2 樣本適合度檢驗 37 3.3.3 獨立性卡方檢驗 37 3.3.4 獨立樣本t檢定 38 3.3.5 單因子變異數分析 38 3.3.6 皮爾森積差相關分析 38 3.3.7 多元迴歸分析 39 3.4 研究限制 40 第四章 研究結果與討論 41 4.1 樣本篩選與基本特性分析結果 41 4.1.1 樣本篩選結果 41 4.1.2 人口資料之次數分配與樣本適合度檢驗結果 42 4.1.3 敘述統計分析結果 47 4.2 人口變項與關注知識變項之關聯性分析結果 53 4.3 不同背景變項在風險感知與公眾接受度之差異性分析結果 57 4.3.1 不同群體在風險感知與公眾接受度之t檢定 57 4.3.2 不同群體對風險感知與公眾接受度之ANOVA檢定 65 4.4 風險感知對於公眾接受度之多元迴歸分析結果 75 4.4.1 正面印象群體之影響分析 76 4.4.2 負面印象群體之影響分析 77 4.4.3 無印象印象群體之影響分析 78 4.4.4 全部群體之影響分析 79 4.5 綜合結果與討論 80 第五章 結論與建議 84 5.1 結論 84 5.2 建議 85 參考文獻 87 中英文文獻 87 網路資料 95 附錄 97

    1. 中國鋼鐵股份有限公司，中龍鋼鐵股份有限公司(2017)。轉爐石海事工程使用手冊。頁1-173。
    2. 中國鋼鐵股份有限公司，中龍鋼鐵股份有限公司(2020)。轉爐石應用於水泥生料使用手冊。頁1-66。
    3. 李政忠(2003)。從抽樣與統計方法探討網路問卷調查的可行性：比較電話訪談與網路問卷樣本的實質差異性。廣播與電視，21，頁55-95。
    4. 李政忠(2004)。網路調查所面臨的問題與解決建議。資訊社會研究，6，頁1-24。
    5. 沈得縣，李承効(2011)。轉爐石應用於瀝青混凝土鋪面使用手冊及注意事項。轉爐石應用於瀝青混凝土鋪面研討會，頁1-15。
    6. 邱皓政(2010)。量化研究與統計分析：SPSS中文視窗版本資料分析範例解析(第五版)。五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
    7. 康兆凱、陳平、楊淞宏、吳姵萱、吳雅蓉、陳俊延、江文山、張嘉修、余進利(2019)。含有碳酸化轉爐石的儀器保護基座對近岸海洋環境生態之影響。第41屆海洋工程研討會論文集，頁1-6。
    8. 康兆凱、劉大綱、黃祥瑜、楊淞宏、陳信宏、吳姵萱(2020)。煉鋼轉爐石應用於海洋牧場對臺灣海洋生態環境之影響評估。計畫編號：OAC-NAMR-109-0011。
    9. 劉大綱、柯明賢、王毓正、陳平(2018)。煉鋼爐石應用於海洋牧場固碳之認證制度與橋接溝通研究。計畫編號：MOST106-3113-F006-001。
    10. 謝旭洲(2008)。社會統計與資料分析。威仕曼文化。
    11. Alessandro, M., Lagomarsino, B.C, Scartascini, C., Streb, J., & Torrealday, J. (2021). Transparency and Trust in Government. Evidence from a Survey Experiment. World Development, 138, 105223.
    12. Battaglio, R.P., & Legge J.S. (2009). Self-interest, ideological/symbolic politics, and citizen characteristics: a cross-national analysis of support for privatization. Public Administration Review, 69 (4), 697-709.
    13. Botetzagias, I., Malesios, C., Kolokotroni, A., & Moysiadis, Y. (2013). The role of NIMBY in opposing the siting of wind farms: evidence from Greece. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 58(2), 229-251.
    14. Coomber, R. (1997). Dangerous drug adulteration-an international survey of drug dealers using the Internet and World Wide Web (WWW). International Journal of Drug Policy, 8, 71-81.
    15. Cheng, M.H., Liu, T.K., Olenin, S., & Su, P.X. (2019). Risk assessment model based on expert's perspective for ballast water management. Ocean & Coastal Management, 171, 80-86.
    16. Du, C.M., Gao, X., & Kitamura, S.Y.(2019). Measures to decrease and utilize steelmaking slag. Journal of Sustainable Metallurgy, 5, 141–153.
