跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.235.120.150) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/07/31 15:12
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:薛卜賓
研究生(外文):Hsueh, Pu-Pin
論文名稱:從鄰近性向度探討科技社群定住區位之變遷-以新竹地區為例
論文名稱(外文):The evolution of residential location of high-tech talent via dimension of proximity-A case study of Hsinchu area
指導教授:胡太山胡太山引用關係
指導教授(外文):Hu, Tai-Shan
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:中華大學
系所名稱:建築與都市計畫學系碩士班
學門:建築及都市規劃學門
學類:建築學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2007
畢業學年度:95
語文別:中文
論文頁數:125
中文關鍵詞:新竹科學工業園區空間演化變遷定住區位個體鄰近性空間鄰近性
外文關鍵詞:Hsinchu Science-based Industrial Park (HSIP)spatial evolutionresidential locationindividual proximityspatial proximity
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:467
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:66
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
新竹地區是台灣近十年發展最為蓬勃的地區之一,其中新竹科學園區扮演地區成長極的角色,以引導推進區域內既有標的產業之成長,並提高與其它地區成長極的關連作用。園區的迅速發展對於新竹地區的人口、定住空間產生了重大衝擊影響,本研究首先透過新竹地區四個時期的農林航空像片基本圖的判讀,在時間與空間兩個向度下探討園區的定住空間之變遷。本研究發現到區域空間擴張情形明顯往交通可及性高的地區延伸。

然而,當園區邁入到第四時期時,人口雖有持續成長,但是空間擴張情形卻有逐漸趨於緩和的傾向。因此,為了進一步闡釋此現象的產生,本研究建立科技社群定住區位決策模式,在購屋動機、資訊搜尋與選擇定住區位決策流程中,科技社群選擇住宅行為是經兩種不同的鄰近性路徑進行,其一是對於園區知識網絡、地方環境認同而依附於居住環境行為之內部鄰近性(社會、認同鄰近);另一則是為了獲取住宅資訊學習而能直接評估居住環境之外部鄰近性(認知鄰近)。

研究發現到,新竹地區定住空間的變遷過程中,技術密集型科技社群因考量到近郊社區的優質生活環境,抑或外圍社區房價相對於核心社區較為低廉,而可能擔任區域成長主要的「推力」角色,但同時亦受到內、外部鄰近性在空間地理上必須鄰近園區知識源,因而減緩區域空間再次擴張。研究進一步就內、外部鄰近性向度以迴歸分析探究空間鄰近性之影響因子,其結果顯示內部鄰近之社會、認同鄰近必須在空間上彼此聚集鄰近在同一地區,亦即科技社群定住區位與工作地點互相鄰近時,就有更多面對面接觸機會產生,而且可以更加容易地建立信任,之後就會導致科技人員之間有更多的人際與鑲嵌關係產生;而外部認知鄰近性雖非空間鄰近性之直接因子,但卻有助於科技人才社會鄰近性之互動。
In recently decade, Hsinchu area has become a rising and flourishing area in Taiwan. Actually, Hsinchu Science-based Industrial Park (HSIP) has played the role of growth pole to lead and improve objective industries and strengthen linkage of growth pole or polarization with other areas. Therefore the rapid development of HSIP has being such a large effect for the whole population and residential space in area. This study uses image maps of Aerial Survey Office to examine four development periods of different changes of growth and transportation in Hsinchu area. We found that the spatial expansion of in Hsinch area has tended to extend to high transportation accessibility.

However, when the HSIP stepped into the fourth development period, the population growth in Hsinch area has sill kept increasing, but the spatial expansion of has turned to get slow down. Therefore, we construct decision model of residential location of high-tech talent which including motives of buying housing, information search and residential location of decision, in order to explain this phenomenon. In this decision processing, high-tech talents choose the residential location though two different kinds of proximity-one is internal proximity (social proximity and identified proximity) which identified knowledge networks and local environment to attach to residential location; another one is external proximity (cognitive proximity) which accessed to housing information by learning interaction to estimate residential location.

