English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 11 |  Items with full text/Total items : 88613/118155 (75%)
Visitors : 23474760      Online Users : 271
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/125916


    Title: 以社會資本觀點探討自造者空間營運之研究
    The study of managing of Makerspace: social capital perspective
    Authors: 洪培琪
    Hung, Pei-Chi
    Contributors: 溫肇東
    洪培琪
    Hung, Pei-Chi
    Keywords: 自造者
    自造者運動
    自造者空間
    社會資本
    Maker
    Maker Movement
    Makerspace
    Social capital
    Date: 2019
    Issue Date: 2019-09-05 17:28:58 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 近年來,自造者空間被視作培育創新能量的「第三空間」,不僅容納了自造 者文化的內涵,更在與社群互動的過程中逐漸發展出不同的樣貌。然而面對政府 推動以尋求產業創新出口及大眾媒體正面積極的催化之下,自造者空間雖被大量 建置,卻也在定義模糊、資源分散的局限下,面臨空間存續的挑戰。
    本研究欲探討的是自造者空間存續期間,於空間及社群互動的過程中社會資 本的形成與累積,並藉此重新定義自造者空間存續所產生的價值。本研究採個案 研究法,選擇台灣三個代表性的自造者空間:OpenLab Taipei、MakerBar Taipei 及 FabLab Taipei 作為研究個案。於描述自造者空間之創建脈絡及觀察自造者空 間社群營運模式的過程中,自造者空間各層次與社會資本構面相互影響的面貌, 並探討自造者空間面臨時代挑戰的存續問題。
    研究結果發現,因社群需求而創建的物理化空間對於自造者空間社群文化的 養成及社會資本的積累是相當重要的孵化器,然而維持實體空間的存續並非空間 經營者的首要目標,能夠藉由實體空間的存在蘊積出得已隨著個體或社群移動的 社會資本含量,方為能夠持續於多元領域創造能量的關鍵因素,亦是自造者空間 所存在的價值。
    Makerspace has been widely discussed in recent years as a “Third place”, where the energy of innovation has been cultivated, not only contains the maker culture but also develops the various appearances in the interacting process with the community. However, affected by government policy of industrial innovation and the catalytic effect of mass media, even though the number of makerspaces has been growing rapidly over the past decade, many makerspaces still face the challenge of survival that caused by the limitations of imprecise definition and scattering of resources.
    The purpose of this study was to investigate the formation and accumulation of social capital in the interactive process of space and community, meanwhile, redefine the value of the existence of makerspace. This study applies case study method, choosing three representative makerspaces in Taiwan: “OpenLab Taipei”, “MakerBar Taipei”, and “FabLab Taipei” as research targets. In the case study, in addition to describe the context of starting a makerspace and the community management in the space, try to observe how the gradations of makerspace and the facets of social capital interact with each other. At the same time, look into the challenges of survival problem that makerspaces are trapped with during these days.
    The results of the study revealed that physical space can be regarded as a significant incubator of maker culture and the accumulation of social capital; Nevertheless, the sustainability of makerspace is not the primary goal of makerspace operator, instead, the accumulation of social capital that can move with individuals and communities is the key point of capability to create energy in multiple fields in the future, and which is the value of the existence of makerspace.
