聚落空間的演變，與當地的歷史環境息息相關。聚落的實質空間是由許多空間形態元素構成，解析當中的形態因子，可以理解聚落之建築物、戶外空間與歷史環境的關聯性。關於聚落空間形態的相關探討，國內外已經有許多基於類型學(typology)與形態學(morphology)的研究，然而在台灣則較缺乏透過空間圖面分析與資料數據，探討空間形態變化與歷史環境變遷之研究。
驗證範圍以台南市灣裡聚落(Wan-li settlement)作為探討，其位於城市邊緣之郊區，聚落內部核心紋理保存完善，聚落空間具有完整呈現動態發展的特色，並且將灣裡地區依照歷史地圖的聚落分布分成前期、中期與後期區域作探討。透過空間形態構成相關文獻，整合理論的論述並延續空間語法(space syntax)中凸性空間(convex space)的觀點，進行其定義的再操作，研究凸性空間繪製的唯一性，並且延伸凸性空間的性質，分析構成虛體(void)空間構成的三大類別：凸性區塊(convex plots)、凸性邊界(convex edges)、凸性節點(convex nodes)，結合實體(solid)空間建築物(buildings)，形成本研究探討聚落空間演變的空間分析架構。藉由地形圖與統計分析來輔助說明聚落成長過程中，每個時期之間的空間差異性與特性。
本研究成果顯示灣裡聚落空間構成演變的趨勢，在建築物群因子方面：建築物數目較少、樓層數較多、建蔽面積較高、建蔽周長較長、建蔽面積與周長的關係較低、容積較高、表面積較高、容積緊密度較高。在凸性區塊因子方面：凸性區塊數目較少、凸性區塊平均面積較高、建築物單位面積之凸性區塊面積較高、凸性邊界單位長度之凸性區塊面積較高、凸性區塊占總面積比率較高。在凸性邊界因子方面：凸性邊界數目較少、凸性邊界長度較長、凸性空間剖面尺度較高、建築物單位面積之凸性邊界長度較短。在凸性節點因子方面：凸性節點數目較少、外圍邊界節點數目較少、建築物單位面積之凸性節點數目較少、凸性邊界單位長度之凸性節點數目較少、凸性區塊單位面積之凸性節點數目較少。
無論建築物群或開放空間，聚落的眾多空間尺度在歷史演變中會呈現明顯的消長關係。因此可以推測未來聚落發展可能的空間形態，提供未來尊重地方發展的都市規劃之實質參考。

The space of settlement developments are closely linked with the local historic environment. The built environment of settlements and urban are building up from many different space elements. Through the analysis of space elements, we can establish the structure of buildings, open space and historical environment. Regarding the related settlement of space development, there are already many theories in the combination of typology and morphology. Regarding the area of the settlement research in Taiwan, there is lack of analysis of cartographic and spatial data to explain the space development in the history development deeply.
The study explores Wan-li settlement which located in Tainan City and builds in the city's edge, and thus the inner core culture of settlement could be preserved completely. Settlement of space displays characteristic of dynamic development completely, and we separate the regions in into early, mid and late for the study area in accordance with the historical map. This study refers the literature of space morphology, and arranges the content of theory to continue developing the concept of convex space in space syntax. Then re-operate the definition. The study stresses the uniqueness of draw space extends the character of convex space, and construct the three categories of void space consisting: convex plots, convex edges, convex nodes. Combine solid space and buildings to construct the structure of this study which discusses the development of settlement space. We explain the development process of settlement and the differences of space and characteristics between each period by the topographic chart and statistic analysis.
The result displays that the trend of the transformation of the spatial construction in Wan-li settlement. On the factor of buildings, the numbers of buildings are less, the average floor of buildings are more, the average area of buildings are more, the average perimeter of buildings are longer, the relationship of area and perimeter are less, the average volume of buildings are more, the average surface area of buildings are more, the volume of buildings per unit surface area of buildings are more. On the factor of convex plotss, the numbers of convex plotss are less, the average area of convex plotss are more, the area of convex plotss per unit area of buildings are more, the area of convex plotss per unit width of convex edgess are more, the rates of area covered by convex plotss are more.On the factor of convex edgess, the numbers of convex edgess are less, the average width of convex edgess are longer, the scale of sections are larger, the width of convex edgess per unit area of buildings are shorter.On the factor of convex nodess, the numbers of convex nodess are less, the numbers of convex nodess in boundary are less, the numbers of convex nodess per unit area of buildings are less, the numbers of convex nodess per unit width of convex edgess are less, the numbers of convex nodess per unit area of convex plotss are less.