This study found that the technology-intensive talents who took account for high living environment of quality at suburban communities or housing price which is relatively lower than main core communities, at sub-core communities, .played the main ”push” roles of area growth. However, the residential spatial evolution had been also retarded spatial expansion once again by internal and external proximity which have to close to knowledge source at HSIP. In term of internal and external proximity, we examined farther influencing factors of spatial proximity applied regression analysis. The study result was presented that internal proximity (social proximity and identified proximity) caused high-tech talents to aggregate geographically at the same area. In other words, when high-tech talents’ residential location are both close to workplace, the more face-to-face opportunity they get, and the more easily build confidence, and the more interpersonal relationship and social embeddedness they have. Though external proximity (cognitive proximity) is not direct factor of spatial proximity, yet it has still contribution to interaction of social proximity.
第一章 緒論
第一節 研究動機與目的………………………………………………………………1-1
第二節 研究內容與方法………………………………………………………………1-4
第三節 研究流程………………………………………………………………………1-10

第二章 文獻回顧
第一節 高科技地區實質空間發展……………………………………………………2-1
第二節 創新與空間-科技社群鄰近性之探討………………………………………2-12
第三節 定住區位決策過程模式………………………………………………………2-19
第四節 個體鄰近性與定住區位………………………………………………………2-26

第三章 園區與地方的空間結構變遷
第一節 區域與地方人口成長分析……………………………………………………3-1
第二節 新竹科學園區及周邊定住空間分析…………………………………………3-12
第三節 新竹地區空間發展趨勢………………………………………………………3-22
第四節 人口與定住空間結構變遷……………………………………………………3-30

第四章 定住空間變遷的另一隱含面
第一節 調查設計與問卷調查…………………………………………………………4-1
第二節 基本資料分析…………………………………………………………………4-5
第三節 購屋社群與地方空間之連結…………………………………………………4-17
第四節 購屋社群之認知鄰近性………………………………………………………4-23
第五節 新竹地區空間發展與鄰近性之分析…………………………………………4-27
第六節 科技社群定住空間發展模式之建構…………………………………………4-35

第五章 結論與建議
第一節 結論……………………………………………………………………………5-1
第二節 建議……………………………………………………………………………5-6

參考文獻
中文部分…………………………………………………………………………………V-1
英文部分…………………………………………………………………………………V-5

附錄
附錄一 評審委員建議與修正…………………………………………………………W1
附錄二 科技人員購買住宅選擇意向調查問卷………………………………………W4
附錄三 問卷信度分析…………………………………………………………………W9
附錄四 科技社群相關購屋構面因素分析……………………………………………W10
附錄五 研究範圍鄉鎮市行鎮區域圖…………………………………………………W17
一、中文部分
