永續發展是一種目標也是一種過程，當我們要在永續發展落實在日常生活中，從「社區」尺度著手，可能是一個較符合人們行動模式的方式。蟾蜍山聚落位於台北市大安區，在2016年劃定為文化景觀，聚落發展提出以「人與生態共生的新眷村永續聚落」作為目標。文化景觀是人類與其自然環境交互作用下的多樣性表現形式。在文化景觀的基礎概念下，文化景觀與在地居民生活文化息息相關，保存與維護的過程勢必也須在地居民的參與。
　　本研究以台北市蟾蜍山文化景觀為單一個案研究對象，採文獻蒐集、參與式觀察，及訪談收集研究資料。對於居民而言，當居住的環境通過成為文化景觀，在地轉型發展成為必然之事。本研究旨在探究社區如何參與文化景觀保存並與之相互影響、形塑的過程，也藉由蟾蜍山的案例思考地方文化、環境與人共生的永續未來願景。透過文獻了解，文化景觀與社區參與、永續發展的關係相當緊密，文化景觀的保存架構中，不僅重視文化保存的價值，也強調著社區的參與與永續發展。
　　研究結果顯示，在地居民認為蟾蜍山文化景觀的內涵包含在地歷史與文化的基礎、良好的生態環境、人與環境共生的日常生活。社區居民在聚落保存轉向文化景觀發展的參與過程中，逐漸展現社區自主的力量，在參與的醞釀之下逐漸形成社區組織台北市大安區社區發展協會，而後將文化景觀發展的部分目標作為社區發展目標。聚落的發展與居民對於未來的想像呼應著永續發展的願景，尤其展現在社會層面上，聚落綿密的社區網絡，成為實踐在地永續的強大力量。

Sustainable development is a goal and it is also a process. While we want to implement sustainable development in our daily life, starting from the "community" scale may be a way to be more in line with behavior patterns of people. Toad Hill Settlement is located in Daan District, Taipei City. After Toad Hill Settlement was designated as a cultural landscape in 2016, the residents of the settlement initiated “a sustainable settlement of the symbiosis between people and the community“ for the brand-new military village. Cultural landscape is the diversity manifestations under the interaction between people and their natural environment. Based on the concept of cultural landscape, cultural landscape is closely related to the life and culture of local residents. Therefore, the process of preservation and maintenance must also involve the participation of local residents.
　　The study takes the cultural landscape of Toad Hill in Taipei City as a single-case study object. Literature reviews, participatory Observations and interviews were used to collect research data. For residents, when the living environment becomes a cultural landscape, local transformation and development have become inevitable. This study aims to explore how the community is involved in cultural landscape preservation, the process of interacting and shaping with it; furthermore, through the case of Toad Hill to think about the vision for a sustainable future with local culture, the symbiosis between environment and people. From literature, I understand the close relationship between cultural landscape, community participation and sustainable development. That is, the preservation structure of cultural landscape not only pays attention to the value of cultural preservation, but also emphasizes the community participation and sustainable development.
　　The study results have shown that local residents believe that the connotations of the cultural landscape of Toad Hill including local history and culture, a good ecological environment, and the daily life of the symbiosis between people and their environment. When the settlement preservation turns to the process of participation of cultural landscape development, community residents gradually demonstrate the power of community autonomy. Under the brewing of participation, the community gradually forms an organization called Taipei City Daan District Community Development Association. And then the association takes part of the target for the cultural landscape development as that of community development. The development of the community and the residents' imagination of the future echo the desire for the vision of sustainable development, especially at the social level, the dense community network of the settlement has become a powerful force for the practice of local sustainability.

