EPA-102-E101-02-207

102

790 千元

2013/04/03

2013/12/15

翁興利

統計室

姜仁智

全國意向顧問股份有限公司

公害糾紛

環境保護、調查、滿意

Environmental protection, survey, satisfaction

藍淑芬

張書菱

02-27818181#120

olivia.chang@trendgo.com.tw

環保署為瞭解民眾對我國環境品質之感受、環保施政措施認同度及對各級環保機關公害陳情處理之滿意程度，以供釐訂政策及提升服務品質之參考，特於本計畫期間內，對年滿20歲以上國民辦理2次環保施政意向調查(以下簡稱意向調查)及1次公害陳情處理滿意度調查(以下簡稱公害陳情調查)。 第1次意向調查，係為瞭解民眾對我國環境品質的感受，於本102年5月6日至102年5月18日間進行電話訪問。採分層比例抽樣法抽取樣本，完成有效樣本2,003人，在95%的信心水準下，抽樣誤差在2.19個百分點以內。調查結果顯示：四成三(42.9%)的民眾最近一年曾遭受噪音的困擾；四成二(41.8%)的民眾最近一年曾遭受異（臭）味污染的困擾；民眾對於4項生活周遭環境衛生問題的改善度介於3.36分至3.86分，其中以公廁髒亂問題改善最多；民眾對於5項資源循環物品的使用方式，其改善度介於3.31分至3.92分，其中以自備購物袋改善最多；7項環境品質及環保措施成效中，以資源回收成效的滿意度較高，以河川環境及水質的滿意度最低；九成三(93.2%)的民眾相信「氣候變遷」是已經發生的事實，並有近八成(79.8%)的民眾認為生活有受到「氣候變遷」的影響，而有六成九(69.3%)民眾認為有受到「節能減碳」概念與政策的影響；近六成二(64.2%)的民眾對環保署過去一年推動環保工作的表現表示滿意。 第2次意向調查，係為瞭解民眾對各項已推動或將推動之環保措施之贊同程度，於本(102)年9月21日至10月10日進行電話訪問。採分層比例抽樣法抽取樣本，完成有效樣本2,014人，在95%的信心水準下，抽樣誤差在2.2個百分點以內。調查結果顯示：民眾對6項環境永續槪念的平均認同度為4.48分；17項環保署已推動的環保措施，其平均知悉率為65.7%，其平均贊同率為95.8%；8項正規劃的環保政策平均支持率為93.6%；七成(70.3%)的民眾對目前住家附近環境整潔表示滿意；五成九(59.3%)民眾對環保署過去一年推動環境保護工作的表現感到滿意。 公害陳情調查，為了瞭解101年10月至102年9月向各級環保機關陳情公害污染案件之民眾對陳情處理之滿意度，於本年6月13日至6月18日及10月11日至10月18日進行電話訪問。依陳情案件類別比例進行隨機抽樣，完成有效樣本為3,053人，在95%的信心水準下，抽樣誤差在2.5個百分點以內，調查結果顯示：陳情案件污染類別以「噪音」(33.9%)較多，陳情時段以「日間（6-20時）」(73.4%)較多，提供給環保單位的陳情資訊以「污染地點」(97.9%)，較多，陳情管道以「電話」(74.3%)較多。八成五(85.0%)的陳情人對陳情專線電話接聽人員服務態表示滿意，六成九(69.0%)的陳情人對網路陳情服務表示滿意。六成六(66.0%)的陳情人表示環保人員會依據所提供的資訊前往陳情現場勘察；有二成三(23.1%)的陳情人會同環保人員至陳情案件現場實際稽查。七成五(74.5%)的陳情人對到場處理時效表示滿意，七成五(75.0%)的陳情人對到場處理環保人員服務態度表示滿意。五成一(51.0%)的陳情人有要求環保機關回復處理情形，其中有七成四(74.3%)的陳情人表示環保機關回復處理情形方以「電話」回復為主；有八成四(83.7%)的陳情人對環保機關回復處理結果的態度表示滿意，有八成(79.6%)的陳情人對環保機關回復處理情形的速度表示滿意。六成一（61.2%）的陳情人對陳情案件處理過程表示滿意，三成八(38.4%)的陳情人對陳情案件處理的結果表示滿意，五成九（58.8%）表示不滿意，其原因以「污染情形未改善」比例最高（73.3%）。四成五（45.0%）陳情人會再針對同一個陳情原因一再陳情，再次提出陳情的原因以「未持續追蹤改善情形，案件又故態復萌」比例最高（75.9%）。陳情人認為環保機關在處理公害陳情需要提供的服務或改進事項主要為「提升處理效率」（36.7%）。

