跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.201.72.250) 您好!臺灣時間:2023/09/27 10:15
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

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:鍾至怡
研究生(外文):Chih-YiChung
論文名稱:共同居住空間之利害關係人社群建構流程探討:以南宅青年為例
論文名稱(外文):Exploring the Community Building Process of Stakeholders in Co-Living Accommodation: Case Study of SoulifeHaxing
指導教授:劉舜仁劉舜仁引用關係楊佳翰楊佳翰引用關係
指導教授(外文):Shuenn-Ren LiouChia-Han Yang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立成功大學
系所名稱:創意產業設計研究所
學門:設計學門
學類:綜合設計學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2019
畢業學年度:107
語文別:英文
論文頁數:135
中文關鍵詞:共享經濟共同居住社群建構過程社區設計社群互動
外文關鍵詞:Sharing EconomyCo-livingCommunity Building ProcessCommunity DesignSocial Interaction
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:142
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
二十一世紀以來高漲的房價、逐漸降低的結婚率,以及都市生活帶來的疏離感,都使得都市中的居住方式近年來的劇變,也造成年輕族群普遍「蝸居」的現象。

然而,共享經濟的發展,強調充份運用閒置資源,以及重新建立人際關係,這也為居住帶來不同的可能性, 使得「共同居住」在近年來逐漸興起。「共同居住」的實踐使得居住者能共享住宅中的公共設備及空間,進而促進居住者間的社群互動,因此,社群建構的重要性,在此概念下更為顯著。

本研究對南宅青年進行個案研究,探討共同居住空間中的社群互動關係,以及該社群中利害關係人之社群建構過程,藉由參與式觀察以及深度訪談等方法收集質化資料。

研究發現,共同居住之社群建構可分為三階段,其中包含(1)社群計畫、(2)管理利害關係人,以及(3)利害關係人參與。進一步將資料進行論述分析後,可了解各個關鍵角色在室友活動中所彰顯之功能,以提供共同居住空間一套可參考的社群建構流程。
In a context of ever-increasing housing price, and the lower rate of marriage, as well as the sense of alienation result from urban lifestyle, the lifestyle of urban citizens, could no longer sustainable.
This article introduces the co-living movement under the sharing economy to make life more social and in an urban context, which is one of the answers to the problem listed above. Co-living communities are developed creatively mix private and common dwellings to recreate a sense of community while preserving a high degree of individual privacy. In that respect, the importance of community building should be emphasized.
This research is a case study of SoulifeHaxing, exploring the social interaction in the co-living community among youth in the urban area as well as providing a better understanding of the community building process through conducting participatory observation and in-depth interview to collecting qualitative data.
It is found in this research that the co-living community building process can be divided into three stages: (1) community planning, (2) stakeholder management, and (3) stakeholder engagement.
By further thematic analyzing, the researcher has a better understanding of the role among the stakeholders, for providing a framework of community building process for co-living accommodation to apply in the future.
Table of Content 1
Chapter 1 Introduction 6
1.1 Research Background 6
1.1.1 Changing lifestyles 7
1.1.2 Sharing Economy 10
1.1.3 Co-Living as the Solution 12
1.2 Research Motivation 13
1.3 Research Objectives and Questions 14
1.4 Research Target 15
1.5 Terminology 16
Chapter 2 Literature Review 17
2.1 Urban Design 17
2.1.1 Concept of DIY Urbanism 17
2.1.2 The Social Understanding of Urban Space 18
2.1.3 The Urban Space Framework 19
2.1.4 Community Design and Participatory Design 22
2.2 Co-Living 23
2.2.1 From Co-Housing to Co-Living 23
2.2.2 Current Development of Co-Living 24
2.2.3 The Goals of Co-Living 26
2.2.4 The Extensive Concept Under Sharing Economy — Co-working Spaces 28
2.3 Community Building 29
2.3.1 What is Community 29
2.3.2 The Concept of Community Building 30
2.3.3 Stakeholder Management and Engagement 32
2.4 Cases of Co-Living 35
