歐美國家自工業革命之後，都市人口快速的成長將都市的擴張推向郊區等環境更為良好的區域，都市中心卻因為住宅的外移導致夜間的活動銳減，活動產生的自然監視效果消失造就了市中心商業區高度的犯罪問題。國外專家與學者為了改善犯罪的問題在都市空間的規劃上提倡透過改善環境的設計方式，提高周邊區域自然監視的效果預防犯罪發生，而逐漸形成了一套環境設計的預防犯罪理論，稱之為環境設計預防犯罪Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design(簡稱CPTED)。其主要針對區域空間出入控管、自然監視、以及活動導入等方式預防犯罪的發生。反觀，國內都市空間無論食衣住行等各類活動交錯混合，卻鮮少針對土地混合使用的自然監視效果進行預防犯罪的研究。因此本研究旨在探究台灣的土地混合使用模式下活動所產生的自然監視，是否產生防範普通竊盜犯罪的效果。
本研究以犯罪製圖的熱點分析方法，配合非線性與逐步迴歸的統計方法探討北投區2007年普通竊盜犯罪點分布與周邊活動的關係。結果顯示活動提供的自然監視效果下， 24小時的活動(如便利商店、洗衣店、警察機關等) 並未對普通竊盜犯罪產生嚇阻的效果，可能的原因是24小時的活動對於夜間的普通竊盜行為並未提供自然監視的效果。日常活動(如服飾店、服飾修補、藥妝店、珠寶銀樓、停車場、鐘錶店、機車行等)具有防範普通竊盜犯罪的效果，因為日常活動的時間固定所以降低犯罪的發生。但診所、美容美體、房屋仲介、補習班等活動卻導致普通竊盜犯罪的增加，其可能原因在於活動型態多存在於室內進行，無法對周邊環境有效的進行監視的作用。

Since the Industrial Revolution, urbanization and population sprawl have moved residential areas toward suburban, resulting in higher crime rate at central business centers in the night. Situational Crime Prevention Theory including the strategy of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design was developed by experts and researchers in the U.S. to reduce crime rate, through increasing access control and providing natural surveillance by mixing various activities. However, this strategy has not been examined in Taiwan, where most urbanized areas are mixed residential area with commercial and retail. Therefore, this research aims at evaluating the effectiveness of natural surveillance under mixed land‐use for minimizing larceny occurrence.
Evidence based on geographic hot‐spot and statistical analyses shows that 24 hour operation stores such as 7‐eleven, self‐service laundry, and police station are not associated with lower larceny rate, due to natural surveillance ineffective during night. However, the more the stores of dressing, sewing, pharmacy, jewelry, watch smith, motorcycle selling and repairing, and parking lots, the lower the larceny occurrence. It is possible associated with the effectiveness of natural surveillance based on routine operation hours preventing larceny from happening in the date. On the contrary, the more the clinics, beauty shops, real estates, and after school care centers, the higher the larceny occurrence. It is possible relating to indoor oriented activities irrelevant to outdoor natural surveillance.

目錄
謝誌...............................................................................................I
摘要...............................................................................................II
目錄...............................................................................................IV
圖目錄...........................................................................................V
表目錄...........................................................................................VI
第壹章、緒論...............................................................................1
第一節、研究動機與目的...........................................................1
第二節、研究範圍.......................................................................2
第三節、研究流程.......................................................................3
第四節、研究內容.......................................................................4
第貳章、相關理論與文獻回顧...................................................5
第一節、國外環境預防犯罪相關理論.......................................6
第二節、國內環境預防犯罪相關研究.......................................15
第三節、總結...............................................................................20
第參章、研究設計.......................................................................21
第一節、研究架構.......................................................................21
第二節、研究方法.......................................................................22
第三節、研究假設.......................................................................24
第肆章、北投區犯罪熱區現況調查...........................................27
第一節、北投區環境特徵...........................................................27
第二節、北投區犯罪熱區分析...................................................28
第伍章、統計分析與結果...........................................................33
第一節、熱區活動多樣性對普通竊盜犯罪比例的影響...........33
第二節、２４小時活動對普通竊盜犯罪比例的影響...............34
第三節、日常活動對普通竊盜犯罪比例的影響.......................35
第陸章、結論與建議...................................................................42
第一節、研究結論.......................................................................42
第二節、後續研究建議...............................................................43
參考文獻.......................................................................................44
附錄...............................................................................................48 