    Reference: 中文參考文獻
    人民網 (2018)。創客周火熱上線,盡顯深圳雙創活力。取自https://kknews.cc/zh-tw/news/5b5rbr2.html
    王中天 (2003)。社會資本(Social Capital):概念、源起、及現況。問題與研究,425:139-163。
    安德森 (Anderson, C.) (2013)。自造者時代:啟動人人製造的第三次工業革命。(連育德譯)。台北市:天下遠見出版。(原著出版年:1995年)
    行政院新聞傳播處 (2015)。毛揆:凝聚創客力量發揮創新創意型塑Maker新世代。取自https://www.ey.gov.tw/Page/9277F759E41CCD91/76077e5e-1d39-4008-bf92-d5dbe04fac2f
    李大維 (2014)。新山寨:民主化創新的中國故事。創瞰巴黎中國版。取自http://parisinnovationreview.cn/blog/2014/12/17/shanzhai-copycat-innovation-china/
    李欣宜 (2015a)。創客經濟。數位時代雜誌,253,78-84。
    李欣宜 (2015b)。忘掉製造KPI,需要更多基層投資。數位時代雜誌,253,94-96。
    李欣宜 (2015c)。歐巴馬的美國家夢從校園紮根。數位時代雜誌,253,110-111。
    李欣宜、蘇宇庭 (2015)。台灣 Maker 來了。數位時代雜誌,253,98-102。
    李俊 (2011)。社會資本與信任:跨時因果關係模型。國立政治大學社會研究所碩士論文。
    李惠斌、楊冬雪 (2000)。社會資本與社會發展。北京:社會科學文獻出版社。
    里夫金 (Rifkin, J.) (2014)。物聯網革命。(陳儀、陳琇玲譯)。台北市:商周出版。(原著出版年:2014年)
    林奇秀、陳一帆 (2011)。淺析網路社群知識分享實證研究如何構思社會資本概念。圖書資訊學刊,9 (2),55-89。
    林南 (2007)。社會資本理論與研究簡介。社會科學論叢,11,1-32。政大社會系博士班學生劉育成謄稿,熊瑞梅教授修訂。
    邱誌勇 (2016)。實體與虛擬的並置參與:當代自造者運動的社群集結與想像。網路人類學專號(一)。考古人類學刊,85,83-108。
    洪堯泰 (2015)。FabLab及Maker Movement。StarUP@Taipei創業台北,創業大師專欄。取自https://www.startup.taipei/master_box/3425
    胡幼慧 (1996)。質性研究:理論、方法及本土女性主義研究實例。台北:巨流
    陳智凱 (2008)。社會資本與知識經濟競爭力。資訊管理學報,4,79-97。
    曾吉弘 (2014)。動手、學習、分享,自造者的天堂。Make:Technology on Your Time國際中文版,12。取自http://makezine.weebly.com/fablab-taipei.html
    黃雅信 (2016)。Maker自造者運動在台灣。取自https://medium.com/@yahsinhuangtw/maker
    楊素 (2015)。混搭玩心 滬台混血新車間。兩岸文創誌。取自http://tccanet.org.tw/article-889.html#.XTTHYSN963U
    萬俊毅、秦佳 (2011)。社會資本的內涵、測量、功能及應用。商業研究,408,8-13。
    道弗帝 (Dougherty, D.)、康拉德(Conrad, A.) (2018)。自由自造。(張家綺譯)。台北市:商周出版。(原著出版年:2016年)
    福山 (Fukuyama, F.) (2014)。信任:社會德性與經濟繁榮。(李宛蓉譯)。新北市:立緒文化。(原著出版年:1995年)
    劉麗惠 (2015)。自造運動熱潮掀起 翻轉台灣。貿易雜誌,286,28-33。
    鄭鴻旗 (2015)。回頭看maker運動開始到現在。取自http://www.taiwansig.tw/index.php
    鄭鴻旗 (2016)。關於台灣Maker運動發展,鄭鴻旗:Maker應可以為台灣土地改變些什麼。取自https://flipermag.com/2016/03/02/maker-3/
    賴明弘、高姿宜 (2017)。以核心策略觀點探討自造者空間業者之商業模式。科技管理學刊,322,1-30。
    Castells, M. (2000)。網路社會之崛起。(夏鑄九、王志弘等譯)。臺北:唐山出版社。(原著出版年:1996年)
    Cavalcanti, G. 2(013)。這是Hackerspace、Makerspace、TechShop,還是FabLab? (Make: Taiwan譯)。取自http://www.makezine.com.tw/make2599131456/hackerspacemakerspacetechshopfab
    Cheng, K. (2015)。混沌是一切的開始—Hackerspace。取自https://medium.com/@kevinphy/混沌是一切的開始-hackerspace-f23af5e 47247
    Cheng, K. (2013)。沙龍的歷史與轉化。取自https://krislcc.wordpress.com/2013/01/13/
    Make Faire官網(2019)。Make Faire簡介。取自http://www.makerfaire.org.tw/makerfaire.html?