丁雪茵、鄭伯壎、任金剛（1996）。質性研究中研究者的角色與主觀性. 本土心理學研究，6，354-376
文化部文化資產局（2016)。蟾蜍山。取自https://nchdb.boch.gov.tw/assets/overview/culturalLandscape/20160825000001
文化資產保存法（1982年，5月26日；2016修訂）
文化資產保存法施行細則（1984年，2月22日；2017修訂）
王淳熙（2014）。文化遺產領域視野下的文化景觀保存維護與管理。國立成功大學建築學系博士論文，台南市。 取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/j3h6m9
好蟾蜍工作室（2020）。勿以「佔用戶」污名化台灣農業「活歷史」。取自https://www.facebook.com/GongguanSettlements/posts/pfbid02Jzb86sbpNtViFJDyWozRE6FmQ6vHhpbLTTvpotDCBwrewa7iFje8Dv6NnS9N1hwkl
好蟾蜍工作室（2020）。洋菇、金針菇之父…蟾蜍山好多活歷史。取自https://www.facebook.com/GongguanSettlements/posts/pfbid02g6cgaNfqYYpRQtn8vkPz6NRmNPJXuB6wCU2WD7CMfhwBtiCrY2XrupvxMufT6N9Dl
呂昀陞（2019）。臺灣菇類產業發展概況。取自https://theme.coa.gov.tw/theme_list.php?theme=storyboard&id=415
李永展（2007）。都市型永續社區之準則：國土永續發展之新趨勢。應用倫理研究通訊，41，48-57
李光中（2007年7月31日)。世界遺產系列(1)—文化景觀的緣起和內涵。取自 https://np.cpami.gov.tw/%E5%85%AC%E5%9C%92%E5%B0%88%E6%AC%84/%E4%B8%BB%E9%A1%8C%E5%A0%B1%E5%B0%8E/472-2009-07-22-15-57-42.html
李光中（2009）。文化地景與社區發展。科學發展，439，38-45
李光中（2014）社區參與世界遺產經營：國際相關政策的緣起與演進。文化資產保存學刊，29，45-54
李光中、許子翊、江紹瑜、藍姆路·卡造、李柏賢（2015）。我國文化景觀保存維護策略—以持續作用的文化景觀為例。文化資產保存學刊，34，66-92
李思薇（2019）。蟾蜍山保存歷程中的社會參與。文資學報，12，1-31
林一宏（2011）。臺灣文化資產保存歷程概要。國立臺灣博物館學刊，64(1)，75-106
林郁文（2015）《蟾蜍山聚落保存運動：非正式聚落的公共性與邊界辯證》，國立臺灣大學建築與城鄉研究所碩士論文。台北市
洪如玉（2010）。全球化時代教育改革與發展的另類思考: 地方本位教育。幼兒教保研究，5，73-82
康旻杰（2015）。聚落文化資源基礎調查計畫－以臺北市蟾蜍山聚落為例。文化部文化資產局委託
莊春萍、張建新（2011）。地方認同：環境心理學視角下的分析。心理科學進展，19，1387-1396
陳依靈（2017）。「社區發展」到「永續社區」之探討。社區發展季刊，158，328-338
傅朝卿（2006）。文化資產執行手冊。行政院文建會
傅朝卿（2015）。以2014 佛羅倫斯宣言倡導的文化遺產保存步趨探討台灣平埔原住民族群文化景觀之策略－以高雄地區西拉雅族為例。科技部專題研究計畫計畫編號：MOST-104-2410-H-006-115-MY2
曾旭正（2014）。營造社區公眾生活與公共空間的基本課題。建築學報，87，159-174
鈕文英、吳裕益（2015）。單一個案研究法: 研究設計與後設分析。心理出版社
黃源協、莊俐昕、劉素珍（2011）。社區社會資本的促成、阻礙因素及其發展策略: 社區領導者觀點之分析。行政暨政策學報，52，87-130
黃馨儀、共伴計畫專案（2021）。《文化：實施2030永續方針》－文化永續的現在進行式。取自https://si.taiwan.gov.tw/Home/CitizensSay/View/839
廖世璋、錢學陶（2002）。古蹟保存的文化認同之探討-以台北市為例。都市與計畫，29(3)，471-489
榮芳杰（2009）。2009年「世界遺產名錄」的趨勢觀察。取自https://twh.boch.gov.tw/taiwan/learn_detail.aspx?id=14
臺北市政府都市發展局（2018）。都市計畫前期公民參與示範計畫（都市計畫擬定階段民眾參與）－以大安區蟾蜍山聚落為例 第三次公民參與會議簡報。取自https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ffv7S9e882Ll1qy6gqWmOagQw1YxT8tF/view
蕭瑞麟（2020). 不用數字的研究: 質性研究的思辯脈絡。五南圖書出版股份有限公司
聶筱秋、胡中凡、唐筱雯、葉冠伶(譯) （2003）。環境心理學（原作者：Bell, P.A. et al.）。臺北市：桂冠圖書股份有限。（原著出版年：1978）
Arnstein, S. R. （1969）. A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of planners, 35(4), 216-224.
