| Summary: | 碩士 === 大葉大學 === 休閒事業管理學系碩士班 === 92 === ABSTRACT
This study is based on the following two assumptions to accomplished:
1.Residents of a community with different demographic background will have marked different attitude towards the ideas of ”economic production”, “quality of life”, and “ecology protection”.
2.Residents of a community with different demographic background will have marked structural correlation on ”economic production”, “quality of life”, and “ecology protection”.
The methodology used in this study is the quantitative one. We used questionnaire survey as the main investigative technique for collecting data. The sampling methods used are the convenient and judgmental sampling. We sent out 600 questionnaires and received 344 valid responses. We used the SPSS statistics software to process our data. The techniques used are: t test of independent samples, one-way ANOVA, and the Pearson product movement correlations. We conducted statistical analysis on collected data to compare the differences and investigated the reasons behind these differences.
The findings of our investigation are as following:
1.Among those residents with higher frequency of participation in the overall community development activities, the higher the consensus as compare to those who did not.
2.Among those residents with higher frequency of participation in the ecology protection activities, the higher the consensus as compare to those who did not.
3.Those residents who obtained information about the community development through communal social activities and studying groups have higher consensus among themselves comparing to those who obtained the same information through other channels.
4.The Residents’ assume three more important issues of the communities toward sustainable development. There are creating job-entrance, developing leisure industry and keeping Hakka culture.
5.In selecting single questions, residents consider ecology protection is more important than the leisure and tourist industry. However, on ranking different questions, they put the latter in front of the former.
Finally, we describe and discuss the phenomena observed. Based on our findings, we made suggestions for people who will engage in follow-up study in the future.
Key Words：Kuoshing township community, community development, sustainable development
|
|---|