    Make Taiwan (2015)。第二屆Fablab亞洲年會於臺北登場。取自http://www.makezine.com.tw/fablab/
    Mohammadi, G. (2015)。Make Faire何以在深圳佔有一席之地。(謝明珊譯)。取自http://makezine.weebly.com/make2599131456/maker-faire8
    Yin, R. K. (2001)。個案研究法。(尚榮安譯)。台北市:弘智文化。


    英文參考文獻

    Almond, G., & Verba, S. (1963). The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
    Babbie, E. (1989). The practice of social research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
    Becker, G. (1964). Human Capital. New York: Columbia University Press.
    Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D., & Mead, M. (1987). The case research strategy in studies of information systems Case Research. MIS quarterly, 11(3):369-386.
    Bourdieu, P. (1986). The Forms of Capital. In: Richardson, J., Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education.Westport, CT: Greenwood: 241-58.
    Branwye, G. (2015 June 15). An Insider’s Guide to Shenzhen Manufacturing. Retrieved from https://makezine.com/2015/06/15/making-in-shenzhen/
    Burt, R. S. (2001). Structural Holes versus Network Closure as Social Capital. In Nan Lin, Karen Cook & Ronald S. Burt eds., Social Capital: Theory and Research (pp. 31-56). New York: Walter de Gruyter, Inc.
    Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. The American Journal of Sociology 94. S95-S120.
    Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
    Cresswell, T. (2004). Place: a short introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.
    Denzin, N. K. (1989). Sociology. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 506(1), 171–172.
    Digital Social Innovation. (2017). Fablabs.io: The Fab Lab Platform Connecting a Network of Makers. Digital Social Innovation. Retrieved from https://digitalsocial.eu/blog/51/fablabs-io-the-fab-lab-platform-connecting-a-network-of-makers
    Dougherty, D. (2012). The Maker Movement, Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, 7 (3): 11-14.
    Durkheim E. (1982). The Rules of Sociological Method, New York: Free Press.
    Fukuyama, F. (1995). Social Capital and the Global Economy, Foreign Affairs, (745): 89-104.
    Fukuyama, F. (1999). The Great Disruption: Human Nature and the Reconstitution of Social Order, New York: Touchstone.
    Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Education research, an introduction. New York: Longman Publishers.
    Gantt, C. (2013, Mar 29). What is a Maker? What it really means to be a "Maker". Retrieved from https://www.tweaktown.com/articles/5301/what-is-a-maker-what-it-really-means-to-be-a-maker-/index.htm
    Giddens, A. (2000). The Third Way and its critics. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    Habermas, J. (1962). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. (Thomas, B. Trans.) MA: MIT Press.
    Hagel, J. III & Brown, J. S. (2006). Globalization & Innovation: Some Contrarian Perspectives. Prepared for the Annual Meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland January 25-30.
    Hagel, J., Brown, J. S., & Kulasooriya, D. (2014). A Movement in the Making. Deloitte University Press. Retrieved from https://www2.deloitte.com/insights/us/en/topics/emerging-technologies/a-movement-in-the-making.html
    Jones, G. A. (2014), Where's the capital? A geographical essay. The British Journal of Sociology, 65: 721-735.
    Jones, S. E. (2014).The Emergence of the Digital Humanities. NY: Routledge.
    Jorgensen, D. L., (1989). Participant Observation: A Methodology for Human Studies: Sage Publications. Newbury Park, Calif.
    Kay, A. (2006). Social Capital, the social economy and community development. Community Development Journal (412):160-173.
    Kay, A., J. Pearce, & M. Evans (2004). The Contribution of Social Capital in the Social Economy to Local Economic Development in Western Europe Research Project. Middlesex: Institute of Social Science Research, School of Social Science. Middlesex University.
