環境與永續發展的困境，是全球人類至今仍不斷面對且充滿挑戰的課題。這些問題的唯一解方，就是改變人類的行為。環境教育在臺灣發展已逾三十年，環境教育的學術領域中，除了課程教材教法之外，「親環境行為」與「環境素養」是主要的兩大研究題目。然而，改變人類的行為非常困難，除了那些能夠促成親環境行為的因子之外，近年來也有許多學者開始研究「親環境行為障礙」。本研究希望建立臺灣親環境行為背後的理論基礎，釐清環境素養在其中扮演的角色，希冀填補理論和實務當中的鴻溝，以補足環境行為學研究之缺口。本研究將嘗試以親環境行為障礙形成理論架構，解析親環境行為複雜之結構因子，以及探討環境素養在其中所扮演之角色。本研究設計了以親環境行為障礙影響親環境行為與環境素養之調節作用作為主軸的研究假設，並依據過去理論文獻建立了親環境行為障礙量表。為此，本研究設計包含有親環境行為障礙、親環境行為、環境素養的正式問卷之在臺灣各縣市發放，最終收回1,024份有效樣本。藉由調查問卷收回之數據進行包括描述性統計、差異分析、相關分析後，以多元線性迴歸分析、調節模型交互作用效果分析進行假設驗證。本研究結果顯示「個人親環境行為」受到了「制度因素障礙」、「環境知識障礙」、「優先權障礙」、「舊有行為模式障礙」的顯著負向影響，並以「優先權障礙」之路徑係數絕對值最高。「公共親環境行為」則受到了「社會文化因素障礙」、「情感涉入障礙」的顯著正向影響，以及「環境知識障礙」、「控制觀障礙」、「優先權障礙」與「舊有行為模式障礙」的負向影響。「情感涉入障礙」是影響「公共親環境行為」中路徑係數最高的變項。本研究藉由調節模型交互作用效果分析進行假設驗證的研究結果，證實了親環境行為障礙會對親環境行為有所影響；此外，環境素養能夠在親環境行為障礙中，針對親環境行為的影響中扮演調節作用的角色。並且透過不同的調節模型交互作用效果，揭示了親環境行為障礙對親環境行為的複雜影響，以及不同的環境素養所扮演著不同的調節變項角色。本研究彌補了親環境行為研究上的空白，在過往的知識與理論基礎上建立了新的觀點，以量化方式確立了親環境行為障礙對親環境行為的影響，並且證實了環境素養可以在其中進行調節作用。

The dilemma of environment and sustainable development is a problem that humans around the world continue to face and are full of challenges. The only solution toward these problems is to change human’s behaviors. Environmental education has been developed in Taiwan for more than 30 years. In the academic field of environmental education, I have detected that the course materials and teaching methods toward "pro-environmental behavior (PB)" and "environmental literacy" are the two main research topics recently. However, it is very difficult to change human's behaviors. In addition to those factors that can promote PB, many scholars have also begun to study "barriers to pro-environmental behavior (BPBs)" in recent years. This study hopes to establish the theory behind Taiwan's PB and to clarify the role of environmental literacy in it. This should be an important help to fill up this gap in this field. This research used environmental literacy as a framework to analyze the complex structure of PB and explore the role of barriers in PBs. This research developed a Scale for the BPBs, established a methodology for measuring BPBs, and implemented the entire surveys. Formal questionnaires including the BPBs, PB, and environmental literacy were distributed in various counties and cities in Taiwan, and 1,024 valid samples were eventually recovered. Descriptive statistics, variance analysis, and correlation analysis were performed on the data collected from the questionnaire, and then multiple linear regression analysis and adjustment model interaction effect analysis were used to test the hypothesis. The research results show that personal PB is significantly negatively affected by institutional factors, environmental knowledge, priority, and old behavioral patterns, and the absolute value of the path coefficient of priority obstacle is the highest. Public PBs were significantly positively affected by sociocultural barriers and affective involvement barriers, and negatively affected by environmental knowledge barriers, control view barriers, priority barriers, and old behavioral pattern barriers. Affective involvement disorder is the variable with the highest path coefficient in influencing public PB. The hypothesis-testing results of the interaction effect analysis of the moderating model confirmed that PB disorders have an impact on PB, and that environmental literacy can play a moderating role in the effects of BPBs on PBs. And the interaction effect of different moderating models revealed the complex influence of BPBs on PB, and the role of different moderator variables played by different environmental literacy. Finally, it shows that this study fills the gap in the study of BPBs, establishes a new perspective on the basis of past knowledge and theory, establishes the impact of BPBs on PB in a quantitative way, and confirms that environmental literacy can regulation in it.