王大立、邱信智(1999),〈台灣地區人口空間分佈型態之研究-中山高速公路衝擊影響分析〉,發表於中華民國都市計劃學會學術研討會,台南:成功大學。
王俊堯(2003),《高科技產業地方生產網絡之研究-以新竹科學工業園區為例》,中華大學建築與都市計劃系,碩士論文。
王湧泉(1985),《高雄都會區的人口分布及其變遷》,中山大學中山學術研究所,碩士論文。
王鴻楷(1993),《新竹科學園區員工生活圈及其地區連接之研究》,(NSC81-0301-H002-20),國科會專題研究計畫。
交通部高速鐵路工程局(1999),《新竹都會區大眾捷運系統規劃報告》。
朱明謙(2001),《高科技產業從業人員休閒行為、工作壓力與工作績效之研究》,義守大學管理科學研究所,碩士論文。
行政院經濟建設委員會都市及住宅發展處(歷年),《都市及區域發展統計彙編》。
吳綱立(1999),〈營造家園認同感對科學城規劃的意義-以歸國高科技人員的經驗為例〉,發表於建築生產與管理技術研討會,台北:台北科技大學,頁153-158。
吳綱立(2002),〈營造家園認同感對促進科學城永續發展的意義-本土化科學城居住空間規劃模式及設計準則之研究〉,發表於中華民國住宅學會第十一屆年會暨學術研討會,南投:暨南大學,頁604-624。
呂怡儒(2001),《台北近郊森林地方感之研究》,台灣大學森林學研究所,碩士論文。
呂清松(1997),《科學園區對地方發展之論爭與臺灣實證-新竹科學園區個案研究》,中興大學都市計劃研究所,碩士論文。
李小建(1999),《經濟地理學》,初版,北京:高等教育。
李俊發(1980),《新竹科學工業實驗園區對台灣北部區域都市發展影響之研究》,中興大學建築與都市計畫研究所,碩士論文。
李朝賢(1995),〈臺灣城鄉人口遷移因素之探討〉,《臺灣經濟》,第218期,頁1-12。
沈道剛(2002),《科學園區員工住宅需求及通勤行為之研究》,東華大學環境政策研究所,碩士論文。
林祖嘉(1994),〈台灣地區住宅需求與租買選擇之聯合估計〉,《政大學報》,第68期,頁183-200。
林素菁(1999),〈通勤成本對住宅區位選擇影響之分析〉,發表於中華民國住宅學會第八屆年會及論文研討會,台北:台灣大學。
林淑萍、蔡明春、劉思穎(2003),〈住宅選擇因素與消費者市場區隔之研究-以新竹科學園區為例〉,發表於中國工業工程學會年會暨學術研討會,彰化:建國技術學院。
林楨家、馮正民、李洋寧(2004),〈知識可及性對創新的影響-以臺灣北部區域電子產業為例〉,《運輸計劃季刊》,第33卷第3期,
施鴻志(1991),《科技園區對區域社經影響之研究》,國科會專題研究計畫。
洪天元(1987),《台北市國民住宅購買者特性之研究》,台灣大學商學研究所,碩士論文。
洪芳傑(2000),《科學園區科技人員住宅區位選擇因素之研究-以新竹科學工業園區為例》,文化大學建築及都市計畫研究所,碩士論文。
胡太山(2005),《科技社群互動及其對創新成效之影響》,台北大學都市計劃研究所,博士論文。
胡太山、林建元、劉明政(2003),〈高科技地區生產者服務業發展演變之研究-以新竹地區為例〉,《建築與規劃學報》,第4卷第2期,頁178-202。
胡太山、張素莉(2001),〈技術基礎設施、產業聚群與與地方創新網絡建構之初探-以新竹科學園區暨周邊地區為例〉,《建築與規劃學報》,第2卷第1期,頁27-42。
胡太山、解鴻年(2004),〈高科技地區社群定住區演化之初探-以新竹地區為例〉,《都市規劃滙刊》,第151期,頁74-78。
胡太山、解鴻年、王俊堯(2002),〈新竹科學園周邊地區社經發展變遷之調查研究〉,《都市與計畫》,第29卷第1期,頁37-65。
孫鴻業(2002),《污名、自我、與歷史:台灣外省人第二代的身份與認同》,清華大學社會學研究所,碩士論文。
徐進鈺(1999),〈流動的鑲嵌-新竹科學工業園區的勞動力市場與高科技發展〉,《台灣社會研究》,第11 / 12期,頁67-96。
徐進鈺(2000),〈廠商的時空策略與動態學習-新竹科學園區積體電路工業為例〉,《城市與設計學報》,第35期,頁75-118。
張聖琳(2004),〈跨海的家-從飄洋過海的矽谷地景談美國郊區住宅亞太化現象〉,《造園季刊》,第51期,頁5-10。
張瑋寧(1996),《高科技人口住宅市場NBER模式之研究-以新竹科學工業園區為例》,逢甲大學土地管理研究所,碩士論文。
曹葦如、張金鶚、林秋瑾(1999),〈以質化方法分析台北地區購屋之行為〉,發表於中華民國住宅學會第八屆年會及論文研討會,台北:台灣大學。
莊錦爐(1998),《新竹科學園區員工住宅需求對周邊房地產影響之研究》,中華大學建築與都市計劃系,碩士論文。
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》,第三版,台北:五南。
陳彥仲(1997),〈住宅選擇之程序性決策模式〉,《住宅學報》,第5期,頁37-49。
陳淑美、張金鶚(2002),〈家戶遷移決策與路徑選擇之研究-台北縣市的實證分析〉,《住宅學報》,第11卷第1期,頁1-22。
陳朝興、蕭慧瑩(1999),〈高科技產業對城市區域形式的影響〉,發表於中華民國都市計劃學會年會及論文研討會,台南:成功大學,頁I-C-1-1-I-C-1-11。
彭新淼(1976),《台北市住宅房屋購買行為之研究》,政治大學企業管理學系,碩士論文。