2.4.1 Cases of Co-Living in Global 35
2.4.2 Cases of Co-Living in Taiwan 38
Chapter 3 Methodology 44
3.1 Research Framework 44
3.2 Research Method 45
3.2.1 Case Study 45
3.2.2 Participant Observation 47
3.2.3 In-depth Interview 48
3.3 Data Collection and Analysis 50
3.3.1 Primary Data 50
3.3.2 Secondary Data 53
3.3.3 Data Analysis 54
Chapter 4 Research Results 56
4.1 Case Study -- SoulifeHaxing 56
4.1.1 Case Introduction 56
4.1.2 A Prototype to Challenge Current Student Accommodations 59
4.1.3 SoulifeHaxing Becomes a Service Provider for Youth 61
4.1.4 The Current Community of SoulifeHaxing 62
4.1.5 The Activities in SoulifeHaxing 64
4.2 The Current Co-Living Community 67
4.2.1 The Onboarding Process in Co-Living Community 68
4.2.2 The Participation in Co-Living Community 69
4.2.3 Operate Alternatively Between Online and Offline 71
4.3 The Stakeholders of Co-Living Community 72
4.3.1 The Motivation and Expectation of Stakeholders 72
4.3.2 Diversity of Residents in Co-Living Community 77
4.3.3 The Key Stakeholder Profile in Co-Living Community 79
4.4 Facilitate the Co-Living Community Building 84
4.4.1 The Interaction Model in Co-Living Community 84
4.4.2 Make an Exception in Daily Life 86
4.4.3 Building Identity Through Project 87
Chapter 5 Discussion 89
5.1 Findings 89
5.1.1 The Transformation of Roles in Co-Living Community 89
5.1.2 Evolution of Co-Living Model 91
5.1.3 Achieve the Goal of Co-Living Community 93
5.2 Implication for Practice 96
5.3 Research Limitation 96
Chapter 6 Conclusion and Future Study 98
6.1 Conclusion 98
6.2 Suggestions for Future Study 99
References …. 101
Appendix I -- Field Notes 104
Appendix II – In-depth Interview 113
Appendix III— Secondary Data 119
山崎亮, & 莊雅琇. (2015). 社區設計: 重新思考 社區 定義, 不只設計空間, 更要設計 人與人之間的連結: 臉譜出版, 城邦出版.
王俐雯. (2012). 成年前期男女孤獨感與幸福感之相關研究-以網路使用者為例. 臺北教育大學, Available from Airiti AiritiLibrary database. (2012年)
司馬蕾. (2012). Basic research on present status of China's residential facilities for the aged and thoughts of the elders: the overall image and internal diversities. 東京大学,
張淑琳. (2018). 從共享經濟模式探討共居之行為意圖--以玖樓共居公寓為例. 淡江大學, Available from Airiti AiritiLibrary database. (2018年)
潘信榮. (2017). 網絡崩世代居住空間的重構-以玖樓共生公寓為例. 臺灣大學建築與城鄉研究所學位論文(2017 年), 1-97.
蔡孟宏. (2016). 基進共享的台南老屋: 能盛興鐵工廠作為都市共享域的營造. 臺灣大學建築與城鄉研究所學位論文, 1-150.
蔡保田. (1987). 教育研究方法論. 中國教育學會. 師大書苑.
Botsman, R., & Rogers, R. (2011). What's mine is yours: how collaborative consumption is changing the way we live (Vol. 5): Collins London.
Bourne, L., & Walker, D. H. (2005). Visualising and mapping stakeholder influence. Management decision, 43(5), 649-660.
Boyce, C., & Neale, P. (2006). Conducting in-depth interviews: A guide for designing and conducting in-depth interviews for evaluation input.
Butcher, T. (2013). Coworking: Locating community at work. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 27th annual australia new zealand academy of management (ANZAM) conference.
Cho, I. S., Trivic, Z., & Nasution, I. (2015). Towards an Integrated Urban Space Framework for Emerging Urban Conditions in a High-density Context. Journal of Urban Design, 20(2), 147-168. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2015.1009009. doi:10.1080/13574809.2015.1009009
Colomb, C. (2015). ‘DIY urbanism’in Berlin: Dilemmas and conflicts in the mobilization of ‘temporary uses’ of urban space in local economic development. Paper presented ‘Transience and Permanence in Urban Development’University of Sheffield, 14-15.