Bennett, T., & Graham, J. (1995). Crime prevention strategies in Europe and North America.
Block, R. L., & Block, C. R. (1995). Space, place and crime: Hot spot areas and hot places of liquor-related crime. Chicago: Criminal Justice Press.
Brantingham, P., & Brantingham, P. (1993). Nodes, Paths and Edges: Considerations on the Complexity of Crime and the Physical Environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology.
Brantingham, P., Brantingham, P., & Wong, P. (1991). How Public Transit Feeds Private Crime: Notes on the Vancouver Skytrain Experience.
Carmona, Matthew; Heath, Tim; Tiesdell, Steve; Oc, Taner;. (2010). Public Places - Urban Spaces: The Dimensions of Urban Design. ELSEVIER.
Clarke, R. V. (1995). Situational Crime Prevention. Crime and Justice, Vol. 19, pp. 91-150.
Clarke, R. V., & Cornish, D. B. (1986). The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Clarke, R. V., & Felson, M. (1993). Routine Activity and Rational Choice. Transaction Publishers.
Clarke, R. V., & Felson, M. (1998). Opportunity Makes the Thief. Police Research Series.
Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach. American Sociological Review.
Cozens, P. M., Saville, G., & Hillier, D. (2005, 5 23). Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED): a review and modern bibliography. Property Management, pp. 328-356.
Ellin, N. (1997). Architecture of fear. Princeton Architectural Press.
Felson, M., & Boba, R. L. (2010). Crime and Everyday Life. SAGE Publications, Inc.
FelsonMarcus. (2002). Crime and Everyday Life.
Fletcher, J. (1849). Moral and educational statistics of England and Wales. Journal of the Statistical Society of London.
Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in public: Micro studies of the public order. New York: Harper & Row.
Guerry, A.-M. (1833). Essai sur la statistique morale de la France.
Herbert, D. T., & Hyde, S. W. (1985). Environmental Criminology: Testing Some Area Hypothesis. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series.
Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Lite of Great American Cities. Vintage Books.
Kushmuk, J., & Whittemore, S. L. (1981). A Re-Evaluation of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Program in Portland, Oregon Executive Summary. u.s. Department of Justice.
La Vigne, N. G. (1997). Visibility and Vigilance: Metro’s Situational Approach to Preventing Subway Crime. U.S. Department of Justice.
Lab, S. P. (2010). Crime Prevention:Approaches, Practices and Evaluations. Elsevier.
Liu, H., & Brown, D. E. (2003). Criminal incident prediction using a point-pattern-based density. International Journal of Forecasting, 19, pp. 603–622.
Llewelyn-Davies. (2000). Urban Design Compendium. London: English Partnerships.
Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (1999). HOT SPOTS OF BUS STOP CRIME:THE IMPORTANCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ATTRIBUTES. Journal of the American Planning Association, Volume 65, Issue 4.
Mackey, D. A., & Levan, K. (2011). Crime Prevention. Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Mayhew, H., & Binny, J. (1862). The criminal prisons of London, and scenes of prison life. London.
Minton, A. (2006). The privatisation of public space. London: RICS.
Newman, O. (1972). DEFENSIBLE SPACE. Kajima Institute Publishing Co, Ltd.
Oc, T., & Tiesdell, S. A. (1997). Safer city centres: reviving the public realm. SAGE.
Roncek, D. W., & Maier, P. A. (1991). Bars, Block and Crime Revisited:Linking the Theory of Routine Activities to the Empiricism of Hot Spots. Criminology.
Shaw, C. R., & McKay, H. D. (1942). Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Sherman, L. W., Gartin, P. R., & Buerger, M. E. (1989). Hot Spots of Predatory Crime: Routine Activities and the Criminology of Place. Criminology.
Townsley, M. (2008). Visualising space time patterns in crime: the hotspot plot. Crime patterns and analysis.
李建達. (2010). 都市邊緣土地使用型式影響竊盜犯罪之研究─以台北市北投區為例. 碩士論文. 台北: 中國文化大學環境設計學院景觀學系.
李素馨. (2000年3月). 都市住宅社區形式與居民被害恐懼感關係之研究. 都市與計劃, 頁 25-45.
李瑞陽, & 陳勝義. (2010年11月30日). 台中市搶奪犯罪熱點與犯罪區位之空間分析. 地理研究, 頁 23-48.
張平吾, & 蔡田木. (2007). 台北市社區鄰里監視系統在犯罪預防上成效評估之研究. 內政部警政署刑事警察局.
張淑貞, & 李素馨. (2008年12月). 街頭搶奪犯罪時間特性之研究：日常活動理論之觀點. 犯罪學期刊, 頁 65-92.
黃乃弘. (2002). 空間型構與住宅竊盜之關連性研究：以台灣某都市為例. 碩士論文. 台中: 逢甲大學建築及都市計劃碩士班.
黃映翎. (2008). 台北市士林區指標型犯罪空間分析. 碩士論文. 台北: 東吳大學社會學系.
黃盈樺, & 易永秋. (2011年6月). 住宅社區居民之社區空間安全意識. 物業管理學報, 頁 9-16.
溫在弘, 劉擇昌, & 林民浩. (2010年5月). 犯罪地圖繪製與熱區分析方法及其應用：以1998-2007年台北市住宅竊盜犯罪為例. 地理研究, 頁 43-64.
劉擇昌, & 游柏輝. (2011年5月). GIS 於住宅竊盜犯罪熱區空間分析應用之研究-以台北市大安區為例. 犯罪學期刊, 頁 97-138.
劉擇昌, 鄧煌發, 黃明昭, 張智雄, & 游相輝. (2012年5月17日). 差異區域層次犯罪空間集群態樣分析一以台北市大安區住宅竊盜為例. 犯罪學期刊, 頁 43-70.
劉濤. (2012年5月18日). 表現型犯罪的情境預防一一個西方犯罪學視角的觀察. 犯罪學期刊, 页 71-88.
謝文彥, & 廖有祿. (2007). 社區犯罪基圖在機車竊盜犯罪區位特性之研究. 台北: 內政部警政署刑事警察局.
蘇智鋒. (2006年10月). 都市商業區之街道空間型態與犯罪預防之研究—以台灣某. 國科會, 頁 NSC94-2211-E-029-008.
蘇智鋒, 黃乃弘, & 王子熙. (2008年12月). 住宅區公共空間配置型態與住宅侵入竊盜犯罪機率分析-英國及台灣之案例研究. 國科會, NSC94-2211-E-029-008.