黃若帆(2003),《以Logit模式分析科技人員住宅選擇之研究》,中華大學建築與都市計劃系,碩士論文。
黃錦玲(1994),《台北市民住屋購買行為之研究》,交通大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。
楊友仁(1998),《從新竹到台南-科學園區、新興工業與地方發展的政治經濟學分析》,台灣大學建築與城鄉研究所,碩士論文。
楊雲龍(1980),《新竹科學園區環境衝擊之研究-社會經濟地理環境之探討》,文化大學地理研究所,碩士論文。
葛愛華(2005),〈效用理論IN、投資損益OUT,科技人聰明購屋經驗談〉,《科技生活》,第66期。
解鴻年(2001),《新竹工業園區設置與周邊地區空間結構變遷關係之調查研究(II)》,(NSC89-2211-E216-012),國科會專題研究計畫。
解鴻年、胡太山、王俊堯(2004),〈產業地區創新與生產網絡之研究—以新竹科學園區暨周邊地區積體電路為例〉,《建築與規劃學報》,第5卷第2期,頁178-200。
解鴻年、胡太山、柯大鈞、薛卜賓(2005),〈新竹科學園區周邊工業區發展變遷之研究〉,《環境與世界》,第11期,頁1-31。
劉怡吟(1996),《台北市家戶住宅選擇變遷之研究》,國立政治大學地政研究所,碩士論文。
劉韻僖、葉匡時、王保鋅(2002),〈人際網絡在資訊產業扮演的角色-以雙灣關係為例〉,《淡江人文社會學刊》,第11期,頁27-59。
蔡秀玲(1998),〈依附理論在諮商中的應用〉,《輔導季刊》,第36卷第1期,頁25-31。
蔡亮(1990),《全球化過程中的新竹區域空間結構之變遷》,成功大學建築與城鄉研究所,碩士論文。
蔡淑韻(2003),〈新竹科學工業園區對新竹地區發展的影響〉,中興大學歷史學系,碩士論文。
鄧建民(1985),《台灣地區住宅需求之研究》,中興大學都市計劃研究所(現為台北大學都市計劃研究所)碩士論文。
盧智芳(2004),〈竹科工程師的寂寞心事〉,《Cheer》,第1期。
龍冠海(1991),《都市社會學理論與應用》,第四版,台北:三民書局。
戴安蕙(2003),《臺灣北部區域空間經濟變遷之研究(1970-1999)》,中國文化大學地學研究所,博士論文。
謝高橋(1981),《都市人口遷移與社會適應—高雄市個案研究》,初版,台北:巨流。
謝靜玫(1998),《消費者選擇口傳建議來源之行為研究》,中央大學企業管理研究所,碩士論文。
顏山涼(1986),《通勤者住宅區位及通勤路徑機率選擇整合模式之實證研究-以台南市為例》,成功大學交通管理科學系暨電信管理研究所,碩士論文。
鐘懿萍、張瑋寧(1995),〈高科技人口住宅需求之研究〉,發表於中華民國都市計畫學會年會及論文研討會,台南:成功大學,頁5-1-5-11。

二、英文部分
Abu-Lughod, J. L. and M. M. Foley (1960), “Consumer strategies”, in N. Foote, J. L. Abu-Lughod and M. M. Foley (Eds) Housing Choices and Constraints, New York: McGraw-Hill, 387-447.
Acs, Z. J. and D. B. Audretsch (1988), “Innovation in large and small firms: An empirical analysis”, The American Economic Review, 78(4): 678-690.
Allen, T. J. (1977), Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technological Information within the R&D Organization, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Alnoso, W. (1964), Location and Land Use: Toward a General Theory of Land Rent, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Amin, A. and Wilkinson F. (1999), “Learning, proximity and industrial performance: An introduction”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 23(2): 121-125.
Antonelli, C. (1995), The Economics of Localized Technological Change and Industrial Dynamics, Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Antonelli, C. (2000), “Collective knowledge communication and innovation: The evidence of technological districts”, Regional Studies, 34(6): 535-547.
