近年來受到氣候變遷和環境劣化的衝擊，各國政府投入大量資金及建設，希望能減緩其所帶來的傷害。台灣政府也在二零零五年提出八年一千一百六十億的治水預算，以求解決台灣沿岸長期以來每當豪雨便氾濫成災的情形。永續發展已成為普世的共同價值。為了確保政策及管理規劃符合永續發展的理念，透過適當的工具能幫助我們了解各種政策帶來潛在的效益及衝擊，進一步去探討何種方案最接近永續發展的趨勢
此研究為以台灣雲林地區為研究對象，分別就社會、經濟及生態三個面向深入探討，根據雲林地區過去之環境變遷及外來可能的發展趨勢，設計三個方案來探討沿海地區永續經營策略。研究中以安全、淹水損失和東方環頸、高蹺、彩鷸之物理棲地作為指標，建構空間資訊決策支援系統，模擬雲林地區面臨洪水可能會遭遇的情形。透過此系統，本研究將各種情境的改變視覺具體化，有助於利益相關者(stakeholder)之間的討論，也能提供決策者在制定相關政策或管理策略之依據。本研究成果跳脫傳統以工程水段控制洪水的治水策略，轉而以洪災風險管理的方式來解決雲林沿海地區長久以來面對的淹水問題，提供一個能達到永續經營的策略，希冀研究成果可以作為相關部門未來規劃參考。

It is increasingly recognized that more sustainable approaches are needed for planning and managing landscapes worldwide, and tools are needed to effectively apply sustainable principles to planning and management, especially for lowland areas. The spatial dimension of sustainability engages relations between different land uses, ecosystems, biotopes and human effects at different scales and over time. Yunlin County, located in southern west of Taiwan, is with the abundant nature resources and suffering from flooding and land subsidence for long. With the effects of climate change, lowland management in this area is getting complicated. All possible strategies should be considered and conveyed to decision-makers in the most efficient and transparent way, so as to redirect further discussion toward the conflicting aspects. This is optimally achieved by resorting to a Decision Support System.
The study focused on the evaluation of the effects on landscape pattern, safety, economic and ecological resources as a whole based on the rules of thumb and the future developing trend. Three planning scenarios, Do Nothing, Current Policy and Coastal Conservation Green Way, were generated so as to simulate. The scenarios were then compared by applying the OSIRIS, a software of decision and evaluation support system, to highlight the most conflicting sites and to propose an optimal strategy for the area under evaluation. The results illustrated that the current policy might not be an effective and sustainable strategy of lowland planning and management in safety, economics and ecological concerns. Instead, the scenario of Coastal Conservation Green Way might not only ease flood threaten but also provide the additional ecological benefit. Hence, the study based on the application of Decision Support System could contribute to enhance communication between stakeholders and help achieve sustainable lowland management.

1. Adams, W. M. (2006). The Future of Sustainability: Re-thinking Environment and Development in the Twenty-first Century.
2. Argent, R. M. and Grayson, R. B. (2001), Design of information systems for environmental managers: an example using interface prototyping. Environmental Modelling & Software 16(5): 433-438.
3. Boscolo, D. and Metzger, J. P. (2009), Is bird incidence in Atlantic forest fragments influenced by landscape patterns at multiple scales? Landscape Ecology 24(7): 907-918
4. Devuyst, D. (2001), Introduction to sustainability assessment at the local level. In Devuyst, D. (Eds.) How green is the city? Sustainability assessment and the management of urban environments. New York: Columbia University Press; 2001. pp. 1– 41.
5. George, C. (1999), Testing for sustainable development through environmental assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 19(2): 175-200
6. George, C. (2001), Sustainability appraisal for sustainable development: integrating everything from jobs to climate change. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 19(2): 95-106.
7. Gibson, R. (2001), Specification of sustainability-based environmental assessment decision criteria and impli-cations for determining "significance" in environmental assessment.
8. Harms, W. B. (1995), Scenarios for nature development. In J.F.T.; Finke Schoute, P.A.; Veeneklaas, F.R.; Wolfert, H.P. (Eds.), Scenario studies for the rural environment; selected and edited proceedings of the symposium Scenario Studies for the Rural Environment, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 12-15 September 1994, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 391-403.
9. Hooijer, A., Klijn F., Pedroli, G. B. M. and Van Os, A. G. (2004), Towards sustainable flood risk management in the Rhine and Meuse river basins: Synopsis of the findings of IRMA-SPONGE. River Research and Applications 20(3): 343-357.
10. Korfmacher, K.S. (2001), The politics of participation in watershed modeling. Environmental Management 27(2): 161-176.