    17. Chen, Y.S., Ko, M.S., Wang, Y.C., Chen, P., & Liu, T.K. (2021). Enrichment of marine productivity utilizing steelmaking slag: managing conflicting stakeholders’ interests in Taiwan. Aquaculture International,
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10499-021-00699-1
    18. Cong, X., Ma, L., Wang, L., Šaparauskas, J., Górecki, J., & Skibniewski, M. J. (2021). The early warning system for determining the “not in My Back Yard” of heavy pollution projects based on public perception. Journal of Cleaner Production, 282, 125398.
    19. Dillman, D.A. (2000). Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method, 2nd ed., New York: John Wiley & Sons.
    20. Do, Y., Kim, J.Y., Lineman, M., Kim, D.K., & Joo, G.J. (2015). Using Internet search behavior to assess public awareness of protected wetlands. Conservation Biology, 29(1), 271-279.
    21. Earle, T.C., & Cvetkovich, G.T. (1995). Social trust: toward a cosmopolitan society. Westport, CT: Praeger.
    22. Esaiasson, P. (2014). NIMBYism - a re-examination of the phenomenon. Social Science Research, 48, 185-195.
    23. Fisher, L.V., & Barron, A.R. (2019). The recycling and reuse of steelmaking slags — A review. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 146, 244-255.
    24. Dowling, G.R., & Staelin, R. (1994). A Model of Perceived Risk and Intended Risk-Handling Activity. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 119-134.
    25. Garnett, K., Cooper, T., Longhurst, P., Jude, S., & Tyrrel, S. (2017). A conceptual framework for negotiating public involvement in municipal waste management decision-making in the UK. Waste Management, 66, 210-221.
    26. Hayashi, A., Watanabe, T., Kaneko, R., Takano, A., Takahashi, K., Miyata, Y., Matsuo, S., Yamamoto, T., Inoue, R., & Ariyama, T. (2013). Decrease of sulfide in enclosed coastal sea by using steelmaking slag. ISIJ International, 53(10), 1894-1901.
    27. Hair, F.J., Babin, J.B., Anderson, E.R., & Black, C.W. (2018). Multivariate Data Analysis, 8th, Cengage Learning EMEA.
    28. Ikuo, F. (2015). Overview of slag usage technology development at various works. Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Technical Report, 109, 160-182.
    29. Jacobs, L. & Worthley, R. (1999). A comparative study of risk appraisal: a new look at risk assessment in different countries. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 59(2), 225-247.
    30. Jones, C.R., Yardley, S., & Medley S. (2019). The social acceptance of fusion: critically examining public perceptions of uranium-based fuel storage for nuclear fusion in Europe. Energy Research & Social Science, 52, 192-203.
    31. Kazuhiro, H., Naoto, T., Yoshiyuki, K., & Toshiaki, K. (2013). Processing and reusing technologies for steelmaking slag. Nippon Steel Technical Report, 104, 123-129.
    32. Kazuhiro, H., Naoto, T., Toshiaki, K., Yoshiyuki, K., & Keisuke, S. (2015). Overview of Iron/Steel Slag Application and Development of New Utilization Technologies. Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Technical Report, 109, 1-7.
    33. Kortenkamp, K.V., & Basten, B. (2015). Environmental Science in the Media. Science Communication, 37(3), 287-313.
    34. Kibirige, H.M. & DePalo, L. (2017). The Internet as a source of academic research information: findings of two pilot studies. Information Technology and Libraries, 19(1), 11-16.
    35. Leiserowitz, A. (2006). Climate change risk perception and policy preferences: the role of affect, imagery, and values. Climate Change, 77 (1–2), 45-72.
    36. Leuven & Beigium (2013). Proceedings of the third international slag valorization symposium: The transition to sustainable materials management. 1-13.
    37. Legagneux, P., Casajus, N., Cazelles, K., Chevallier, C., Chevrinais, M., Guéry, L., Jacquet, C., Jaffré, M., Jaffré M., Naud, M.J., Noisette, F., Ropars, P., Vissault, S., Archambault, P., Bêty, J., Berteaux, D. & Gravel, D. (2018). Our House Is Burning: Discrepancy in Climate Change vs. Biodiversity coverage in the media as compared to scientific literature. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 5, 1-6.
    38. Mitchell, M.S. (1999). Consumer perceived risk: conceptualisations and models. European Journal of Marketing, 33 (1/2), 163-195.