中文部分
方偉達（2019）。環境教育：理論、實務與案例。臺北市：五南出版社。
王柏青、陳元泰（2018）。地方依附、環境態度與環境行為關係之研究。環境與管理研究，19（1），1-18。
王順美（2004）。社會變遷下的環境教育－綠色學校計畫。師大學報：教育類，49（1），159-170。
吳忠宏、林麗娟、鄭以芯、楊知衡、洪千雯（2016）。懷舊情感、地方依附與負責任環境行為關係之研究–以鹿港老街遊客為例。鄉村旅遊研究，9（2）， 1-23。
吳明隆（2005）。SPSS統計應用學習實務：問卷分析與應用統計。台北：知城數位。
游書豪、蔡執仲、鄭蕙玲（2016)。國中生選購瓶裝水所展現親環境行為之研究。環境教育研究，12（2），7-33。
張子超（2002）。九年一貫課程自然與生活科技學習領域環境價值之內容分析。環境教育學刊，1，83-93。
葉欣誠、吳燿任、劉湘瑤、于蕙清（2006）。我國國民小學階段防災素養建構之研究。2006年中華民國環境教育研討會論文集，201-210。
蔡清田（2011）。素養：課程改革的DNA。臺北市：高等教育。
蔡慧敏（2002）。島嶼公民環境素養概念及內涵分析。行政院國家科學委員會補助專題研究計畫成果報告（編號：NSC90-2511-S-003-074）。
潘淑蘭、周儒、吳景達（2017）。探究環境素養與影響環境行動之因子：以臺灣大學生為例。環境教育研究，13（1），35-65。
謝宗恒（2017）。探討社會資本與文化興趣對於地方情感與負責任環境行為關係之中介效果–以二結圳文化景觀之社區為例。戶外遊憩研究，30（3），47-76。
謝宗恒（2019）。新北市城鄉邊緣地帶之農耕體驗價值：兼論價值對地方情感與親環境行為影響。戶外遊憩研究， 32（2），1-37。
英文部分
Aarts, H., & Dijksterhuis, A. (2003). The silence of the library: Environment, situational norm, and social behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(1), 18-28. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.18
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action Control: From Cognition to Behavior (pp. 11-39). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Blake, J. (1999). Overcoming the ‘value‐action gap’ in environmental policy: Tensions between national policy and local experience. Local Environment, 4(3), 257-278. doi:10.1080/13549839908725599
Bloom, B., Engelhart, M., Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook I: The classification of educational goals. In: New York: David McKay.
Boehmer-Christiansen, S., & Skea, J. (1991). Acid politics: environmental and energy policies in Britain and Germany: Belhaven Press.
Brown, L. M., Haun, J. N., & Peterson, L. (2014). A Proposed Disaster Literacy Model. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, 8(3), 267-275. doi:10.1017/dmp.2014.43
Chao, Y.-L. (2012). Predicting people’s environmental behaviour: theory of planned behaviour and model of responsible environmental behaviour. Environmental Education Research, 18(4), 437-461. doi:10.1080/13504622.2011.634970
Chawla, L. (1998). Significant Life Experiences Revisited: A Review of Research on Sources of Environmental Sensitivity. The Journal of Environmental Education, 29(3), 11-21. doi:10.1080/00958969809599114
Chawla, L. (1999). Life Paths Into Effective Environmental Action. The Journal of Environmental Education, 31(1), 15-26. doi:10.1080/00958969909598628
Chiang, Y.-T., Fang, W.-T., Kaplan, U., & Ng, E. (2019). Locus of Control: The Mediation Effect between Emotional Stability and Pro-Environmental Behavior. Sustainability, 11(3). doi:10.3390/su11030820
Diekmann, A., & Preisendörfer, P. (1992). Persónliches umweltverhalten: Diskrepanzen zwischen Anspruch und Wirklichkeit. [Ecology in everyday life: Inconsistencies between environmental attitudes and behavior.]. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 44(2), 226-251.
Dietz, T., Stern, P. C., & Guagnano, G. A. (1998). Social Structural and Social Psychological Bases of Environmental Concern. Environment and Behavior, 30(4), 450-471. doi:10.1177/001391659803000402
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1977). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research.
Fuhrer, U. (2013). Ökologisches Handeln als sozialer Prozess: Ecological action as a social process: Springer-Verlag.
Gagnon Thompson, S. C., & Barton, M. A. (1994). Ecocentric and anthropocentric attitudes toward the environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 14(2), 149-157. doi: 10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80168-9
Gifford, R., & Nilsson, A. (2014). Personal and social factors that influence pro-environmental concern and behaviour: A review. International Journal of Psychology, 49(3), 141-157. doi:10.1002/ijop.12034
Grob, A. (1991). Meinung-verhalten-umwelt: ein psychologisches ursachennetz-modell umweltgerechten Verhaltens: Peter Lang.
Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. In: University of Kansas, KS.
Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R., & Tomera, A. N. (1987). Analysis and Synthesis of Research on Responsible Environmental Behavior: A Meta-Analysis. The Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1-8. doi:10.1080/00958964.1987.9943482
Hungerford, H. R., & Peyton, B. R. (1976). Teaching environmental education: J. Weston Walch.
Hungerford, H. R., Peyton, R. B., & Wilke, R. J. (1980). Goals for curriculum development in environmental education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 11(3), 42-47.