11. Landres, P. B., Verner, J., and Thomas, J. W. (1988), Ecological Uses of Vertebrate Indicator Species: A Critique. Conservation Biology, 2: 316-328. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.1988.tb00195.x
12. Martensen, A. C., Pimentel, R. G. and Metzger, J. P. (2008), Relative Effects of Fragment Size and Connectivity on Bird Community in the Atlantic Rain Forest: Implications for Conservation. Biological Conservation 141(9): 2184 -2192
13. Metzger, J. P., Martensen, A. C., Dixo, M., Bernacci, L. C., Ribeiro, M. C., Teixeira, A. M. G. and Pardini, R. (2009), Time-lag in biological responses to landscape changes in a highly dynamic Atlantic forest region. Biological Conservation 142(6): 1166-1177
14. Nakao, T., and Tanimoto, K. (1997), Comprehensive Flood Control Measures in the Tsurumi River Basin in Japan, Water International, 22(4): 252-258
15. National Land Surveying and Mapping Center (2008), Land Use Investigation of Taiwan. Taichung
16. Office of the United Nations Disaster Relief Coordinator (1991). Mitigating natural disasters : Phenomena, effects and options : A manual for policy makers and planners. New York.
17. Plate, E.J. (2002), Flood risk and flood management. Journal of Hydrology 267(1-2): 2-11.
18. Pope, J., Annandale, D. and Morrison-Saunders, A. (2004), Conceptualising sustainability assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 24(6): 595-616.
19. Salles, P. and Bredeweg, B. (2006), Modelling population and community dynamics with qualitative reasoning. Ecological Modelling 195(1-2): 114-128.
20. Schanze, J. (2006), Flood risk management – a basic framework. In Jochen Schanze, Evzen Zeman and Jiri Marsalek (Eds.), Flood Risk Management: Hazards, Vulnerability and Mitigation Measures, Springer Netherlands, pp. 1-20.
21. Tsai, C. T. and Hsiao, C. C. (2010), Flooding impact analysis in flood-prone areas to cope with climate change, Landmark Project-Annual Report, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan.
22. Van Eupen, M., Knol, W., Nijhof, B. and Verweij, P. (2002), Landscape Ecological Decision & Evaluation Support System – User Guide, Alterra report 447
23. Van Eupen, M., van Rooij, S., Padovani, C., Tomas, W. and Haasnoot, M. (2005), Impact modeling of scenarios on vegetation and fauna. In Jongman, R.H.G. (Eds.) Pantanal-Taquari Tools for decision making in Integrated Water Management. Alterra special publication
24. Van Eupen, M., Pedroli, B., Chong, B. and Xingong, W. (2007), Evaluating the Effect of Wetland Management Scenarios on Vegetation and Fauna in the Yellow River Delta (China). Technical Report Ledess Yellow River Delta, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
25. Verheem, R. (2002), Recommendations for Sustainability Assessment in the Netherlands. In Commission for EIA. Environmental Impact Assessment in the Netherlands. Views from the Commission for EIA in 2002. The Netherlands; 2002.
26. Verwei, P.J.F.M. (2005), Osiris Manual, Wageningen Software Labs BV, pp 6­7.
27. Verweij, P.J.F.M., Van Eupen, Michiel, Roos-Klein Lankhorst, J. and Nieuwenhuizen, W. (2010), Qualitative reasoning in participatory spatial planning: the use of OSIRIS in the Yellow River Delta. 2010 International Congress on Environmental Modelling and Software Modelling for Environment's Sake, Fifth Biennial Meeting. Ottawa, Canada.
28. Videira, N., Antunes, P., Santos, R. and Lopes, R. (2010), A Participatory Modelling Approach to Support Integrated Sustainability Assessment Processes. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 27(4): 446-460.
29. Voinov, A. and Gaddis, E. J. B., (2008), Lessons for successful participatory watershed modeling: A perspective from modeling practitioners. Ecological Modelling 216(2): 197-207.
30. Walz, A., Lardelli, C., Behrendt, H., Gret-Regamey, A., Lundstrom, C., Kytzia, S. and Bebi, P. (2007), Participatory scenario analysis for integrated regional modelling. Landscape and Urban Planning 81(1-2): 114-131.
31. Water Resources Planning Institute (2008), Planning for Integrated Flood Mitigation Measures in Southern Yunlin Coastal Area.
32. Water Resources Planning Institute (2009). Planning for Integrated Flood Mitigation Measures in Northern Yunlin Coastal Area.
33. World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford (UK), Oxford Univ. Press.
34. 李謁政，陳正哲(2006)，雲林縣鄉村風貌綱要規劃成果報告書，行政院農業委員會水土保持局
35. 邱祈榮、李培芬、張琪如(2001)，評量台灣地區生態永續發展指標 - 以野鳥族群為例調查計畫，行政院環境保護署
36. 陳韋伶(2010)，「以水災風險管理觀點評估土地使用調洪策略之研究--以鹽水溪流域為例」，國立成功大學都市計劃學系碩士論文
37. 陳麗文(2010)，「台灣工業區開發之環境成本評估－以雲林離島式基礎工業區為例」，國立成功大學都市計劃學系碩士論文
38. 國立成功大學都市計劃系(1993)，雲林縣綜合發展計畫，雲林縣政府
39. Website of GreenInnovation: http://www.greeninnovation.com.au
40. Website of National Fire Agency: Statistics of Natural Disasters http://www.nfa.gov.tw/upload/FTB/UpFiles/1000401-%E5%A4%A9%E7%84%B6%E7%81%BD%E5%AE%B3%E6%90%8D%E5%A4%B1%E7%B5%B1%E8%A8%88%E8%A1%A8(47%E5%B9%B4%E8%87%B3%E4%BB%8A).doc