Audretsch, D. B. (1998) “Agglomeration and the location of innovative activity”, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 14(2): 18-29.
Audretsch, D. B. and M. Feldman (1996), “R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production”, American Economic Review, 86(3): 630-640.
Audretsch, D. B. and P. E. Stephan (1996), Company-scientist locational links: The case of biotechnology, American Economic Review, 86(3): 641-652.
Baptista, R. (1996), “Research round up: Industrial clusters and technological innovation”, Business Strategy Review, 7(2): 59-64.
Berry, B. J. L. (1973), “The changing scale and nature of American urbanization”, Internal Comparative Study of Megalopolies, Japan Center for Area Development Research.
Bettman, J. R. (1979), An Information Processing Theory of Consumer Choice, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Block, P. H., D. L. Sherrell, and N. M. Ridgway (1986), “Consumer search: An extended framework”, Journal of Consumer Research, 13(1): 119-126.
Boarnet, M. G. (1994), “The monocentric model and employment location”, Journal of Urban Economics, 36(1): 79-97.
Boschma, R. A. (2004), “Competitiveness of regions from an evolutionary perspective”, Regional Studies, 38(9): 1001-1014.
Boschma, R. A. (2005), “Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment”, Regional Studies, 39(1): 61-74.
Boschma, R. A. and J. G. Lambooy (1999), “Evolutionary economics and economic geography”, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 9(4): 411-429.
Bricker, K. S. and D. L. Kerstetter (2000), “Level of specialization and place attachment: An exploratory study of whitewater recreationists”, Leisure Sciences, 22(4): 233-257.
Brown, L. A. and E. G. Moore (1970), “The intra-urban migration process: a perspective”, Geografiska Annaler Series B, 52: 1-13.
Buchanan, J. M. and C. J. Goetz (1972), “Efficiency limits of fiscal mobility: An assessment of the Tiebout model”, Journal of Public Economies, 1(1): 25-43.
Burgess, E. W. (1925), “The growth of the city: An introduction to a research project”, in R. E. Park, E. W. Burgess and R. D. Mckenzie (Eds) The City, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 47-62.
Camagni, R. P. (1991), Innovation Networks: Spatial Perspectives, London: Belhaven Press.
Castells, M. and P. Hall (1994), Technopoles of the World: The Making of Twenty-First-Century Industrial Complexes, London and New York: Routledge.
Cervero, R. and Kang-Li Wu (1998), “Sub-centring and commuting-Evidence from the San Francisco bay area, 1980-90”, Urban Studies, 35(7): 1059-1076.
Chang, Sheng-Lin (1999), “Image is more important than experience: A case study of hi-tech home building in response to shifting home identities”, Paper presented at Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Environmental Design Research Association, Orlando, Florida, USA.
Chang, Sheng-Lin and R. T. Hester (1998), “When landscapes are transplanted across the ocean: Multicultural community design in technopolis”, Paper presented at ASLA Annual Meeting Proceedings, Washington DC, USA.
Cohen, W. M. and D. A. Levinthal (1989), “Innovation and learning: the two faces of R&D”, The Economic Journal, 99: 569-596.
Cohen, W. M. and D. A. Levinthal (1990), “Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning an innovation”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1): 128-152.
Conner, K. R. and C. K. Prahalad (1996), “A resource-base theory of the firm: Knowledge versus opportunism”, Organization Science, 7(5): 477-501.
Davies, W. K. D. (1984), Factorial Ecology, Aldershot: Gower.
Despres, C. (1991), “The meaning of home: Literature review and directions for future research and theoretical development”, Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 8(2): 96-115.
Edquist, C. and B. Johnson (1997), “Institutions and organizations in systems of innovation”, in C. Edquist (Eds.) System of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations, London: Pinter, 41-63.
Engel, J. F., R. D. Blackwell and P. W. Miniard (1993), Consumer Behavior (7th ed.), Chicago: The Dryden.
Feldman, M. P. (1994), The Geography of Innovation, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Fidel, R. and M. Green (2004), “The many faces of accessibility: Engineers’ perception of information sources”, Information Processing and Management, 40(3): 563-581.
Fodness, D. and B. Murray (1999), “A model of tourist information search behavior”, Journal of Travel Research, 37(3): 220-230.
