早於1960年，許多老舊工業地區便面臨經濟衰頹與或汙染物滲透，而導致廠房閒置、荒廢的問題。其中英國(UK, Urban Task Force,1999)是最早將此荒廢工業地景定義為棕地的國家，並將之指為一種相對於綠地體系的空間模式。然而這些工業廢棄地在都市生態體系中，卻往往隱含著生態棲地的價值。而過去在棕地的研究上，多考慮整治方法與財務評估上，甚少評估轉換為棲地所帶來的潛力。
因此本文即透過生態系統與社會環境的角度思考，輔以景觀生態學理論與地理資訊系統，提供一套快速決策的方法，來評估這些工業廢棄地轉為都市棲地的潛力與重要性。以作為未來工業區更新思考的新方向。研究結果發現棕地污染程度與基地安全性的考量，對於棕地轉為都市棲地的影響最為顯著。其次則為綠色空間策略所帶來的影響。透過基地本身條件與基地外部環境的評比，將有助於評估未來棕地發展為都市棲地價值的重要性順序。

Since 1960s, many old industrial districts had encountered the recession or the pollutant infiltration leading to the problems of the derelict factories. The United Kingdom was the first country to define the derelict landscape as brownfield and refer to the contrast of a spatial pattern of Greenfield system. However the industrial wastelands imply the potential of turning to the wildlife areas. The past research of brownfield only think about the remediation methods and the assessments of financial affairs hardly assess the potential of turning brownfield into habitat.
Therefore the article provide a quick strategy to think about the brownfield through ecology system and social environment combining landscape ecology theory and geographic information system to evaluate the importance and potential of turning brownfield into urban habitat. These can be a new direction for future industrial area regeneration. The result of research points out that the consideration of the pollution degree and safety of site has the most remarkable influence on turning brownfield into urban habitat. The secondary effect is the possibility of potential users on site. By these evaluation of site circumstance inside and the outer environment of site will take advantage to evaluate the order of importance that brownfield redevelopment to urban habitat in the future.

參考書目：
一、國內文獻
1. 王秀娟，綠地計劃之理論與實證。田園城市：台北，pp.26-30，2001。
2. 中興工程顧問公司，台南縣鄉村型無污染工業區規劃作業，pp.2-142至2-147，2005。
3. 永康市公所，市政導覽手冊, http://www.yongkangcity.gov.tw/index.php，2005
4. 李依芸，廢棄地景之生態復育與再現—跨案研究掩埋場再生利用，國立台灣大學園藝所碩士論文，2003。
5. 行政院，生物多樣性推動方案，行政院第二七四七次院會通過，民國九十年八月十五日版本，2001。
6. 行政院，生物多樣性推動方案，民國九十三年二月核定本，2004a。
7. 沈清基，城市生態與城市環境，同濟大學出版社：中國上海，1998。
8. Dramstad W. E., and Olson J. D., Forman R.T. T., 1996, (張俊彥, 洪佳君, 曾心嫻編譯), Landscape Ecology Principles in Landscape Architecture and Land-Use Planning.,(景觀建築及土地使用計畫之景觀生態原則),，地景企業公司：臺北，2001。
9. 英國生物多樣性行動計畫機關，http://www.ukbap.org.uk/，2002。
10. Forman R. T. T., and Godron M., (張啟德 等譯, 1994), Landscape Ecology.,(景觀生態學),田園城市文化：台北，1986。
11. 徐世榮，褐地政策之比較研究－美國及台灣經驗的審視，中華民國都市計劃學會，2004。
12. 徐介文，廢棄地景 大雪山製材廠再生，東海大學建築所碩士論文，2002。
13. 許紹峰，徐世榮，土壤污染整治政策之探討，土地問題研究季刊，一卷一期pp.52- 63，03月2002。
14. 曾梓峰，追求非成長的再發展─永續取向的德國魯爾工業區再發展。國立成功大學：台南，2002。
15. 俞孔堅，景觀：文化，生態與感知，田園城市文化：臺北市，1998。
16. 郭瓊瑩，水與綠─網絡規劃理論與實務，詹氏書局：台北，2003。
17. 陳尊賢，污染土壤調查與整治。國立台灣大學 農業化學研究所，2004。