Arnstein, S. R.（1969）. A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of planners, 35(4), 216-224
Chaskin, R. J.（2001）. Building community capacity: A definitional framework and case studies from a comprehensive community initiative. Urban affairs review, 36(3), 291-323.
Cittaslow UK （n.d）。Retrieved from https://www.cittaslow.org.uk/about-us/#philosophy
Coleman, J. S. （1994）. Foundations of social theory. Harvard university press.
Desa, U. N. （2016）. Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development.
Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E.（1968）. The discovery of grounded theory; strategies for qualitative research. Nursing research, 17(4), 364.
Home Office (2004). Firm Foundations: The Government’s Framework for Community Capacity Building, London: Civil Renewal Unit, Home Office.
Kay, A.（2006）. Social capital, the social economy and community development. Community Development Journal, 41(2), 160-173
Lane, B., & Dorfman, D.（1997）. Strengthening Community Networks: The Basis for Sustainable Community Renewal. Program Report.
Moore, R. L., & Graefe, A. R.（1994）. Attachments to recreation settings: The case of rail‐trail users. Leisure Sciences, 16(1), 17-31.
Presidency, U. K. （2005, December）. Bristol Accord. In Conclusions of Ministerial Informal Meeting on Sustainable Communities in Europe, Bristol
Proshansky, H. M. (1978). The city and self-identity. Environment and Behavior, 10(2), 147-169.
Putnam, R. D. （1992）. Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton university press.
Rossler, M.（1973）. Partners in site management. A shift in focus: heritage and community involvement. Community Development through World Heritage; Albert, MT, Richon, M., Vnals, MJ, Witcomb, A., Eds, 27-31.
Seamon, D., & Nordin, C. (1981). Marketplace as place ballet: A Swedish example. Na
Shamai, S.（1991）. Sense of place: an empirical measurement. Geoforum, 22, 347-358.
Sobel, D. （2004）. Place-based education: Connecting classrooms & communities. Great Barrington, MA: Orion Society.
Stedman, R.（2002）. Toward a social psychology of place: Predicting behaviour from place-based cognitions, attitude, and identity. Environment and Behaviour, 34, 561–581.
Tuan, Y. F. （1974）. Topophilia: A study of environmental perception, attitudes, andvalues. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Princeton Hall.
Tuan, Y. F.（1977）. Space and place: The perspective of experience. U of Minnesota Press.
UNESCO.（1972, November）. Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. World Heritage Center, Paris
Wals, A. E., & Noorduyn, L.（2010）. Social learning in action: A reconstruction of an urban community moving towards sustainability. In Engaging Environmental Education, 57-76.
Wals, A. E., Lans, T., & Kupper, H.（2012）. Blurring the boundaries between vocational education, business and research in the agri-food domain. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 64(1), 3-23.
World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). （1987）. Our Common Future. New York: Oxford University Press.
World Heritage Center（2008）. World Heritage Information. Retrieved from http://whc.unesco.org/uploads/activities/documents/activity-567-1.pdf
World Heritage Centre （2008）. Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Retrieved from https://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide08-en.pdf#annex3
World Heritage Center.（2002, JUNE）.The Budapest Declaration on World Heritage. World Heritage Committee. Budapest, 2002
Yildirim, E., Baltà Portolés, J., Pascual, J., Perrino, M., Llobet, M., Wyber, S., ... & Guerra, C. （2019）. Culture in the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda: A Report by the Culture 2030 Goal Campaign.