Freeman, A. M. (1979), “Hedonic prices, property values and measuring environmental benefits: A survey of the issues”, Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 81(2): 154-171.
Friedman, J. (1966), Regional Development Policy: A Case Study of Venezuela, Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Gerstberger, P. G. and T. J. Allen (1968), “Criteria used by research and development engineers in the selection of an information source”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 32(4): 272-279.
Golledge, R. and R. Stimson (1997), Spatial Behavior: A Geographic Perspective, New York: Guilford Press.
Gordon, I. R. and P. McCann (2000), “Industrial clusters: Complexes, agglomeration and/or social networks”, Urban Studies, 37(3): 513-532.
Granovetter, M. (1985), “Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness”, American Journal of Sociology, 91(3): 481-510.
Hair, J. F. Jr., R. E. Anderson, R. L. Tatham and W. C. Black (1995), Multivariate Data Analysis with Reading (4th ed.), Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Harris, C. D. and E. Ullman (1945), “The nature of cities”, American Academy of Political and Social Science, 242: 7-17.
Harrison, B. (1992), “Industrial districts: Old wines in new bottles”, Regional Studies, 26(5): 469-483.
Harvey, D. (1973), Social Justice and the City, London: Edward Arnold.
Hausmann, U. (1996), “Neither industrial district nor innovative milieu-Entrepreneurs and their contexts: An actor-oriented framework and case studies form Greater London and Zurich”, Paper presented at the 36th European Congress of the RSA, Zurich, Switzerland.
Hawkins, D. I., R. J. Best and K. A. Coney (2001), Consumer Behavior: Building Marketing Strategy (8th ed.), New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hekman, J. (1980), “Income, labour supply and urban residence”, American Economic Review, 70: 805-811.
Hoogstra, G., J. Van Dijk and Raymond J. G. M. Florax (2005), “Do jobs follow people or people follow jobs? A meta-analysis of Carlino-Mills studies”, Paper presented at 45th Congress of the European Regional Science Association (ERSA), Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Howard, J. A. and J. N. Sheth (1969), The Theory of Buyer Behavior, New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Howell, J. R. L. (2002), “Tacit knowledge, innovation and economic geography”, Urban Studies, 39(5/6): 871-884.
Hoyt, H. (1939), The Structure and Residential Neighborhoods in American Cities, Washington D. C: Federal Housing Administration.
Hugstand, P., J. W. Taylor and G. D. Bruce (1987), “The effects of social class and perceived risk on consumer information search”, Journal of Services Marketing, 1(1): 47-52.
Janelle, D. G. (1969), “Spatial reorganization: A model and concept”, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 59(2): 348-364.
Keeble, D., C. Lawson, B. Moore and F. Wilkinson (1999), “Collective learning processes, networking and ‘institutional thickness’ in the Cambridge Region”, Regional Studies, 33(4): 319-331.
Kogut, B. and U. Zander, (1996), “What firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning”, Organization Science, 7(5): 502-518.
Kotler, P. (1997), Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation, and Control (9th ed.), Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Leckie, G. J., K. E. Pettigrew and C. Sylvain (1996), “Modeling the information seeking of professionals: A general model derived from research on engineers, health care professionals, and lawyers”, Library Quarterly, 66(2): 161-193.
Levinson, D. and A. Kumar (1997), “Density and the journey to work”, Growth and Change, 28(2): 147-172.
Lin, Chien-Yuan (1997), “Technopolis development: An assessment of the Hsinchu experience”, International Planning Studies, 2(2): 257-272.
Lundvall, B. A. (1993), “Explaining interfirm cooperation and innovation: Limits of the transaction-cost approach”, in Grabher G. (Eds.) The Embedded Firm: On the Socioeconomics of Industrial Networks, London: Routledge, 52-64.
Maskell, P. and A. Malmberg (1999), “The competitiveness of firms and regions: ‘Ubiquitification’ and the importance of localized learning”, European Urban and Regional Studies, 6(1): 9-25.
Masser, I. (1991), “By accident or design: Some lessons from technology led local economic development initiatives”, Review of Urban and Regional Development Studies, 3: 78-93.
Mathews, J. A. (1997), “A Silicon Valley of the east: Creating Taiwan’s semiconductor industry”, California Management Review, 39(4): 26-54.
