| 研究生: | 蔡憲卿 | |
| 論文名稱: | 建構社會生活安全指標體系之研究 | |
| 論文名稱: | The Study on Construction of Indicator System for Social | |
| Life Security | ||
| 指導教授: | 蔡明璋教授 | |
| 關鍵字: | 社會生活安全 指標體系 | |
| [摘要] | ||
| 論文提要內容： 本文嘗試結合社會學、犯罪學、統計學及社會指標理論，研擬建構「社 | ||
| 會生活安全指標體系」，使國民個人對生活安全情境有所覺知，也提供政府部門作為規劃 | ||
| 施政策略及精進社會安全政策，提昇行政信任度及施政滿意度之參據，達到應用社會學實 | ||
| 證研究與發展之功能。本文針對行政院主計處八十三年編製沿用至今之「國民生活指標體 | ||
| 系架構」中之安全領域統計指標項目認有不足，依據學者研究文獻、行政院治安會報「三 | ||
| 安政策」及生活安全之概念內涵，建構我國「社會生活安全指標體系」，以具體及有效地 | ||
| 衡量測度生活安全情境。本指標體系計分「社會治安」、「交通安全」、「公共安全」三 | ||
| 個構面次領域：「治安構面」選取1.犯罪發生（率）、2.犯罪破獲（率）、3.犯罪受害（ | ||
| 人口率）、4.偵防警力（比例）、5.警政支出（比例）五個指標；「交安構面」選取1.交 | ||
| 通事故（發生率）、2.車輛肇事（率）、3.車禍受害（人口率）、4.交通違規（率）、5. | ||
| 車享路積五個指標；「公安構面」選取1.意外災害（發生率）、2.災害受害（人口率） | ||
| 、3.公安檢查（合格率）、4.消防人力（比例）、5.消防設施（率）五個指標；共計十五 | ||
| 個指標群。資料蒐集包括行政院主計處之《社會指標統計》年報、內政部警政署之《警政 | ||
| 統計年報》、內政部消防署之《消防統計年報》、台灣各縣市政府《統計要覽》預決算表 | ||
| 等，為求較高之信度與效度，統計時間以2000、2001、2002年三年度資料數值之平均值作 | ||
| 為各指標之運算數值。本文分別以毛瑞斯（Morris）標準化指數轉換法及T-Score標準化指 | ||
| 數轉換法加以試編各指標之單元指數及安全體系之綜合指數，採用SPSS10.0電腦統計軟體 | ||
| 操作測量，並將各縣市生活安全程度予以排序，以這兩種轉換法實證測量結果發現相對名 | ||
| 次排序相當一致，顯見本體系所選取之各指標能有效具體測度各地區之生活安全度。本研 | ||
| 究復將所建構之指標體系客觀指數與聯合報民調中心「2001年縣市長施政滿意度及治安滿 | ||
| 意度」主觀指數相互檢驗，以皮爾森（Pearson）係數相關分析結果：生活安全綜合指數與 | ||
| 施政滿意度達中級程度相關，治安構面指數及生活安全綜合指數與治安滿意度達高度相關 | ||
| ，P值亦達非常顯著關係，顯見本研究建構之「社會生活安全指標體系」能顯著地衡量各縣 | ||
| 市之治安狀況及生活安全程度，具高度之信度及效度。本研究再與相關社經因素進行假設 | ||
| 檢驗，以複迴歸分析模型實證分析結果發現：「人口密度」與治安滿意度及生活安全綜合 | ||
| 指數均具有顯著負向相關，「每戶消費支出」、「儲蓄金額」、「支配所得」、「失業率 | ||
| 」則並不具顯著關係。本研究獲致結論一：人口密集度與生活安全度具有顯著的負向相關 | ||
| ；結論二：都市化及工業化程度也是影響生活安全度重要的因素；結論三：都市化造成社 | ||
| 會結構分化，削弱社會聯繫鍵（Social Bond）及社區意識凝聚力，減弱社會規範力；強化 | ||
| 社會聯繫力亦能增加社會生活安全程度。最後，本文根據研究發現與結論，對政府有關部 | ||
| 門及公共政策提出建議，以供規劃社會安全政策之參考。 | ||
| [摘要] | ||
| Abstract | ||
| This article is in attempt to research and research to establish the life | ||
| safety indicator socially by integrating sociology, criminology, statistics | ||
| and the theory of social indicator so that the civilians shall be sensible of | ||
| the safe settings of daily life, applicable for the governmental agencies to | ||
| project the administrative policies and the security principles for further | ||
| refinement. | ||
| We find the deficiency of the statistic indicator items within the safe | ||
| realm listed in the “the systemic structure of civilian life indicator” | ||
| proposed by the Auditing Department of Executive Yuan in 1994. From the | ||
| research lectures of scholars, the public security report of Executive Yuan | ||
| and the ideology contents of safe life, we create the our domestic “the | ||
| systemic structure of civilian life indicator socially”. The said indicator | ||
| system is scored with “the social security”, “traffic security”, and “ | ||
| public order”, totally 3 dimensions. | ||
| As of “the social security”, we select 5 indicators of 1) the crime | ||
| occurrence rate 2) the case breaking rate 3) the criminal victim percentage 4) | ||
| the marshal personnel resource (ratio) 5) the expenditure rate of marshal | ||
| agencies. | ||
| As of “the traffic security”, we select 5 indicators of 1) the crime | ||
| occurrence rate 2) the case breaking rate 3) the criminal victim percentage 4) | ||
| traffic regulation disobedience rate 5) the car share road area. | ||
| As of “the public order”, we select 5 indicators of 1) the accident | ||
| occurrence rate 2) the disaster victim percentage 3) the public order | ||
| inspection (the eligible rate) 4) the personnel resource of fire fighting 5) | ||
| the facilities of fire fighting (percentage). | ||
| There are totally 15 indicators collected from the annual report of “ | ||
| social indicator statistics” issued by the Auditing Department of Executive | ||
| Yuan, the “Fire Fighting Statistic Annual Report’, and the final accounting | ||
| of budge allocation for the “Statistic Brief”. | ||
| This article is separately adopted with Morris Standardized Indicator | ||
| Conversion, and T-score Standardized Indicator Conversion by using SPSS 10.0 | ||
| statistic package soft ware to measure and also sequence the life safety | ||
| degrees of various counties and cities. Through 2 experimental operations, we | ||
| find the measured results are quite similar to the indicator sequence. The | ||
| selected indicators from this system are available to effectively and | ||
| concretely evaluate the life safety degree. | ||
| This research also perform the mutual examinations between the established | ||
| objective index of indicator system and the subjective index of the “2002 The | ||
| Satisfaction Degree of Administrative Performance and Public Order for the | ||
| Magistrates from Various Cities and Counties” .The P-value also reaches the | ||
| remarkable degrees to show that the “Safety Indicator System of Social Life | ||
| Safety” can remarkably measure the degrees of marshal security and life | ||
| safety with high confidence and reliability. | ||
| This research is also further aimed to research the hypothesized | ||
| examinations onto the relevant social and economical factors by means of the | ||
| double regression analysis. It comes in no remarkable correlations among the “ | ||
| expenditure per household”, “deposit amount”, “controllable income” and “ | ||
| unemployment rate”. | ||