本研究以臺北市十大環保社區為對象，進行個案了解。目的在於
了解社區進行環境行動的現況與影響因素。本研究採質性研究，以訪
談社區領袖做為主要收集資料的方法。經由一連串的資料分析與詮釋
，獲得以下的結論：
壹、環境行動方面
一、受訪社區所採取的環境行動，大部分集中於環境清潔、垃圾處理
、綠化美化與資源回收，只有少數社區舉辦相關的環境教育課程
或活動。若依Peyton（1977）的分類，則大部分屬於生態管理以
及說服，極少採用消費者主義、政治行動與法律行動。
二、環境行動的進行方式以民生需求活動（無居民參與或有居民參與
）最多，特別是國宅社區多為無居民參與之民生需求活動。　
貳、NAPO-model 與影響因素
一、社區推動環境行動的相關因子可以需求－資產－過程－結果【
NAPO- model(Need-Asset-Process-Outcome)】為主軸的方式分
析，形成一模式圖。受訪社區的NAPO-model都充滿了差異點，難
以合併，唯有公部門住宅社區其型態較為類似。
二、各受訪社區推動環境行動的影響因子分析結果：
１．需求方面：受訪社區中因政府刺激與壓力以及社區環境問題嚴重
而採取行動者最多，其次為對社區環境品質的期許，對大環境覺
知而採取環境行動的只有興家社區。　　
２．資產方面：社區媽媽與退休老人是受訪社區常提到的人力資產，
而經費來源主要為居民繳交、停車場收益（國宅）、區公所補助
等。區公所或民間團體則是少數社區的環保資訊來源。
３．過程方面：受訪社區資源的運用最普遍使用的社區內資源是聘工
與義工隊。並且以說服為改變居民行為的主要策略，其次為群眾
壓力、身教，少數社區利用預防性措施、罰款或正向鼓勵的方法
。
４．結果方面：所有受訪社區採取環境行動後均能使硬體環境得以改
善，然而只有少數社區能具有組織形成或成長、居民參與或認同
的結果迴饋。

This research studies the actions taken by ten
communities who were awarded with "environmental community"
by the Taipei City in 1994. The researchers adopted in-depth
interview with these community leaders to collect their
action experiences at community level. A
need-asset-process-outcome model was generated to help the
content analysis. The result are listed below.
1.The environmental actions taken by majority of interviewed
communities were cleaning environment, planting flowers
around their house, and recycling. Only a few communities
have already held environmental education activities for
their children. So far, these actions belong to the
categories of "eco-management" and "persuation".
2.The cause of taking actions in these communities were due
to their perception of the serious environmental problems
in their communities or compliance with the government's
expection. Several communities took actions because they
hoped to have a good quality of environment.
3.The community leaders usually recruited housewives and
retired people to take the actions. The budget cane from
parking fee, cleaning fee or funding of local governments.
Few communites searched assistance from NGO or local
government for information support.
4.A few communities involved residents in the cleaning and
planting work, while the other hired labors to do these.
The communities leaders corrected residents' unfriendly
environmental behaviors through group pressure, modeling,
punishment and reward system.
5.The environmental quality in these ten communities
improved after the actions. In several communities,
community organizations grew up and more residents
recognized the value of their own communities during the
environmental actions.