    Kenneth, N. (2001), Trust, Social Capital, Civil Society, and Democracy. International Political Science Review. (222):201-214.
    La Porta, et al., (1997), Trust in Large Organization. American Economic Review. 87(2): 333-38.
    Leana, C. R. and Van Buren, H. J. (1999). Organizational Social Capital and Employment Practices. Academy of Management Review. 24: 538-555.
    Lesser, L. and Storck, J. (2001). Communities of practice and organizational performance. IBM Systems Journal. 40: 831-841.
    Lin, N. (1999). Building a Network Theory of Social Capital. Connections, (22): 28-51.
    Lin, N. (2001). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
    Lindtner, S., Greenspan, A., Li, D. (2015). Designed in Shenzhen: Shanzhai Manufacturing & Maker Entrepreneus. Retrieved from http://www.hackedmatter.com/output
    Lofland, J. & Lofland, L. H. (1984). Analysis Social Settings, 2nd edn, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
    Maker Media & Deloitte Center for the Edge. (2013). Impact of the maker movement: Notes from the Maker Impact Summit. Sebastopol, CA: Maker Media.
    Moilanen, J. (2012). Emerging hackerspaces - Peer-Production Generation. In: Hammouda I., Lundell B., Mikkonen T., Scacchi W. eds.,Open Source Systems: Long-Term Sustainability. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, 378. Berlin, Heidelberg.
    Merlo, S., (2014). The Year of 100 Maker Faires. Retrieved from https://makezine.com/2014/01/01/the-year-of-100-maker-faires/
    Nahapiet, J. & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social Capital , Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage, Academy of Management Review, 23(2): 242-266.
    Narayan, D. and Pritchett, L. (1999). Cents and Sociability: Household Income and Social Capital in Rural Tanzania. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 47(4): 871-897.
    Nee, V. & Nee, B. (1972). Longtime Californ’: A Documentary Study of an American Chinatown. United States. Pantheon Books.
    Phelps. E. (2013). Mass Flourishing: How Grassroots Innovation Created Jobs, Challenge, and Change. Princeton University Press.
    Portes A. (1998). Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Morden Sociology. In Annual Review of Sociology. 24: 1-24.
    Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
    Putnam R. D. (1995a). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy. 6(1): 65-78.
    Putnam R. D. (1995b). Tuning in, tuning out: The strange disappearance of social capital in America. PS: Political Science & Politics, 28(4): 664-683.
    Putnam, R. D. (1998). “Democracy in America at the End of the Twentieth Century,” in Dietrich Rueschemeyer, Marilyn Rueschemeyer and Bjorn Wittrock,eds., Participation and Democracy East and West: Comparisons and Interpretations, New York: M.E. Shape.
    Rosen, W. (2010). The Most Powerful Idea in the World: A Story of Steam, Industry, and Invention. University of Chicago Press.
    Sleigh, A., Stewart, H., Stokes, K. (2015). Open dataset of UK makerspaces: a user’s guide. Nesta. Retrieved from: https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/open-dataset-of-uk-makerspaces-a-users-guide/
    Van Holm, E. J. (2014). What are Makerspaces, Hackerspaces, and Fab Labs? Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2548211
    Von Hippel, E. (2007). Democratizing Innovation. The MIT Press. Wadsworth Publishing Company.
    Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
    Zak, J. & Knack, S. (2001). Trust and Growth. The Economic Journal. 111: 295-321.

    其他外文參考文獻
    Caussil, J. (2018). Comment Leroy Merlin prépare l'avenir avec ses Tech Shop. Retrieved from: https://www.lsa-conso.fr/comment-leroy-merlin-prepare-l-avenir-avec-ses-tech-shop,279942
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    科技管理與智慧財產研究所
    102364136
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0102364136
    Data Type: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/NCCU201901006
    Appears in Collections:[科技管理與智慧財產研究所] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    413601.pdf15081KbAdobe PDF0View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback