地震帶土地使用規劃策略跨國比較研究

Cross Country Analysis of Land Use Planning on Earthquake Prone Area

傳統結構性措施改變原本不安全的環境，直覺地留下環境安全的訊息，普遍受到認同與接受。結構性措施不應為唯一的的地震災害防減災措施，隨著地震災害規模劇增挑戰結構性措施有限的耐震效果，非結構性措施中土地使用規劃憑藉限制開發區位、類型、強度，引導開發遠離已知災害風險地區，並將開發引導於相對安全地區。美國與紐西蘭面對大規模地震災害，儘管防減災土地使用規劃的公信力與信賴度受到挑戰，惟認知災害預防的重要性故仍逐步完成活動斷層的劃設與防減災土地使用規劃。現階段台灣各類直接管制、間接管制與資訊揭露法令規範仍趨一般性與通則性，參考美國與紐西蘭作法，有必要確實將災害風險資訊納入為開發計畫准駁參考，以及更全面性納入災害風險資訊與地質敏感資訊於土地使用規劃。是以，本文借鑒他國推動防減災土地使用規劃經驗，蒐集相關法令規範與防減災土地使用規劃措施，跨國比較省思與討論，期供未來臺灣修訂防減災土地使用計畫的參考。 Structural measures change risk environment into safer place and such improvements leave a secure impression. With large scale of earthquake disasters, structural measures might provide limited against effect. Relatively, non-structural engineering measures such as land use plan receive increasing attention by controlling development location, type and intensity and to physically lead new development away from risk area but safer places. Although the faith and confidence of land use planning on disaster mitigation are challenged by the public, both America and New Zealand have identified and regulated land use planning on active fault zone. Currently, the regulations of direct, indirect and information disclosure on seismic disaster in Taiwan are too general, and it is necessary to take disaster risks into consideration while approving development plans. Therefore, this study refers to disaster mitigation land use planning experiences in America and New Zealand to conduct a comparative analysis on land use planning and related acts. This study might be suitable referred to future disaster mitigation land use plan in Taiwan.

Structural measures change risk environment into safer place and such improvements leave a secure impression. With large scale of earthquake disasters, structural measures might provide limited against effect. Relatively, non-structural engineering measures such as land use plan receive increasing attention by controlling development location, type and intensity and to physically lead new development away from risk area but safer places. Although the faith and confidence of land use planning on disaster mitigation are challenged by the public, both America and New Zealand have identified and regulated land use planning on active fault zone. Currently, the regulations of direct, indirect and information disclosure on seismic disaster in Taiwan are too general, and it is necessary to take disaster risks into consideration while approving development plans. Therefore, this study refers to disaster mitigation land use planning experiences in America and New Zealand to conduct a comparative analysis on land use planning and related acts. This study might be suitable referred to future disaster mitigation land use plan in Taiwan.