本研究旨在探析公共圖書館之成效與社會價值，並以嘉義縣新港閱讀館為例。本研究分析的層面包含圖書館使用者自新港閱讀館服務中所獲得之效益、圖書館使用者將新港閱讀館作為場所使用的類型，以及新港閱讀館中所積累之社會資本。

本研究採用問卷調查法，自2014年5月6日至7月15日間於新港閱讀館發放問卷，總共回首387份有效問卷。本研究根據問卷結果進行分析，提出五項結論：（ㄧ）新港閱讀館使用者以該社區居民為主，學生族群為眾，女性多於男性，使用時間以週末為高峰；（二）新港閱讀館使用者以「借還書」、「課業學習（自習）」、「查找資料」等傳統圖書館服務為主要使用目的；（三）新港閱讀館對使用者生活影響可歸類為「生活資訊」、「文化活動」、「工作相關」以及「閱讀與學習」四種類型。（四）新港閱讀館使用者將該館作為廣場、遇見多元群眾場所、公共領域、聯合舉辦活動，以及後設聚會場所等五種類型之聚會場所，其中以作為低緊密度聚會場所較為頻繁，有利於橋接型社會資本的積累；（五）新港閱讀館分別對於參與該館社團組織之使用者，及與家人一同前往該館之使用者間的結合型社會資本積累有幫助。本研究結果顯示，使用者之使用頻率、獲益之成效、將新港閱讀館作為各種聚會場所，以及網絡中社會資本的程度間有正向的統計顯著關係。

本研究結果指出新港閱讀館之服務與空間有其社會價值，除了圖書館傳統核心服務外，新港閱讀館作為聚會場所有利於穩定社會網絡，深化信任，達成最低限度之價值與規範，進而形成與累積社會資本。在個人層面上，新港閱讀館對使用者生活有幫助；在網絡關係上，新港閱讀館亦有利建立關係或強化既有關係，而兩者皆有利於深化社會資本，顯示實體公共圖書館仍有其不可抹滅的社會價值。

根據研究結果，提出建議如下：（一）強化公共圖書館與使用者間的網絡關係，藉由社會網絡的建立與互動，加深對彼此的信任，讓圖書館成為家與工作之外的第三場所。（二）為與家人同行的使用者設計活動，增加此類型使用者與其他人互動、建立連結的機會，有利橋接型社會資本的形成（三）依據不同類型的使用者提供相對應的空間及服務，讓使用者們各得其所而不致相互干擾。（四）優化使用者常用之服務項目，同時設計活動推廣目前使用者較少利用的圖書館服務，可使資源得到有效利用，也有利於增加圖書館在使用者心中的重要性。

This study aims at exploring the perceived outcomes and societal value of public library through case study of Singang library. This study analyses the aspects that users benefits from library services, to what extent Singang library users use library as meeting places, and the social capital accumulated through use of the library.

Quantitative research is applied in this study. Questionnaires were distributed to library users from 6th May to 15th July 2014. The data are based on sample of 387 Singang library users, ranging in age from 7 to 64.
The result shows that Singang library users benefit from library services in 22 areas in daily life. The benefits in 22 areas of daily life were collapsed through factor analysis into four major outcome types: daily life information, cultural activities, work related, and reading and learning. For analysis of how users use library as meeting places, this study shows that Singang library would be used as five types of meeting places: square, a place for meeting diverse people, public sphere, joint activities and metameeting place. Singang library as meeting places contributes to breed bridging social capital in users network, especially when the library is used as low intensive meeting place. There are also bonding social capital among users who participate in library clubs and users who visit with their family. This study analyses the relationship among library use frequency, perceived outcomes, library as meeting place, and social capital. The result shows that the four variables are positive correlated.

Based on the results of this study, there are suggestions for Singang library and public libraries. First, making Singang library as an informal meeting place, which is a breeding ground of social capital, by strengthening network among users and library increases the trust among the network. Second, organizing activities aim at users visit with family in order to create possibilities for them to build connections with others, which contribute to create bridging social capital. Third, arranging library space and services according to the purposes and needs of the users. Forth, offering better services that are frequently used and promoting services that are less used so that will make public library a more important place for users.