McAndrew, F. T. (1993), Environmental Psychology, Pacific Grove, California: Books / Cole.
Midgley, D. F. (1983), “The dimensions of advertising involvement”, in K. B. Monroe (Eds.) Advances in Consumer Research, Association for Consumer Research, MI: AnnArbor, 8: 25-30.
Mills, E. S. (1973), Studies in the Structure of the Urban Economy, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.
Murdie, R. A. (1969), Factiorial Ecology of Metropolitan Toronto, Chicago: University of Chicago.
Murray, K. B. (1991), “A test of services marketing theory: Consumer information acquisition activities”, Journal of Marketing, 55(1): 10-25.
Muth R. F., (1969), Cities and Housing, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Nelson, R. R. and S. G. Winter (1982), An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Nicosia, F. M. (1968), Consumer Decision Process, Marketing and Advertising Implication, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Nooteboom, B. (2000), Learning and Innovation in Organizations and Economies, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Oakey, R. P. (1981), High Technology Industry and Industrial Location, Farnborough: Gower.
Oates, W. E. (1969), “The effects of property taxes and local public spending on property values: An empirical study of tax capitalization and the Tiebout hypothesis”, Journal of Political Economy, 77(6): 957-971.
Oh, Deog-Seong (2002), “Technology-based regional development policy: Case study of Taedok Science Town, Taejon metropolitan city, Korea”, Habitat International, 26(2): 213-228.
Oh, Deog-Seong and Sang-Ryong Cha (2001), “Critical success factors of technopolis for regional innovation: Case study of Daedeok Science Town”, paper presented at the International Symposium on City Planning 2001, Taejon, Korea.
Parr, J. B. (1999), “Growth-pole strategies in regional economic planning: A retrospective view. Part 1 Origins and advocacy”, Urban Studies, 36(7): 1195-1215.
Pavitt, K. (1987), “The objectives of technology policy”, Science and Public Policy, 14(3): 182-188.
Perez, C. and L. Soete (1988), “Catching up in technology: Entry barriers and windows”, in G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg and L. Soete (Eds) Technical Change and Economic Theory, London: Pinter, 458-479.
Pettigrew, K., R. Fidel and H. Bruce (2001), “Conceptual frameworks in information behavior”, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST), 35: 43-78.
Pinelli, T. E., A. P. Bishop, R. O. Barclay and J. M. Kennedy (1993), “The information-seeking behavior of engineers”, in A. Kent and C. M. Hall (Eds.) Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, New York: Marcel Dekker, 52: 167-201.
Polanyi, K. (1944), The Great Transformation, Boston: Beacon.
Porter, M. E. (1998), On Competition, Boston: Harvard Business School.
Prahalad, C. and G. Hamel (1990), “The core competence of the organization”, Harvard Business Review, 68: 79-91.
Ravenstein, E. G. (1889), “The laws of migration”, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, LII, 241-301.
Raymond, L. H. (1984), Buyer Behavior: A Decision-making Approach, Columbus, Ohio: C.E. Merrill.
Ridker, R. G. and J. A. Henning (1967), “The determinants of residential property values with specific reference to air pollution”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 49(2): 246-256.
Rosen, S. (1976), “Hedonic prices and implicit markets: Product differentiation in pure competition”, Journal of Political Economy, 82(1): 35-55.
Saxenian, A. (1994), Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128, Boston: Harvard .
Simon, H. A. (1955), “A behavioral model of rational choice”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 6(1): 99-118.
Simpson, W. (1992), Urban Structure and the Labour Market: Worker Mobility, Commuting and Underemployment in Cities, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Smilor, R., Kozmetsky, W. and Gibson D. (1988), Creating the Technopolics, Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Storper, M. (1995), “The resurgence of regional economics, ten years later: The region as a nexus of untraded interdependencies”, European Urban and Regional Studies, 2(3): 191-221.
Straszheim, M. (1987), “The theory of urban residential location”, in: E. S. Mills (Eds.) Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, Amsterdam: North-Holland, 2: 717-757.
Swann, P. (1993), “Identifying asymmetric competitor networks from characteristics data: Application to the spreadsheet software market”, Economic Journal, 103: 468-473.