環境保護、調查、滿意

正式報告.zip

4MB

正式報告

2014/2/1 上午 12:00:00

The Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) conducted three surveys in 2013 to evaluate and understand the following viewpoints from the public: the impressions about the current environmental quality, identification extent with the environmental protection measures, and satisfaction at nuisance petition. The findings of the surveys were used as reference for future EPA policies. The participants were the public aged 20 and above. The first two surveys focused on public’s opinions about EPA policies. The first second of this series was undertaken through phone calls during the period from May 6 September 21 to May 18 October 10, 2013. A total of 2003 2014 valid samples were collected, using a stratified random sampling method, under a confidence interval of 95%, with a sampling error within 2.19 2.2 percentage point. The first of this series was concerned with the public’s reception on environmental quality. Regarding the findings of the surveys, refer to the following statements. Over the last year, about 42.9% of the public responded they had been annoyed by noise. About 41.8% of the public reported that they had been bothered by the smell of polluted air over the last year. The public was of the opinion that the improvement level of four environmental sanitation problems fell between 3.36 and 3.86 (5 representing the highest while 1 the lowest in the improvement degree). Among the four, conditions of messy and smelly public toilets had improved most noticeably. The public were of the opinion that the application of five recycling ways fell between 3.31 and 3.92 (5 representing the highest while 1 the lowest in the improvement degree). Among the five, conditions of taking reusable shopping bags outdoors had improved most noticeably. Concerning achievements among seven environmental quality and measures, resource recycling was given the highest satisfaction level. The lowest satisfaction level went to river cleanliness and water quality. About 93.2% of the public thought “climate change” was the truth and had already occurred. And about 79.8% of the public regarded that their daily lives had been affected by climate change. Nearly 69.3% of the public considered that they were influenced by the concept of energy conservation/carbon reduction and official policy. Approximately 64.2% of the public was satisfied with the environmental protection movements facilitated by EPA over the past year. The second of this series was concerned with the public’s level of consent for various environmental protection policies which were launched already or planned. Regarding the findings of the surveys, refer to the following statements. The average level of identification of the public with the idea of environmental sustainability in six categories stood at 4.48 points. The average awareness rate of the 17 environmental protection measures undertaken by the EPA was 65.7%. The average approval rate of the 17 measures was 95.8%. There were eight environmental policies under planning whose average approval rate was 93.6%. About 70.3% of the public was satisfied with environmental cleanliness residing nearby. Approximately 59.3% of the public was satisfied with the environmental protection movements facilitated by the EPA over the past year. The survey about petition cases on public nuisance was to understand public’s satisfaction at nuisance petition cases progressed by each level of environmental protection service agencies from October, 2012 to September, 2013. The collected data was through telephone interviews with the public, who offered public nuisances from June 13 to June 18, 2013 and from October 11 to October 18, 2013. A total of 3053 valid samples were collected, using a stratified random sampling method, under a confidence interval of 95% with a sampling error within 2.5 percentage point. The results were shown below. Among the public nuisances, 33.9% of the public fell into the category of “noise”. About 73.4% of the public addressed petition requests on public nuisance during daytime, from six a.m. to eight p.m. About 97.9% of the public frequently complained “pollution site” the most. Those petition requests on public nuisance were mostly addressed by “phone calls,” about 74.3% of the public did that. About 85.0% of the public was satisfied with telephone receptionists’ service attitude for nuisance petition cases. About 69.0% of the public was satisfied with online petition service on public nuisance. About 66% of the public said that representatives of environmental protection service agencies would follow the information of public nuisances they received and go to the sites for investigation. And 23.1% of the public would accompany the representatives to the sites for investigation. There was 74.5% of the public satisfying with the handling efficiency of nuisance petition cases on the spot. About 75.0% of the public said they were satisfied with the courtesy demonstrated by the environmental protection officials on the spot. In addition, about 51.0% of the public requested environmental protection officials to send feedback for the progress of nuisance petition cases. Among them, 74.3% of them reported that environmental protection officials sent the progress of petition cases through “phone calls”; about 83.7% of the public was satisfied with the attitude of replying results for processing nuisance petition cases; approximately 79.6% of the public was satisfied with the efficiency of replying results for progressing nuisance petition cases by environmental protection officials. Almost 61.2% of the public was satisfied with the progress for nuisance petition cases. About 38.4% of the public was satisfied with the results for progressing nuisance petition cases. Nearly 58.8% of the public was not satisfied. There was 73.3%, the highest percentage, of the public explained that the pollution was not improved. Approximately 45.0% of the public thought that they would file the same complaints again and again. About 75.9%, the highest percentage, of the public explained that the situations were not improved or the nuisance petition case occurred again. For improvements toward nuisance petition cases, there was 36.7% of the public regarded that “improving the efficiency to handle petition cases” was high priority.

Environmental protection, survey, satisfaction