都市型態係指人類活動於某個時間點影響都市區域內固定元素的空間表現形式，亦可被視為都市活動所創造的空間表徵。但是，都市型態與都市活動兩者間的關係並非全然是單向的，而是相互影響著，都市型態除了與土地使用與交通運輸關係密切外、還與許多其他活動面向有著重要的關連性，例如居住活動與運輸行為、都市經濟與產業活動、公共投入與能源使用、甚至是環境品質與生態多樣性維護。都市型態不僅可以做為都市發展的觀察依據，亦是都市活動與決策投入的重要決定面向。
本研究乃依循都市型態量化研究之方向，以台灣地區為實證地區。首先對都市型態的衡量對象、地理尺度、衡量面向及衡量指標做系統性思考，除了參考過去相關文獻外，亦加入景觀生態學及空間統計學等其他學科領域的思維，試圖建構合適台灣地區都市型態的衡量指標，以進行台灣地區都市型態之比較研究，並將結果做為規劃決策者參考之用。
本研究乃應用面積加權平均形狀指數(AWMSI)、面積加權平均碎形維度值(AWMPFD)、緊密度指數(CI)、最大區塊的緊密度指數(CILP)、中心性指數(Centrality)、全域型空間自相關係數(Moran’s I)、人口密度(POP Density)及道路密度(Road Density)做為都市型態衡量指標，每項指標皆有其衡量意義與衡量面向。本研究利用這些指標進行空間向度的都市型態描述觀察、時間向度的都市型態變遷分析、並探討不同特性都市表現出來的型態差異性。
結果發現，隨著都市規模增大，都市發展在空間上反映的形狀愈形複雜，又隨著都市發展可能產生的分散現象，大都市雖然發展強度高於一般都市或市鎮，但是會發生發展零碎的現象；再者，大都市會對鄰近都市的發展密集程度產生影響，距離大都市的衛星市鎮發展型態在空間表現上最為密集，其後隨著距離的增加，都市型態愈形零散。

Urban form may be defined as the spatial configuration of fixed elements within urban area, and also may be defined as urban activity creates spatial pattern. Urban form and urban activity between the relations completely is unidirectional by no means, but is mutually affects. Besides urban form is close with land use and transportation, it and many other activities, for example housing behavior, transports behavior, urban economy and industry activity, public investment, energy use, even environment quality and ecology multiplicity maintains, have the important correlation. Urban form not only may do for the urban development observation basis, also is urban activity and policy-making investment important decision faces.
The study applies quantitative methods to the research of urban form in Taiwan. First, the study makes the systematic ponder to measuring object, geography scale, measuring concept and measuring index of urban form by referring to the reference the related literature. The study also applies the landscape ecology and spatial statistics to research urban form. Then, the study attempts to construct appropriate measuring indexes to explain urban form in Taiwan and to compare the difference of urban form of Taiwan cities, and finally will do for plans using of the policy-maker reference.
The study applies AWMSI, AWMPFD, CI, CILP, Centrality, Moran’s I, POP Density and Road Density as measuring indexes of urban form. Each index has its mean and concept. The study use these indexes to observe spatial difference and temporal chage of urban form, and to discusses the different characteristic of urban display the difference of urban form.
The result of the study displays that with the increasing of urban scale, the spatial shape of urban will be more complex. Also dispersible phenomenon possibly produces with ueban development. The large cities although have higher development intensity than the normal cities, the large cities have the development fragmentary phenomenon. The large cities affect development crowded degree of their neighborhood cities. The development pattern of satellite town which left the large cities recently is most crowded in the space. With the distance increase, the urban form will be scattered.