Cox, W., Pavletich, H., & Hartwich, O. (2017). 13th annual demographia international housing affordability survey: 2017.
Dannenberg, A. L., Jackson, R. J., Frumkin, H., Schieber, R. A., Pratt, M., Kochtitzky, C., & Tilson, H. H. (2003). The impact of community design and land-use choices on public health: a scientific research agenda. American journal of public health, 93(9), 1500-1508.
Dearden, A., Light, A., Zamenopoulos, T., Graham, P., Plouviez, E., & Sousa, S. d. (2014). Scaling up co-design: research projects as design things. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 13th Participatory Design Conference: Short Papers, Industry Cases, Workshop Descriptions, Doctoral Consortium papers, and Keynote abstracts - Volume 2, Windhoek, Namibia.
Droste, C. (2015). German co-housing: an opportunity for municipalities to foster socially inclusive urban development? Urban research & practice, 8(1), 79-92.
Feagin, J. R., Orum, A. M., & Sjoberg, G. (1991). A case for the case study: UNC Press Books.
Finn, D. (2014). DIY urbanism: implications for cities. Journal of Urbanism: International research on placemaking and urban sustainability, 7(4), 381-398.
Guion, L. A., Diehl, D. C., & McDonald, D. (2001). Conducting an in-depth interview: University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and ….
Haq, R. U., Nadeem, S., Khan, Z. H., & Akbar, N. S. (2015). Thermal radiation and slip effects on MHD stagnation point flow of nanofluid over a stretching sheet. Physica E: Low-dimensional Systems and Nanostructures, 65, 17-23.
Harvey, D. (2001). Globalization and the “spatial fix.
Horelli, L., & Vepsä, K. (1994). In search of supportive structures for everyday life. In Women and the environment (pp. 201-226): Springer.
Jefferson-Jones, J. (2014). Airbnb and the housing segment of the modern sharing economy: Are short-term rental restrictions an unconstitutional taking. Hastings Const. LQ, 42, 557.
Kong, L., Giang, E., Nieusma, T., Kadam, R. U., Cogburn, K. E., Hua, Y., . . . Ward, A. B. (2013). Hepatitis C virus E2 envelope glycoprotein core structure. Science, 342(6162), 1090-1094.
Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques: New Age International.
Krokfors, K. (2012). Co-housing in the making: Alexandrine Press.
Kwiatkowski, A., & Buczynski, B. (2011). Coworking: How freelancers escape the coffee shop office. Fort Collins.
Lietaert, M. (2010). Cohousing's relevance to degrowth theories. Journal of cleaner production, 18(6), 576-580.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (1989). Qualitative research. In: London: Sage.
Moriset, B. (2013). Building new places of the creative economy. The rise of coworking spaces.
Nathan, R. (2006). My freshman year: What a professor learned by becoming a student: Penguin.
Ostrom, E. E., Dietz, T. E., Dolšak, N. E., Stern, P. C., Stonich, S. E., & Weber, E. U. (2002). The drama of the commons: National Academy Press.
Peck, M. S. (1987). The Different Drum. The creation of true community-the first step to world peace. In: London, Sydney, Auckland, Johannesburg: Rider.
Pfortmüller, F., & Luchsinger, N. (2013). The Power of Trust: Learnings from Six Years of Building a Global Community of Young Leaders (Innovations Case Narrative: Sandbox). Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, 8(3-4), 43-54.
Porter, J. (2008). Designing for the social web: New Riders Berkeley, CA.
Shinohara, 篠. S. (2016). 共享住宅_摆脱孤立的居住方式. 城市建筑, 4.
Tummers, L. (2015). Understanding co-housing from a planning perspective: why and how? Urban research & practice, 8(1), 64-78.
Vestbro, D. U. (2000). From collective housing to cohousing—a summary of research. Journal of architectural and planning research, 164-178.
Vestbro, D. U., & Horelli, L. (2012). Design for gender equality: The history of co-housing ideas and realities. Built Environment, 38(3), 315-335.
Zalasiewicz, J., Williams, M., Smith, A., Barry, T. L., Coe, A. L., Bown, P. R., . . . Gibbard, P. (2008). Are we now living in the Anthropocene? Gsa Today, 18(2), 4.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top