18. 陳琦維，英國都市棲地經驗及其引入台灣空間規劃體系之探討，成功大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文，2004。
19. 陳智斌，我國傳統工業區再發展課題與策略之研究 ~以台中工業區製造業產業需求為例，逢甲大學土地管理所碩士論文，2002。
20. 陳秀蘭，關廠悲歌 工廠家數遽減。經濟日報，A2版，財經要聞，2005.11.07。
21. 許育誠，棕地再發展之研究 都市計劃內工業區更新之新方向，台北大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文，2002。
22. 葉俊榮，環境政策與法律，月旦出版社：台北，1993。
23. 葉顓銘等，吸收金屬污染的植栽，科學發展，380期pp.44~49，08月2004。
24. 經濟部工業局土壤及地下水污染預防與整治資訊網，土壤重金屬污染現地處理方式一：植生復育法，2005。
25. 趙羿:賴明洲:薛怡珍，景觀生態學理論與實務，台北：地景企業股份有限公司，2004。
26. 鄔建國，景觀生態學-格局、過程、尺度與等級。五南：台北，2003。
27. 楊逸萍，從國外棕地再發展經驗探討六堵工業區未來發展方向之研究，成功大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文，2004。
28. 簡莉莎，以公私合作模式推動工業區再生可行方式之研究，台灣大學建築與城鄉研究所碩士論文，2003。
29. 鍾國輝、孔憲法，生態工業園區概念在竹科之應用研究－以積體電路產業為例，區域科學會年會暨學術研討會，2001。

二、國外文獻
1. Brian H. Roberts, The application of industrial ecology principles and planning guidelines for the development of eco-industrial parks: an Australian case study, Journal of Cleaner Production, 12 pp.997–1010, 2004.
2. Barceló J and Poschenrieder C, 2003, Phytoremediation: principlesand perspectives, contribution to science, 2, 3 pp. 333-344, 2003.
3. Brian H. Roberts, The application of industrial ecology principles and planning guidelines for the development of eco-industrial parks: an Australian case study, Journal of Cleaner Production 12, pp.997–1010, 2004.
4. Baker, G & Graf, A., Principles for nature reserves in England：A Guide to their Selection and Declaration, Peterborough：English Nature, 1989.
5. Carr and Lane, Practical conservation: urban habitats The Open University in association with English Nature., 1993.
6. Corporation of London,Biodiversity Action Plan ,London：Corporation of London., 2003.
7. Cook, E. A., “Landscape structure indices for assessing urban ecological networks”, Landscape and Urban Planning, 58, pp.269–280, 2002.
8. De Sousa, 2002, Brownfield redevelopment in Toronto: an examination of past trends and future prospects, Land Use Policy, 19, pp.297–309, 2002.
9. Dramstad, W. E., and J. D. Olson, R. T. T. Forman., Landscape Ecology Principles in Landscape Architecture and Land-Use Planning. Washington, DC: Island Publishers, 1996.
10. Freeman, C., The development of a land use decision-making model for use on sites with naturally regenerating habitat. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Leeds Metropolitan University, 1997.
11. Gilpin, A., Dictionary of Environment and Sustainable Development, New York：JOHN WILLY&SONS,1996
12. Greater London Authority (GLA), Connection with London’s Nature: The
Mayor’s Biodiversity Strategy, London: GLA, 2002
Greater London Authority (GLA), Green Capital: The Mayor’s State of the Environment Report for London, London: GLA, 2003.
13. Garvin, A., Berens, G. Urban Parks and Open Space.Urban Land Institute and Trust for Public Land, Washington. , 1997.