    39. McComas, K.A., Lu, H., Keranen, K.M., Furtney, M.A., & Song, H. (2016). Public perceptions and acceptance of induced earthquakes related to energy development. Energy Policy, 99, 27-32.
    40. Misnon, F.A., Rahman, I.A., Hu, Y.S., & Yasir, M.S. (2018). Public perception toward information and knowledge of nuclear power plant development. A Malaysian case study.1-7.
    41. Mao, B., Ao, C., Cheng, Y., Jiang, N., & Xu, L. (2020). Exploring the role of public risk perceptions on preferences for air quality improvement policies: An integrated choice and latent variable approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 269, 122379.
    42. Östman, J. (2013). The influence of media use on environmental engagement: a political socialization approach. Environmental Communication, 8(1), 92-109.
    43. Odonkor, S.T., & Adams. S. (2020). An assessment of public knowledge, perception and acceptance of nuclear energy in Ghana. Journal of Cleaner Production, 269.
    44. POSCO (2010). For sea forestation and restoration of marine ecosystems. Retrieved from https://www.chc.com.tw/pdf/Triton%20Brochure(Eng).pdf
    45. Petrova, M.A. (2013). NIMBYism revisited: public acceptance of wind energy in the United States. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 4(6), 575-601.
    46. Panagiotopoulos, P., Barnett, J., Bigdeli, A.Z., & Sams, S. (2016). Social media in emergency management: twitter as a tool for communicating risks to the public. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 111, 86-96.
    47. POSCO (2018). POSCO corporate citizenship report 2018. Retrieved from
    https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/ungc-production/attachments/cop_2019/477356/original/2018_POSCO_Report_EN.pdf?1565256419
    48. Pu, S., Shao, Z., Fang, M., Yang, L., Liu, R., Bi, J., & Ma, Z. (2019a). Spatial distribution of the public's risk perception for air pollution: a nationwide study in China. Science of the Total Environment, 655, 454-462.
    49. Pu, S., Shao, Z., Yang, L., Liu, R., Bi, J., & Ma, Z. (2019b). How much will the Chinese public pay for air pollution mitigation? A nationwide empirical study based on a willingness-to-pay scenario and air purifier costs. Journal of Cleaner Production, 218, 51-60.
    50. Palmieri, N., Simeone, M., Russo, C., & Perito, M.A. (2020). Profiling young consumers’ perceptions of GMO products: a case study on Italian undergraduate students. International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science, 21.
    51. Ropeik D. (2002). Understanding factors of risk perception. Environment Reporting, 56(4), 1-117.
    52. Ropeik, D.P. (2011). Risk perception in toxicology-part I: moving beyond scientific instincts to understand risk perception. Toxicological Sciences. 121 (1), 1–6.
    53. Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science 36, 280-285.
    54. Strauss, J. (1996). Early survey research on the Internet: review, illustration and evaluation. In Blair E.A. & Kamakura W.A. (Eds.), proceedings of the American marketing association winter educators' conference. Chicago: American Marketing Association.
    55. Sérgio, C., Benício, D.M., & Collins, M. (1998). Risk perception and industrial buyer differences. Retrieved from
    http://www.anpad.org.br/admin/pdf/enanpad1998-mkt-26.pdf
    56. Song, M.Z. (2012). New theory of risk management: all-round and integration, 6th ed., Taipei: Wunan.
    57. Sampei, Y., & Aoyagi-Usui, M. (2009). Mass-media coverage, its influence on public awareness of climate-change issues, and implications for Japan’s national campaign to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Global Environmental Change, 19(2), 203-212.
    58. Takashi, Y., Masayoshi, Y., & Masato, S. (2015). Overview of slag usage technology development at various works. Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Technical Report, 109, 160-182.
    59. Toshiaki, K., Chika, K., Eiji, K., & Koichi, T. (2015). Application of steelmaking slag to marine forest restoration. Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Technical Report , 109, 79-84.
    60. Thompson-Saud, G., Gelcich, S., & Barraza, J. (2018). Marine environmental issues in the mass media: insights from television, newspaper and internet searches in Chile. Ocean & Coastal Management, 165, 154-160.
    61. Uji, A., Prakash, A., & Song, J. (2021). “Does the NIMBY syndrome” undermine public support for nuclear power in Japan? Energy Policy, 148,111944.