Hungerford, H. R., & Tomera, A. N. (1985). Science methods for the elementary school. Champaign, IL: Stipes Publishing Co, 421-431.
Hungerford, H. R., & Volk, T. L. (1990). Changing learner behavior through environmental education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 21(3), 8-21.
Jensen, B. B., & Schnack, K. (1997). The action competence approach in environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 3(2), 163-178. doi:10.1080/1350462970030205
Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The Application of Electronic Computers to Factor Analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 141-151. doi:10.1177/001316446002000116
Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. psychometrika, 39(1), 31-36.
Kempton, W., Boster, J. S., & Hartley, J. A. (1996). Environmental values in American culture. Cambridge, MA: mit Press.
Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the Gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239-260. doi:10.1080/13504620220145401
Krajhanzl, J. (2010). Environmental and proenvironmental behavior. School and Health, 21(1), 251-274.
Kurisu, K. (2015). Pro-environmental behaviors. Tokyo: Springer Japan.
Lehmann, J. (1999). Befunde empirischer Forschung zu Umweltbildung und Umweltbewusstsein (Vol. 4): Springer.
Liao, Y., Ho, S. S., & Yang, X. (2015). Motivators of Pro-Environmental Behavior: Examining the Underlying Processes in the Influence of Presumed Media Influence Model. Science Communication, 38(1), 51-73. doi:10.1177/1075547015616256
Liobikienė, G., & Poškus, M. S. (2019). The Importance of Environmental Knowledge for Private and Public Sphere Pro-Environmental Behavior: Modifying the Value-Belief-Norm Theory. Sustainability, 11(12). doi:10.3390/su11123324
McCarty, J. A., & Shrum, L. J. (2001). The Influence of Individualism, Collectivism, and Locus of Control on Environmental Beliefs and Behavior. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 20(1), 93-104. doi:10.1509/jppm.20.1.93.17291
Moisander, J. (1998). Motivation for ecologically oriented consumer behaviour. Paper presented at the Workshop Proceedings, March. The European Science Foundation (ESF) TERM (Tackling Environmental Resource Management Phase II 1998–2000). http://www. lancs. ac. uk/users/scistud/esf/lind2. htm.
NAAEE. (2011). Developing a Framework for Assessing Environmental Literacy.
Newhouse, N. (1990). Implications of attitude and behavior research for environmental conservation. The Journal of Environmental Education, 22(1), 26-32.
Owens, S. (2000). ‘Engaging the Public’: Information and Deliberation in Environmental Policy. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 32(7), 1141-1148. doi:10.1068/a3330
Paulhus, D. (1983). Sphere-specific measures of perceived control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(6), 1253.
Pepper, M., & Leonard, R. (2016). How Ecotheological Beliefs Vary Among Australian Churchgoers and Consequences for Environmental Attitudes and Behaviors. Review of Religious Research, 58(1), 101-124. doi:10.1007/s13644-015-0234-1
Pettus, A. M., & Giles, M. B. (1987). Personality characteristics and environmental attitudes. Population and Environment, 9(3), 127-137. doi:10.1007/BF01259303
Preuss, S. (1991). Umweltkatastrophe Mensch: Über unsere Grenzen und Möglichkeiten, ökologisch bewusst zu handeln: Asanger.
Rajecki, D. (1982). Attitudes: themes and advances. Sunderland, MA. In: Sinauer Associates, Inc.
Roth, C. E. (1968). Curriculum Overview for Developing Environmentally Literate Citizens.
Roth, C. E. (1992). Environmental Literacy: Its Roots, Evolution and Directions in the 1990s.
Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In B. Leonard (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. Volume 10, pp. 221-279): Academic Press.
Seiders, K., Voss, G. B., Godfrey, A. L., & Grewal, D. (2007). SERVCON: development and validation of a multidimensional service convenience scale. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35(1), 144-156. doi:10.1007/s11747-006-0001-5
Shamos, M. H. (1989). Views of scientific literacy in elementary school science programs: Past, present, and future. Scientific Literacy.
Sherkat, D. E., & Ellison, C. G. (2007). Structuring the Religion-Environment Connection: Identifying Religious Influences on Environmental Concern and Activism. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 46(1), 71-85. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2007.00341.x
Stern, P. C. (2000). New Environmental Theories: Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior. Journal of social issues, 56(3), 407-424. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00175
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T. D., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L. (1999). A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Human ecology review, 6(2), 81-97.
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., & Kalof, L. (1993). Value Orientations, Gender, and Environmental Concern. Environment and Behavior, 25(5), 322-348. doi:10.1177/0013916593255002
Taber, K. S. (2018). The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273-1296. doi:10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
UNEP. (1978). Declaration of The Tbilisi Intergovernmental Conference on Environmental Education. Intergovernmental Conference on Environmental Education, ED/MD/49.
Veisi, H., Lacy, M., Mafakheri, S., & Razaghi, F. (2019). Assessing environmental literacy of university students: A case study of Shahid Beheshti University in Iran. Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 18(1), 25-42. doi:10.1080/1533015X.2018.1431163