14. Herbst, H.The importance of wastelands as urban wildlife areas – with particular reference to the cities Leipzig and BirminghamUFZ Bericht Nr.Stadt¨okologische ForschungenNr. 35. Umweltforschungszentrum Leizpig-Halle, 2003.
15. Herbst, H.& Herbst,V.,2005, The development of an evaluation method using a geographic information system to determine the importance of wasteland sites as urban wildlife areas, Landscape and Urban Planning 77, pp.178–195,2006.
16. Harrison, C. and Davies, C., Conserving Biodiversity that matters：practitioners’perspectives on brownfield development and urban natire conservation on London, Environmental Management 65, pp.95-108. , 2002.
17. Hough, M. Cities and Natural Process. Rutledge, London, 1994.
18. Hough, M., Benson, B., Evenson, J., Greening the Toronto Port Lands. Waterfront Regeneration Trust, Toronto, 1997.
19. Harnik, P. Inside City Parks. Urban Land Institute and Trustfor Public Land, Washington, 2000.
20. Journal Urbio (Urban Biodiversity and Human nature). Issue 1, 2002.
21. Kahn, H & Wiener, A.J., 1967, The Year 2000: A Framework for Speculation on the Next Thirty-Three Years, MacMillan Publishing Company,1967.
22. Lowe, E. A., Moran, S.R& Holmes, D, B, Eco- industrial Parks: A handbook for local development teams, Oakland (CA): Indigo Development (ch4), 2000.
23. Mark, D. Bjelland, 2004, Brownfield site in Minneapolis-St. Paul, The interwoven geographies of industrial disinvestment and environmental contamination, urban geography, 25, 7, pp. 631–657, 2004.
24. Miller, D, Toronto the Beautiful: Revitalizing our Waterfront"
, http://www.toronto.ca/mayor_miller/speeches/crew_031004.htm,2004.
25. McHarg, Ian L., Design with Nature, U.S.A.：John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 1992.
26. McCarthy, L., et al., Brownfield Redevelopment：A Resource Guide for Toledo and Other Ohio Governments, Developers, and Communities, Department of Geography and Planning and Research Associate ,pp.8-10.,2001.
27. Machin, N., Planning for the Wild, London: London Wildlife Trust., 2000.
28. Nijkamp, P., Rodenburg, C.A, and Wagtendonk, A. J., SPECIAL SECTION: “Success factors for sustainable urban brownfield development A comparative case study approach to polluted sites”, Ecological Economics. 40, pp.235–252., 2002.
29. Nassauer, J, Principle For Ecological Landscape Design in Brownfield Business Parks, DRAFT, Michigan University, 2001.
30. P Guest Bsc AIEEM, t, Wandle Meadow Nature Park Management Plan, on behalf of the London Borough of Merton Education, Leisure and Libraries Departmen pp.2-15.,1997.
31. Pilz, C.S., A framework for integrate phytoremediation into the landscape architectural design process, Canada：University of Guelph, 2001
32. Robert A.simons, Turning Brownfield into Greenbacks, Developing and Financing Environmentally Contaminated Urban Real Estate Christopher A., 1998.
33. Russ, T. H., et al., Redeveloping brownfields /landscape architects , planners., New York:/McGraw-Hill.,2000.
34. Smyth, B., Practical Conservation: Site Assessment and Management Planning, Milton Keynes: The Open University, 1987.
35. Singer, M., et al., Brownfields Redevelopment: A guidebook for Local Governments and Communities-Second Edition, International City/County Management Association., 2000.
36. Thomas, M. R., A GIS-based decision support system for brownfield redevelopment, Landscape and Urban Planning, 1, 58, pp.7-23., 2002.
37. Tyrvainen, L. Economic valuation of urban forest benefits in Finland. J. Environ. Manage, 62, pp.75–92, 2001.
38. Urban Task Force, Toward Urban Renaissance, DETR, London, 1999.
39. Wheater, C.P., Urban Habitats, London: Routledge, 1999.