一、中文文獻
Halpern, D.（2008）。社會資本（黃克先、黃惠茹譯）。臺北市：巨流圖書公司印行。（原著出版年：2005）
Webster, F.（2004）。資訊社會理論（馮建三譯）。臺北市：遠流出版事業股份有限公司。（原著出版年：1995）
內政部（1999）。社區發展工作綱要。內政部臺八八內中社字第8814454號令修正（民國88年12月14日）。檢自：http://sowf.moi.gov.tw/06/law/10.htm
立法院（2001）。圖書館法。華總一義字第 9000009320 號令發布（民國90年1月17日）。上網日期：2015年3月7日，檢自：http://www.ncl.edu.tw/public/Attachment/7121310405471.pdf。
江明修（2004）。充實社會資本之研究。臺北市：行政院經濟建設委員會。
吳明隆（2009）。SPSS操作與應用-問卷統計分析實務。臺北市：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
吳美清（1996）。公共圖書館在社區總體營造中之角色與功能。臺北市立圖書館館訊，14(2)，33-43。
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，1(1)，1-32。
林南（Lin, N.）（2005）。社會資本（林祐聖、葉欣怡譯）。臺北市：弘智文化事業有限公司。（原著出版年：2001）
林振春（1996）。鄉鎮圖書館在社區總體營造中的角色。臺北市立圖書館館訊，14(2)，4-11。
邱皓政（2006）。量化研究與統計分析-SPSS中文視窗版資料分析範例解析。臺北市：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
財團法人新港文教基金會（2008）。新港微微笑：新港文教基金會20週年回顧專輯。嘉義縣：財團法人新港文教基金會。
黃源協、劉素珍、莊俐昕、林信廷（2010）。社區社會資本與社區發展關聯性之研究。公共行政學報，34，29-75。
新港鄉戶政事務所（2015）。村里鄰人口數。上網日期：2015年3月7日，檢自：http://singang-hro.cyhg.gov.tw/population/index.asp?Parser=99,6,37
游常山（2013）。推祖孫共讀，把圖書館當客廳。天下雜誌，535，168-169。
葉乃靜、賴鼎銘（2004）。從圖書館事業的盲點綜論圖書館員的權威失落及自處之道。在王振鵠教授八秩榮慶論文集，（頁131-143）。臺北市：臺灣學生書局。
韓乾（2012）。研究方法原理。臺北市：五南。
二、英文文獻
Aab#westeur057#, S., & Audunson, R. (2012). Use of library space and the library as place. Library & Information Science Research, 34(2), 138-149.
Aab#westeur057#, S., Audunson, R., & Vårheim, A. (2010). How do public libraries function as meeting places. Library & Information Science Research, 32 (1), 16-26.
Audunson, R. (2005). The public library as a meeting place in a multicultural and digital context: The necessity of low-intensive meeting-places. Journal of Documentation, 61(3), 429-441.
Audunson, R., Varheim, A., Abo#westeur057#, S., & Holm, E. D. (2007). Public libraries, social capital, and low intensive meeting places. Information Research, 12(4). Retrieved from http://www.informationr.net/ir/12-4/colis20.html
Becker, S., Crandall, M. D., Fisher, K. E., Kinney, B., Landry, C., & Rocha, A. (2010). Opportunity for all: How the American public benefits from Internet access at U.S. libraries. Washington, DC: Institute of Museum and Library Services.
Berndtson, M. (2013, August). Public libraries and placemaking. Paper presented at the IFLA World Library and Information Congress: 79th IFLA General Conference and Assembly, Singapore. Retrieved from http://library.ifla.org/224/
Bertot, J. C., & McClure, C. R. (2003). Outcomes assessment in the networked environment: Research questions, issues, considerations and moving forward. Library Trends, 51(4), 590-613.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (pp. 241-258). New York, NY: Greenwood.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95-S120.
Deutsche, R. (2012). The question of public space. Retrieved from http://iwalewapublicspace.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/rosalyn-deutsche-_-the-question-of-_public-space_.pdf
Evjen, S., & Audunson, R. (2009). The complex library: Do the public’s attitudes represent a barrier to institutional change in public libraries? New Library World, 110(3/4), 161-174.
Fisher, K. E., Saxton, M. L., Edwards, P. M., & Mai, J. E. (2007). Seattle public library as place: Reconceptualizing space, community, and information at the central library. In J. E. Buschman & G. J. Leckie (Eds.), The library as place: History, community, and culture (pp. 135-160). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Giddens, A. (2000). The third way and its critics. Maiden, MA: Polity Press.
Given, L. M., & Leckie, G. J. (2003). “Sweeping” the library: Mapping the social activity space of the public library. Library & Information Science Research, 25(2003), 365-385.
Goulding, A. (2009). Engaging with community engagement: Public libraries and citizen involvement. New Library World, 110(1/2), 37-51.
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.
Habermas, J. (1974). The public sphere: An encyclopedia article. New German Critique, 3, 49-55.
Hanifan, L. J. (1916). The rural school community center. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 67, 130-138.
Harris, C. (2007). Libraries with lattes: The new third place. Aplis, 20(4), 145-152.
Huysmans, F., & Oomes, M. (2012, August). Measuring the public library’s societal value: A methodological research program. Paper presented at the IFLA World Library and Information Congress: 78th IFLA General Conference and Assembly, Helsinki, Finland. Retrieved from http://conference.ifla.org/past/ifla78/76-huysmans-en.pdf
International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. (2009, August). Satellite Meetings. IFLA World Library and Information Congress: 75th IFLA General Conference and Assembly, Milan, Italy. Retrieved from http://conference.ifla.org/past/2009/satellite-en.htm
International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions/United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization. (1994). Public library manifesto. Retrieved from http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s8/unesco/eng.htm
Johnson, C. A. (2010). Do public libraries contribute to social capital? A preliminary investigation into the relationship. Library & Information Science Research, 32(2), 147-155.