Taaffe, E. J., H. L. Gauthier and T. A. Maraffa (1980), “Extend commuting and the intermetropolitan periphery”, Annuals of the Association of American Geographers, 70(3): 313-329.
Tassey, G. (1991), “The functions of technology infrastructure in a competitive economy”, Research Policy, 20(4): 345-61.
Tiebout, C. M. (1956), “A pure theory of local expenditure”, Journal of Political Economy, 64: 416-424.
Torre, A. and Gilly J. P. (2000), “On the analytical dimension of proximity dynamics”, Regional Studies, 34(2): 169-180.
Verspagen, B. and W. Schoenmakers (2000), “The spatial dimension of knowledge spillovers in europe: evidence from firm patenting data”, MERIT Working Papers (2000-016).
Von Hipple, E. (1994), “Sticky information and the locus of problem solving: Implications for innovation”, Management Science, 40(4): 429-439.
Walters, C. G. and G. W. Paul (1978), Consumer Behavior: Theory and Practice (3rd ed.), Illinois: Irwin.
White, M. (1988), “Location choice and commuting behaviour in cities with decentralized employment”, Journal of Urban Economics, 24: 129-152.
Williams, D. R., M.E. Patterson, J. W. Roggenbuck, and A. E. Watson (1992), “Beyond the commodity metaphor: Examining emotional and symbolic attachment to place”, Leisure Sciences, 14(1): 29-46.
Wu, Kang-Li (1997), Employment and housing development and their impact on metropolitan commuting: An empirical studying of the Silicon Valley region of the San Francisco Bay area, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California at Berkeley.
Wu, Kang-Li (1998), “A study of the impact of science park development on housing development: A case study of Silicon Valley and its implications for Taiwan’s science park planning”, Paper presented at the 3rd Asian Real Estate Society (AsRES), Taipei, Taiwan.
Zucker, L. G., M. R. Darby and J. Armstrong (1994), “Intellectual capital and the firm: The technology of geographically localized knowledge spillovers”, NBER Working Paper No.4946.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 胡太山、林建元、劉明政(2003),〈高科技地區生產者服務業發展演變之研究-以新竹地區為例〉,《建築與規劃學報》,第4卷第2期,頁178-202。
2. 林楨家、馮正民、李洋寧(2004),〈知識可及性對創新的影響-以臺灣北部區域電子產業為例〉,《運輸計劃季刊》,第33卷第3期,
3. 李朝賢(1995),〈臺灣城鄉人口遷移因素之探討〉,《臺灣經濟》,第218期,頁1-12。
4. 胡太山、張素莉(2001),〈技術基礎設施、產業聚群與與地方創新網絡建構之初探-以新竹科學園區暨周邊地區為例〉,《建築與規劃學報》,第2卷第1期,頁27-42。
5. 徐進鈺(2000),〈廠商的時空策略與動態學習-新竹科學園區積體電路工業為例〉,《城市與設計學報》,第35期,頁75-118。
6. 張聖琳(2004),〈跨海的家-從飄洋過海的矽谷地景談美國郊區住宅亞太化現象〉,《造園季刊》,第51期,頁5-10。
7. 陳彥仲(1997),〈住宅選擇之程序性決策模式〉,《住宅學報》,第5期,頁37-49。
8. 陳淑美、張金鶚(2002),〈家戶遷移決策與路徑選擇之研究-台北縣市的實證分析〉,《住宅學報》,第11卷第1期,頁1-22。
9. 解鴻年、胡太山、王俊堯(2004),〈產業地區創新與生產網絡之研究—以新竹科學園區暨周邊地區積體電路為例〉,《建築與規劃學報》,第5卷第2期,頁178-200。
10. 解鴻年、胡太山、柯大鈞、薛卜賓(2005),〈新竹科學園區周邊工業區發展變遷之研究〉,《環境與世界》,第11期,頁1-31。
11. 劉韻僖、葉匡時、王保鋅(2002),〈人際網絡在資訊產業扮演的角色-以雙灣關係為例〉,《淡江人文社會學刊》,第11期,頁27-59。
12. 蔡秀玲(1998),〈依附理論在諮商中的應用〉,《輔導季刊》,第36卷第1期,頁25-31。