壹、中文文獻
1. 王國材，1994，＜運輸網路佈置對都市發展型態影響之研究＞，國立交通大學交通運輸研究所，博士論文。
2. 王智聖，2002，＜都市公園生態空間特性之研究－以台南市公園鳥類為例＞，國立成功大學都市計劃研究所，碩士論文。
3. 朱健銘，2000，＜土地利用空間型態之研究＞，國立台灣大學地理學研究所，碩士論文。
4. 吳振發、林裕彬，2006，＜汐止市土地利用時空間變遷模式＞，《都市與計劃》，33卷3期，pp231-259。
5. 李明儒，2008，＜不同空間尺度下網格式土地使用變遷模型之敏感性分析＞，國立台灣大學建築與城鄉研究所，碩士論文。
6. 李俊霖，2001，＜都市成長管理監測之研究－以台北市綜合發展計畫例＞，國立台北大學都市計劃研究所，碩士論文。
7. 李哈濱、伍業剛，1992，景觀生態學的數量研究方法，北京，中國科學技術出版社。
8. 李瑞陽、林士強，2006，＜利用寬間技術與景觀生態指數分析墾丁國家公園土地覆蓋變遷影響之研究＞，《地理學報》，第46期，pp31-48。
9. 李團勝、肖篤寧，＜瀋陽市城市景觀結構分析＞，《地理科學》，22卷6期，pp717-723。
10. 林家慶，2006，＜應用福衛二號時間序列影像監測曾文水庫集水區崩塌地之時空變化＞，國立成功大學地球科學研究所，碩士論文。
11. 林晴如，2003，＜台灣地區永續性空間發展模式之分析＞，國立成功大學都市計劃研究所，碩士論文。
12. 邱皓政，2006，量化研究與統計分析，台北，五南。
13. 施鴻志，1997，都市規劃，新竹，建都文化。
14. 胡堯智，2005，＜都市土地使用變遷模擬方法之研究－以區域空間自相關、鄰近特徵為例＞，逢甲大學環境資訊科技研究所，碩士論文。
15. 徐國城，2006，＜緊密都市形態之正負面效益論述－兼論對台灣城鄉空間發展之參考觀點＞，《土地問題季刊》，5卷4期，pp32-45。
16. 高雅力，2004，＜都會區生態廊道規劃之研究：以台南市為例＞，國立成功大學都市計劃研究所，碩士論文。
17. 張淑貞，2008，＜街頭搶奪犯罪之空間與時間群聚性研究－以台中市西屯區為例＞，逢甲大學土木及水利工程所，博士論文。
18. 梁蘄善，1985，地理學計量分析，台北，中國文化大學出版社。
19. 許智宏，2006，＜都市混合土地使用形態及其影響因素之研究：以台南市為例＞，國立成功大學都市計劃研究所，碩士論文。
20. 許瑞堯，2003，＜都市發展型態對製造業廠商產值影響之研究＞，國立成功大學都市計劃研究所，碩士論文。
21. 陳正昌、程炳林、陳新豐、劉子鍵，2003，多變量分析方法－統計軟體應用，台北，五南。
22. 陳順宇，2000，多變量分析，高雄，復文。
23. 陳慈仁，2001，＜台北市資訊軟體業與網際網路服務業區位分佈之研究＞，台灣大學建築與城鄉研究所，碩士論文。
24. 曾文忠，2003，＜沿海土地利用變遷與管理之研究－以雲林沿海為例＞，逢甲大學土地管理學研究所，碩士論文。
25. 黃紹東，2004，＜台南市東區住宅價格之空間自我迴歸分析＞，國立成功大學都市計劃研究所，碩士論文。
26. 鄔建國，2003，景觀生態學：格局、過程、尺度與等級，台北，五南。
27. 趙羿、賴明洲、薛怡珍，2003，景觀生態學理論與實務，台北，地景。
28. 劉士鴻，1993，＜不同都市型態下交通運輸績效影響之研究＞，國立交通大學交通運輸研究所，碩士論文。
29. 劉玉山，1985，＜光復四十年來台灣地區都市計劃之回顧與展望＞，《中華民國都市計劃學會第十二次會員大會》。
30. 蔡為民、唐俊華、陳佑啟、張風榮，2004，＜近20年黃河三角洲典型地區農村居民點景觀格局＞，《資源科學》，26卷5期，pp89-97。
31. 蔡珮雯，2003，＜都市發展型態對都市公共成本及經濟效益之影響＞，國立成功大學都市計劃研究所，碩士論文。
32. 鄭文馨，2006，＜台灣都市土地價格空間聚集分析－1997~2006年為例＞，長榮大學土地管理與開發研究所，碩士論文。
33. 賴進貴、葉高華、王韋力，2004，＜土地利用變遷與空間相依性之探討以臺北盆地聚落變遷為例＞，《臺灣地理資訊學刊》，1期，pp29-40。
34. 謝純瑩，2002，＜台灣中部地區人口老化空間變遷之研究＞，國立彰化師範大學，碩士論文。
貳、英文文獻
1. Aaviksoo, K., 1993. Changes of Plant Cover and Land Use Types(1950s to 1980s) in Three Mire Reserves and Their Neighborhood in Estonia. Landscape Ecology, 8(5), 287-301.