Johnson, C. A. & Griffis, M.R. (2009). A place where everybody knows your name? Investigating the relationship between public libraries and social capital. Canadian Journal of Information & Library Sciences, 33(3/4), 159–191.
Kretzmann, J. P., & McKnight, J. L. (1993). Building communities from the inside out: A path toward finding and mobilizing a community’s assets. Evanston, IL: Institute for Policy Research.
Leckie, G. J., & Hopkins, J. (2002). The public place of central libraries: Findings from Toronto and Vancouver. Library Quarterly, 72(3), 326-372.
Linn, M. (2013, April). Seating sweeps: An innovative research method to learn about how our patrons use the library. Paper presented at the Association of College and Research Libraries, Indianapolis, IN. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/conferences/confsandpreconfs/2013/papers/Linn_Seating.pdf
Most, L. R. (2011). The rural public library as place: A theoretical analysis. Advances in Library Administration and Organization, 30, 51-149.
Online Computer Library Center. (2012a). Libraries in the Netherlands: A snapshot of priorities & perspectives. Retrieved from http://www.oclc.org/reports/nl-libraries.en.html
Online Computer Library Center. (2012b). Libraries in the U.S.: A snapshot of priorities & perspectives. Retrieved from http://www.oclc.org/reports/us-libraries.en.html
Online Computer Library Center. (2012c). Libraries in the UK: A snapshot of priorities & perspectives. Retrieved from http://www.oclc.org/reports/uk-libraries.en.html
Oldenburg, R. (1989). The great good place: Cafes, coffee shops, bookstores, bars, hair salons, and other hangouts at the heart of a community. New York, NY: Marlowe.
Oldenburg, R. (2001). Celebrating the third place: Inspiring stories about the "Great Good Places" at the heart of our communities. New York, NY: Marlowe.
Poll, R. (2012). Can we quantify the library’s influence? Creating an ISO standard for impact assessment. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 13(2), 121-130.
Poll, R., & Payne, P. (2006). Impact measures for libraries and information services. Library Hi Tech, 24(4), 547-562.
Ptacek, B. (2013). Place: Bill Ptacek. In J. Janes (Ed.), Library 2020: Today's leading visionaries describe tomorrow's library. Maryland, MD: The Scarecrow Press, Inc.
Putnam, R. D., & Feldstein, L. M. (2003). Better together: Restoring the American community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Putnam, R. D. (1995). Tuning in, tuning out: The strange disappearance of social capital in America. Political Science and Politics, 28(4), 664-683.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks.
Rooney-Browne, C., & McMenemy, D. (2010). Public libraries as impartial spaces in a consumer society: Possible, plausible, desirable? New Library World, 111(11/12), 455-467.
Rudd, P. D. (2000). Documenting the difference: Demonstrating the value of libraryes through outcome measurement. Perspectives on Outcome Based Evaulation for Libraries and Museums, (pp. 16-24). Washington, DC: Institution of Museum and Library Services. Retrieved from http://www.imls.gov/assets/1/workflow_staging/assetmanager/214.pdf
State Library of New South Wales. (2000). A safe place to go: Libraries and social capital. Sydney, Australia: University of Technology.
State Library of Victoria. (2005). The vital contribution of Victoria’s public libraries: A research report for the library board of Victoria and the Victorian public library network. Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.slv.vic.gov.au/about/information/pu blications/policies_reports/plu_lbc.html
Shuman, B. A. (1997). Beyond the library of the future. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
Stimson, R., Western, J., Baum, S., & van Gellecum, Y. (2003). Measuring community strength and social capital. Regional Studies, 39(8), 1095-1109.
Svendsen, G. L. H. (2013). Public libraries as breeding grounds for bonding, bridging and institutional social capital. Sociologia Ruralis, 53(1), 52-73.
Urban Library Council. (2011). Library priority: Community-civic engagement. ULC Leadership Briefs, (pp. 1-4). Retrieved from http://www.urbanlibraries.org/filebin/pdfs/ULC_Leadership_Brief_II_Full_4Pages.pdf
Vakkari, P., & Serola, S. (2012). Perceived outcomes of public libraries. Library and Information Science Research, 34(2012), 37-44.
Vakkari, P., Aab#westeur057#, S., Audunson, R., Huysmans, F., & Oomes, M. (2014). Perceived outcomes of public libraries in Finland, Norway and the Netherlands. Journal of Documentation, 70(5), 927-944.
Vårheim. (2007). Social capital and public libraries: The need for research. Library& Information Science Research, 29, 416-428.
Wiegand, W. A. (1999). Tunnel vision and blind spots: What the past tells us about the present; reflections on the twentieth-century history of American librarianship. The Library Quarterly, 69(1), 1-32.
Wiegand, W. A. (2003a). Broadening our perspectives. The Library Quarterly,73(1), v-x.
Wiegand, W. A. (2003b). To reposition a research agenda: What American studies can teach the LIS community about the library in the life of the user. The Library Quarterly,73(4), 369-382.
Wiegand, W. A. (2011). Moore library of Lexington, Michigan, 1903-1953. The Library Quarterly, 81(3), 251-276.
Zukin, S. (1995). The cultures of cities. Cambridge, UK: Blackwell.