Whether buildings or open spaces, a number of settlements of spatial scales will show significant relationship between growth and decline in the history development.So we can forecast the possible development of space shape settlements in the future, and provide reference while doing urban planning in respect of local development.

中文資料
1. Alexander, C. (1977)原著；王聽度、周序鴻等人合譯(1991)《建築模式語言》，六合出版，臺北市
2. Jacobs, J. (1961)原著；吳鄭重譯(2007)，《偉大城市的誕生與衰亡》，聯經，臺北市
3. Lynch, K. & Hack, G. (1984) 原著；張效通譯(1998)，《敷地計畫（第三版）》，六合出版，臺北市
4. McCluskey, J. (1979)原著；歐陽志敏、張仲一、盧紹曾譯(1994)，《圖解道路型式與都市景觀》，田園城市文化，臺北市
5. Rossi, A. (1966)原著；施植明譯(1992)，《城市建築》，博遠出版，臺北市
6. Trancik, R. (1986) 原著；謝慶達譯(1996)，《尋找失落的空間－都市設計理論》，田園文化，臺北市
7. 王嘉澤(2006)，《安平傳統聚落場所性之探討》，國立成功大學建築研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺南市
8. 王鴻儒(2008)，《統計分析實務與應用—Excel 2007》，碁峰資訊，臺北市
9. 李琦華，林峰田(2007)，《台灣聚落的空間形構法則分析》，中華民國建築學會「建築學報」第60期，27-45頁，臺北巿
10. 李琦華，林峰田(2008)，《台灣聚落的空間結構與社會脈絡研究》，中華民國建築學會「建築學報」第65期，45-62頁，臺北巿
11. 杜水泉 編著(2009)，《風情灣裡》，灣裡人文工作室，臺南市
12. 杜婕瀅(2006)，《台南市灣裡地區傳統民居改建形式之研究》，國立雲林科技大學空間設計系碩士班碩士論文，未出版，雲林縣
13. 沙學浚(1974)，《城市與似城聚落》，正中，臺北巿
14. 周菊香(1992)，《府城今昔》，臺南市政府，臺南市
15. 林世昌(2003)，《台南市喜樹、灣裡的聚落發展》，國立台南師範學院鄉土文化研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺南市
16. 林怡婷(2008)，《台南市街道邊緣空間構成之研究一個都市秩序形成的觀點》，國立成功大學建築研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺南市
17. 林俊宏(2003)，《灣裡地區王船祭典與人群關係之研究》，國立台南師範學院鄉土文化研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺南市
18. 林盈華(2006)，《台灣傳統都市空間中街道紋理之研究》，國立成功大學建築研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺南市
19. 林會承(1985)，《清末鹿港街鎮結構》，境與象出版，臺中市
20. 胡振洲(1977)，《聚落地理學》，三民，臺北巿
21. 范勝雄(1998)，《府城叢談：府城文獻研究》，臺南市政府，臺南市
22. 孫全文計劃主持(1992)，《台灣傳統都市空間之研究》，詹氏，臺北市
23. 張慧英(2006)，《中國傳統園林空間結構形式分析－以板橋林家花園為例》，國立成功大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺南市
24. 郭肇立 編著(1998)，《聚落與社會》，田園城市文化，臺北市
25. 陳君宜(2007)，《都市閱讀與書寫─好的都市形態探討》，國立成功大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺南市
26. 陳芳惠(1984），《村落地理學》，五南，臺北市
27. 陳嘉茹(2007)，《以空間型構法則與階層線性模式探討交通路網結構對都市商業型態影響之研究》，國立成功大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺南市
28. 陳榮村(1993)，《台灣海洋聚落發展之研究》，胡氏，臺北市
29. 黃后秀(2002)，《終戰後台南市灣裡地區社會文化之研究》，國立台南師範學院鄉土文化研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺南市
30. 黃瑞菘、曾思瑜(2008)，《醫院門診空間尋路行為之研究—以兩家單一樓層走道型門診空間為例》，「設計學報」第4期，43-63頁，雲林縣
31. 臺南市政府編(1996)，《續修臺南市志》，臺南市政府，臺南市
32. 盧嘉興(1965)，《鹿耳門地理演變考》，中國學術著作獎助委員會，臺北巿
33. 謝佳芸(2008)，《產業對聚落發展之影響初探—以1980年以前的台南喜樹為例》，國立成功大學建築研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺南市
34. 魏德文等合著(2008)，《測量臺灣：日治時期繪製臺灣相關地圖, 1895-1945》，南天 :臺灣歷史博物館，臺北市

日文資料
1. 日本建築學會編(1989)，「圖說集落：その空間と計畫」，東京，都市文化社