2. Alan, M. M., 1985. Compactness of Geographic Shape: Comparison and Evaluation of Measures, Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, 67(1), 53-67.
3. Anderson, W. P., Kanaroglou, P. S. and Miller, E. J. 1996. Urban form, Energy, and the Environment: A Review of Issues, Evidence and Policy, Urban Studies, 33(1), 7–35.
4. Anselin, L., 1995. Local Indicators of Spatial Association - LISA. Geographical Analysis, 27, 115.
5. Ales, R. F., A. Martin., F. Ortega., and E. Ales., 1992. Recent Changes in Landscape Structure and Function in a Mediterranean Region of SW Spain(1950-1984). Landscape Ecology, 7(1), 3-18.
6. Alonso, W., 1964. Location and land use. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachussetts, USA.
7. Beatley, T., 2000. Green urbanism: learning from european cities. Island Press, Washington, DC.
8. Benfield, F., Kaid, Matthew., D. Raimi., and Donald, D. T. Chen., 1999. Once there were greenfield: how urban sprawl is undermining America’s environment, Economy and Social Fabric, New York: Natural Resources Denfense Council.
9. Breheny, M., 1992. Sustainable development and urban form. Pion, London.
10. Brueckner, J.K., 2000. Urban sprawl: diagnosis and remedies. Int. Reg. Sci. Rev. 23 (2), 160–171.
11. Burgess, E.W., 1925. In: Park, R.E., Burgess, E.W., McKenzie, R. (Eds.), The Growth of the City: An Introduction to a Research Project. The City, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 47–62.
12. Cervero, R., Kockelman, K., 1997. Travel Demand and the 3Ds: Density, Diversity, and Design, Transportation Research D, 2(3), 199–219.
13. Christaller, W., 1933. Central Places in Southern Germany. Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
14. Cliff, A., Ord, J. K., 1973. Spatial Autocorrelation. London: Pion.
15. De Roo, G., Miller, D., 2000. Compact Cities and Sustainable Urban Development: A Critical Assessment of Policies and Plans from an International Perspective. Ashgate, Hampshire, England.
16. Diamond, H. L., P. F. Noonon., 1996. Land Use in America, Washington, DC: Island Press, 85.
17. Dieleman, F.,Wegener,M., 2004. Compact city and urban sprawl. Built Environ. 30 (4), 308–323.
18. Duany, A., Plater-Zyberk, E., Speck, J., 2000. Suburban Nation. North Point Press, New York, NY.
19. Emin, Z. B., Ali, I. K., 2007. Spatial and Temporal Dynamics of Land Use Pattern in Turkey: A Case Study in Inegol. Landscape and Urban Planning, 81, 316-327.
20. Ewing, R., 1997. Is Los Angeles-style sprawl desirable? J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 63 (1), 107–126.
21. Ewing, R., Pendall, R., Chen, D., 2002. Measuring Sprawl and its Impact. Smart Growth America, Washington, DC.
22. Friedman, J., 1966. Regional Development Policy: A Case Study of Venezuela. The MIT Press.
23. Forman, R. T. T., Godron, M., 1986. Landscape Ecology. John Wiley and Sons.
24. Galster, G., Hanson, R., Ratcliffe, M.R., Wolman, H., Coleman, S., Freihage, J., 2001. Wrestling sprawl to the ground: defining and measuring an elusive concept. Hous. Pol. Debate 12 (4), 681–717.
25. Gillham, O., Maclean, A., 2001. The Limitless City. Island Press, Washington, DC.
26. Gilliland, J., Pierre, G., 2006. The study of urban form in Canada. Urban Morphology. 10(1), 51-66
27. Griffith, D. A., 1988. Advanced Spatial Statistics: Special Topics in the Exploration of Quantitative Spatial Data Series. Springer.
28. Hair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. and Black, W. C., 1995. Multivariate Data Analysis with Reading. Prentice Hall.