    62. Wang, B., Hong, G., Qin, T., Fan, W.R., & Yuan, X.C. (2019a). Factors governing the willingness to pay for air pollution treatment: a case study in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region. Journal of Cleaner Production, 235, 1304-1314.
    63. Wang, S., Wang, J., Lin, S., & Li, J. (2019b). Public perceptions and acceptance of nuclear energy in China: the role of public knowledge, perceived benefit, perceived risk and public engagement. Energy Policy, 126, 352-360.
    64. Yang, Y.L. (2020). Comparison of public perception and risk management decisions of aircraft noise near Taoyuan and Kaohsiung International Airports. Journal of Air Transport Management, 85, 101797.
    65. 經濟部工業局(2016)。認識爐石家族。取自
    https://www.chc.com.tw/pdf/%E8%AA%8D%E8%AD%98%E7%88%90%E7%9F%B3%E5%AE%B6%E6%97%8F.pdf
    66. 行政院交通環境資源處(2017)。【院會議案】轉爐石及底渣循環利用規劃。取自
    https://www.ey.gov.tw/Page/448DE008087A1971/927b85fc-89dc-4561-8dd4-09991e44ba57
    67. 行政院新聞傳播處(2018)。【重要政策】循環經濟推動方案。取自
    https://www.ey.gov.tw/Page/5A8A0CB5B41DA11E/18ef26a4-5d05-4fb3-963e-6b228e713576
    68. 行政院公共工程委員會(2017)。【新聞稿】再生粒料循環利用 兼顧環保及工程品質。取自
    https://www.pcc.gov.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=C61062639C0CD29F&sms=21EF9CF82726C1BB&s=6A9B0FFC6523FC76
    69. 行政院公共工程委員會(2019)。再生粒料應用於公共工程之推動策略。取自
    https://gpi.edf.org.tw/pics/uploads/%E5%86%8D%E7%94%9F%E7%B2%92%E6%96%99%E6%87%89%E7%94%A8%E6%96%BC%E5%85%AC%E5%85%B1%E5%B7%A5%E7%A8%8B%E4%B9%8B%E6%8E%A8%E5%8B%95%E7%AD%96%E7%95%A5.pdf
    70. 行政院環境保護署(2011)。【新聞發布】環保署回應「詭異藍海奇觀－中鋼爐石填海造陸」報導。取自
    https://enews.epa.gov.tw/Page/3B3C62C78849F32F/5ea77d0d-3a57-493e-8ad8-bc06efc24703
    71. 行政院環境保護署(2013)。【即時新聞澄清】環保署推動廢棄資源物填海造島(陸)政策說明。取自
    https://enews.epa.gov.tw/Page/894720A1EB490390/887c5942-baaf-426d-aba5-f8241683c2dd
    72. 周昭平、涂建豐、石秀華(2011)。詭異藍海奇觀—中鋼爐石填海造陸。環團：美麗的錯誤。取自
    https://tw.appledaily.com/headline/20111116/KJPK3JWZ7RKGO4VMAURCMW7USI/
    73. 環境資訊中心(2020)。配合政府循環經濟？台北港開「轉爐石」填海造港首例，環評不敢草率放行。取自
    https://e-info.org.tw/node/223460
    74. BusinessKorea (2020). POSCO Uses Steel Slag to Create Sea Forests and Save the Marine Ecosystem. Retrieved from
    http://www.businesskorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=46986
    75. 監察院(2009)。【院新聞稿】國道八號銜接台十七線西濱公路之台江大道，因不當使用轉爐石填築路堤，導致路面隆起呈波浪狀，監察院通過劉玉山委員及錢林慧君委員提案糾正交通部臺灣區國道新建工程局。取自https://www.cy.gov.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=124&sms=8912&s=4866
    76. 行政院環境保護署督察總隊(2014)。【即時新聞澄清】環保署對旗山農地回填已持續環境品質監測之說明。取自
    https://enews.epa.gov.tw/Page/894720A1EB490390/47b9bd19-d1ee-4234-b446-f003cf3a0346
    77. 行政院環境保護署事業廢棄物最終處置網(2018)。【相關新聞】【台菲爐石大戰】垃圾底渣超好用 台中市府年省8000萬。取自
    https://fdiw.epa.gov.tw/lp.aspx?ctNode=6&local=%E7%9B%B8%E9%97%9C%E6%96%B0%E8%81%9E

    下載圖示
    2026-08-05公開
    QR CODE