英文資料
1. Alexander, C. (1965) A City is Not a Tree, Architectural Forum Vol. 122, No. 1, pages 58-61 and No. 2, pages 58-62.
2. Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., Jacobson, M., Fiksdahl-King, I. and Angel, S. (1977) A Pattern Language, New York: Oxford University Press.
3. Asami, Y., Kubat, A. S. and Istek, C. (2001) Characterization of the street networks in the traditional Turkish urban form, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Vol. 28, pages 777-795.
4. Batty, M. (2001) Exploring isovist fields: Space and shape in architectural and urban morphology, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design No. 28, pages 123-150.
5. Batty, M. and Longley, P. (1994) Fractal Cities, London: Academic Press.
6. Borie, A., Micheloni, P. and Pinon, P. (1980) Urban forms and meandering sites, Paris: Ville Recherche Diffusion.
7. Caniggia, G. and Maffei, G. (2001) Architectural Composition and Building Typology: Interpreting Basic Building, Florence: Aliniea Editrice.
8. Castex, J., Celeste, P. and Panerai, P. (1980) The reading of a city: Versailles, Paris: Editions du Moniteur.
9. Castex, J., Depaule, J.and Panerai, P. (1977 ) Urban forms: from block to building, Dunod, Paris.
10. Cataldi, G. (1998) Designing in stages. Theory and design in the typological concept of the Italian school of Saverio Muratori, in Typolotical Process and Design Theory Ed. A Petruccioli, pages 127-140.
11. Cataldi, G. (2003) From Muratori to Caniggia: the origins and development of the Italian School of design typology, Urban Morphology No. 7, pages 19-34.
12. Cataldi, G., Maffei, G. and Vaccaro, P. (2002) Saverio Muratori and the Italian school of planning typology, Urban Morphology No. 6, pages 3-14.
13. Conzen, M. R. G. (1960) Alnwick Northumberland: A Study in Town-plan Analysis (The Institute of British Geographers), London.
14. Cooper, J. (2003) Fractal assessment of street-level skylines: a possible means of assessing and comparing character, Urban Morphology No. 7, pages 73-82.
15. Cooper, J. (2005) Assessing urban character: the use of fractal analysis of street edges, Urban Morphology No. 9, pages 95-107.
16. Corsini, M. (2001) Building types and urban fabric of Rome's outer suburbs: from reading to planning, in Proceedings of 6th International Seminar on Urban Form, pages 43-46.
17. Cullen, G. (1961) Townscape, New York :Reinhold.
18. Darin, M. (1998) The study of urban form in France, Urban Morphology No. 5, pages 63-76.
19. Doratli, N., Hoskara, S. O. and Fasli, M. (2004) An analytical methodology for revitalization strategies in historic urban quarters: a case study of the Walled City of Nicosia, North Cyprus. Cities 24(4), pages 329-348.
20. Forman, R.T.T. (1995) Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Gehl, J. (1987) Life Between Buildings, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
22. Hillier, B. (1996) Space is the Machine, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23. Hillier, B. and Hanson, J. (1984) The Social Logic of Space, Cambridge Cambridge University Press.
24. Hillier, B., Hanson, J. and Peponis, J. (1987) Syntactic analysis of settlements, Architecture et Comportement/Architecture and Behaviour, 3 (3). pages 217-231.
25. Hillier, B., Hanson, J., Peponis, J., Hudson, J. and Burdett, R. (1983) Space syntax: a different urban perspective, Architects’ Journal, Vol. 178, No. 48, pages 47-63.