29. Harris, C. D., and Ullman, E. L., 1945. The Nature of Cities, Ann. Am. Acad. Polit. So. Sci, 242, 7–17.
30. Howard, E., 1898. Garden Cities of Tomorrow (London, 1902. Reprinted, edited with a Preface by F.J. Osborn and an Introductory Essay by Lewis Mumford).
31. Hoyt, H., 1939. The Structure and Growth of Residential Neighborhoods in American Cities, Federal Housing Administration, Washington, DC.
32. Huang. J., X. X. Lu., and J. M. Sellers., 2007. A global comparative analysis of urban form: applying spatial metrics and remote sensing, Landscape and Urban Planning, 82, 184–197.
33. Johnson, M.P., 2001. Environmental impacts of urban sprawl: a survey of the literature and proposed research agenda. Environ. Plann. A(33), 717–735.
34. Knaap, G. J., Song, Y., and Zorica, N. B., 2007. Measuring Patterns of Urban Development: New Intelligence for the War on Sprawl. Local Environment, 12(3), 239–257.
35. Knox, P., 1987. Urban Social Geography: An Introduction. Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
36. Leccese, M., McCormick, K., 2000. Charter of the New Urbanism. McGraw-Hill, New York.
37. Li, X., Yen, A. G., 2004. Analyzing Spatial Restructuring of Land Use Patterns in a Fast Growing Region Using Remote Sensing and GIS. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69, 335-354.
38. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. 2001. Smart Growth, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. Cambridge, MA.
39. Lynch, K., 1960. The Image of City. The MIT Press.
40. Lynch, K., 1981. The Good City Form. The MIT Press.
41. Luck, M., Wu, J., 2000. A Gradient Analysis of the Landscape Pattern of Urbanization in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area of USA.
42. Marshall, S., 2005. Urban Pattern Specification, Solutions, London.
43. McGarigal, L., Marks, B. J., 1994. FRAGSTATS Manual: Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for Quantifying Landscape Structure, Source: http://ftp.fsl.orst.edu/.
44. Oden, N. L., Sokal, R. R., 1992. An Investigation of Three-Matrix Permutation Tests. J. Classif, 9, 275–290.
45. O'Neill, R. V., Krummel, J. R., Gardner, R. H., Sugihara, G., Jackson, B., Deangelis, D. L., Milne, B. T., Turner, M. G., Zygmunt, B., Christensen, S. W., Dale, V. H. and Graham, R. H., 1988. Indices of Landscape Pattern, Landscape Ecology, 1, 153-162.
46. Perroux, F., 1955. La notion de pole de croissance, Economie appliqué.
47. Skinner, C. N., 1995, Change in Spatial Characteristics of Forest Openings in the Klamath Mountain of Northwestern California, USA. Landscape Ecology, 10 (4), 219-228.
48. Sokal, R. R., Oden, N. L., 1978. Spatial autocorrelation in biology. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. 10, 199–228.
49. Song, Y., Knaap, G.J., 2004. Measuring urban form: is Portland winning the war on sprawl? J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 70(2), 210–225.
50. Sawada, M., 2004. Global Spatial Autocorrelation Indices - Moran's I, Geary's C and the General Cross-Product Statistic. Source: http://www.lpc.uottawa.ca/publications/moransi/moran.htm
51. Torrens, P.M., Marina, A., 2000. Measuring Sprawl. Centre for Advanced Spatial, London.
52. Tsai, Y. H., 2005. Quantifying Urban Form: Compactness versus ‘Sprawl’, Urban Studies. 42(1), 141–161.
53. Upton, G. J. G., Fingleton, B., 1985. Spatial Data Analysis by Example: Point Pattern and Quantitative Data. John Wiley & Sons.
54. Wassmer, R.W., 2000. Urban Sprawl in a U.S. Metropolitan Area: Ways to Measure and a Comparison of the Sacramento Area to Similar Metropolitan Areas in California and the U.S. Project Paper.
55. Weber, A., 1909. Theory of the Location of Industry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
56. X. J. Yu., Cho, N. N. 2007, Spatial and Temporal Dynamics of Urban Sprawl along Two Urban-Rural Transects: A Case Study of Guangzhou, China. Landscape and Urban Planning, 79, 96-109.