RISS 검색 - 국내학술지논문 상세보기

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In empirical studies on rural development projects, differentiation tends to be considered a strategy aimed at increasing the number of visitors. Rural development projects include the improvement of living environment, and the discussion about project goals and evaluation of project results are often focused on the aspect of rural tourism. Thus, subjective benefits of such projects for residents are omitted. This study examines the meaning of differentiation from the perspective of residents and explores the validity of the number of visitors and the possibility of reflecting residents' subjective score as evaluation indicators for a project. To achieve such an objective, this study uses survey data collected from 153 people in 38 comprehensive development projects in areas of Eup and Myeon, Korea. The results of this study show that differentiation is viewed as a by-product of positive improvement from a rural development project, from the perspective of residents. The effects of rural development are classified into two dimensions: socioeconomic effects and living environmental effects. Landscape improvement is included in the dimension of living environmental effects and an increase in the number of visitors is included in the dimension of socioeconomic effects. As such, they are confirmed to be the factors that determine the level of differentiation. For example, the increase in the number of visitors is confirmed to be a valid indicator of project success, in which two-dimensional characters are reflected. The level of differentiation evaluated by residents is a result of the workings of the above two factors. Unlike in previous studies, the possibility of evaluation based on the perception of residents is confirmed in the evaluation of results. When the level of differentiation is interpreted as the direct result of a project, the number of visitors has an impact on socioeconomic effects, and the project content of landscape improvement has an impact on living environmental effects. The goal of policy and residents is the same in terms of the effort residents may make in maximizing results of a project by themselves; thus, the government's goal is achieved even when a project is carried out under the autonomy of residents. Ultimately, the government should focus on providing conditions in which active citizen participation can not only occur but help to establish a policy direction, which subsequently strengthens the substantial rights of residents.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김정태, "충청남도 5개 군의 GRDP 변화요인 분석" 한국농촌지도학회 19 (19): 1041-1066, 2012

2 이병기, "참여정부 농촌개발정책의 회고" 한국농촌지도학회 15 (15): 145-175, 2008

3 최영완, "지역유형을 고려한 농촌마을종합개발사업의 주민평가 및 개선방안" 농업생명과학연구원 45 (45): 227-235, 2011

4 이정훈, "지역개발에서 차별화된 장소이미지 설정을 위한 장소분석 방법론 재구축" 국토지리학회 38 (38): 479-496, 2004

5 이충훈, "지역 정체성을 위한 색채개선방안 연구 : 공주를 중심으로" 한국디자인학회 28 (28): 233-251, 2015

6 조영재, "지방정부의 농촌개발사업 추진체계의 문제점과 개선과제- 충청남도를 중심으로 -" 한국농촌계획학회 16 (16): 35-47, 2010

7 채종훈, "전남지역 농촌마을종합개발사업의 경제적 성과 요인 분석" 한국지역개발학회 23 (23): 107-126, 2011

8 김봉태, "어촌종합개발사업의 정량적 효과 분석" 한국해양수산개발원 26 (26): 75-104, 2011

9 최은영, "서울의 학력집단별 거주지 분리와 아파트 가격의 차별화" 한국지역지리학회 10 (10): 592-605, 2004

10 이용학, "브랜드 지위를 고려한 차별화 전략 :속성 정렬성 및 속성 유형의 조절효과" 한국광고학회 24 (24): 175-193, 2013