26. Hofmeister, B. (2004) The study of urban form in Germany, Urban Morphology No. 8, pages 3-12.
27. Jiang, B., Claramunt, C. and Klarqvist, B. (2000) Integration of space syntax into GIS for modelling urban spaces, International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation Vol. 2, pages 161-171.
28. Krier, R. (1979) Urban Space, New York: Rizzoli.
29. Kruger, M. (1977) An Apporach to Built Form Connectivity at an Urban Scale PhD thesis, Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
30. Larkham, P. (1997) Urban morphology and typology in the United Kingdom, in Typological Process and Design Theory Ed. A Petruccioli, pages 159-177.
31. Larkham, P. (2006) The study of urban form in Great Britain, Urban Morphology No. 10, pages 117-141.
32. Lynch, K. (1960) The Image of the City, Cambridge: MIT Press.
33. Marshall, S. (2005) Streets and patterns, London; Spon, New York.
34. Martin, L., March, L. and Echenique, M. (1972) Urban Spaces and Structures, Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
35. Marzot, N. (2002) The study of urban form in Italy, Urban Morphology No. 6, pages 59-73.
36. Moudon, A. (1997) Urban morphology as an emerging interdisciplinary field, Urban Morphology No. 1, pages 3-10.
37. Moudon, A. (1998) The changing morphology of suburban neighbourhoods, in Typological Process and Design Theory Ed. A Petruccioli, pages 141-157.
38. Muratori, S. (1959) Study for an Operational Urban History of Venice, Rome: Instituto Poligrafico dello Stato.
39. Muratori, S., Bollati, R., Bollati, S. and Marinucci, G. (1963) Study for an Operational Urban History of Rome, Rome: Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche.
40. Parolek, D. G., Parolek, K. and Crawford, P. C.(2008) Form-based codes, Hoboken, N. J. : J. Wiley & Sons.
41. Peponis, J., Wineman, J., Bafna, S., Rashid, M. and Kim, S. H. (1998) On the generation of linear representations of spatial configuration, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design Vol. 25, pages 559- 576.
42. Peponis, J., Wineman, J., Rashid, M., Kim, S. H. and Bafna, S. (1997) On the description of shape and spatial configuration inside buildings: convex partitions and their local properties, Environment and Planning B:Planning and Design Vol. 24, pages761-781.
43. Pinho, P. and Oliveira, V. (2009) Cartographic analysis in urban morphology, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Vol. 36, pages 107-127.
44. Ratti, C. (2004) Space syntax: some inconsistencies, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design Vol. 31, No. 4, pages 487-499.
45. Salingaros, N. A. (1997) Life and Complexity in Architecture From a Thermodynamic Analogy, Physics Essays Vol. 10, pages 165-173.
46. Salingaros, N. A. (2005) Principles of urban structure, Amsterdam: Techne.
47. Steadman, P. (1983) Architectural Morphology: An Introduction to the Geometry of Building Plans, London: Pion.
48. Sternberg, E. (2000) An integrative theory of urban design, Journal of the American Planning Association No. 66, pages 265-278.
49. Talen, E. (2005) Evaluating Good Urban Form in an Inner-City Neighborhood: An Empirical Application, Journal of Architectural and Planning Research Vol. 22, No. 3, pages 204-228.
50. Trancik, R. (1986) Finding lost space :theories of urban design, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
51. Turner, A., Doxa, M., O'Sullivan, D. and Penn, A. (2001) From isovists to visibility graphs: A methodology for the analysis of architectural space, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design No. 28, pages 103-121.
52. Turner, A., Penn, A. and Hillier, B. (2005) An algorithmic definition of the axial map, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design Vol. 32, No. 3, pages 425–444.
53. Whitehand, J. (2001) British urban morphology: the Conzenian tradition, Urban Morphology No. 5, pages 103-109.
54. Whitehand, J. and Larkham, P. (1992) The urban landscape: issues and perspectives, in Urban Landscapes: International Perspectives, London: Routledge.
55. Yoshida, H. and Omae, M. (2005) An approach for analysis of urban morphology: methods to derive morphological properties of city blocks by using an urban landscape model and their interpretations, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems No. 29, pages 223–247.