住民參與診斷模型을 통해 본 住民參與豫算制度 硏究 : 大田廣域市 事例를 中心으로 = (The) study on citizen participatory budgeting based on citizen participatory institutional diagnostic tool : Daejeon metropolitan city case

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this thesis is to identify important dimensions to diagnose the current Daejeon Metropolitan City's Citizen Participatory Budgeting(CPB) based on a theoretical model called CLEAR. In addition, it is to evaluate the current level or characteristics of each dimension. For that purpose, first of all, it reviews the existing literature and summarizes theoretical background and institutional cases. Especially in terms of latter, it selects outstanding foreign and domestic cases, analyses their characteristics and derive implication to improve the Daejeon case.
For an empirical study, it carries out a questionnaire survey to citizen committee members of CPB, general public servants, and officials in NGOs at Daejeon Metropolitan City. The survey question is classified into three categories: general background question, CLEAR model-related questions, and general evaluative questions. The CLEAR model provides five dimensions to diagnose a participatory institution: 'Can do', 'Like to', 'Enabled to', 'Asked to', and 'Responded to'. Statistical analyses such as factor analysis and ANOVA are carried out with final 224 data which are collected from 52 citizen committee members, 97 public servants, and 74 NGO officials.
The result shows that the empirical data confirms 5 dimensions provided by CLEAR model. More specifically, the factor analysis identifies 7 factors from the data: administrative support, participatory organizing, participatory representativeness and relevance, participatory responsiveness, participant capacity, participatory scale, and strengthening organizing participation. It can be interpreted that participant capacity is related to 'Can do', participatory representativeness and relevance or participatory scale to 'Like to', participatory organizing or strengthening organizing participation to 'Enabled to', administrative support to 'Asked to', and participatory responsiveness to 'Responded to'.
The result also shows there is big perceptive difference on CLEAR related and general evaluative dimensions. The citizen committee members tends to show relatively balanced view on those dimensions. The public servant group evaluates much more favorably to the current institution, while the NGO officials show the opposite tendency.
From a point of view of citizen committed members, it appears that participatory organizing and responsiveness is the most urgent agenda. In addition, the review of specific questions prior to categorizing identifies the importance of citizen committee member representativeness, public servants' more positive interest in participatory budgeting, institutionalization of small scale CPB, sufficient information provision, and activation of CPB Study Group.
Based on empirical results, it provides several suggestions. First of all, it is necessary to strengthen the ordinance and operational rules to change the current passive model to more positive governance model. Secondly, the current CPB structure should be divided into two tiers including local participatory budgeting committee under the current city-level citizen committee. In addition, a special committee can be introduced to represent the minority interest. Thirdly, there should be more effort to change the attitude and perception of public servants. Forth, it is necessary to support network building among citizen committee members and empower and strengthening their leadership. Fifth, a more organized educational system should be introduced to cultivate and improve participating citizens' expertise. Sixth, it is necessary to define more clearly participating citizen members' range of participation and authority, and make it sure to feedback to citizen participants in order for them identify their contribution through participation.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제1장 서 론 1
• 제1절 연구 목적 1
• 1. 연구 배경 1
• 2. 연구 목적 3
• 제2절 연구 범위 및 방법 4
• 1. 연구 범위 4
• 2. 연구 방법 4
• 제2장 주민참여예산제도의 이론적 고찰 7
• 제1절 주민참여예산제도 7
• 1. 개념과 등장배경 7
• 2. 주민참여예산제도의 필요성 12
• 3. 참여유형과 주민참여예산제도 모형 21
• 4. 지방정부예산에서의 주민참여예산제도 29
• 제2절 주민참여예산제도의 운영사례 36
• 1. 국외 사례 36
• 2. 국내 사례 65
• 제3장 대전광역시 주민참여예산제도와 분석틀 86
• 제1절 대전광역시 주민참여예산제도 86
• 1. 도입배경 및 과정 86
• 2. 주민참여예산제도의 운영현황 87
• 3. 주민참여예산제도의 운영실적 96
• 제2절 연구의 분석틀: 참여진단모형 105
• 제4장 실증분석 108
• 제1절 조사설계 108
• 1. 조사대상 및 자료수집방법 108
• 2. 조사도구 111
• 3. 분석방법 114
• 제2절 실증분석 결과 114
• 1. 요인분석결과 114
• 2. 참여진단 차원별 집단 간 평균 비교분석 118
• 3. 일반적 제도평가 차원별 집단간 비교분석 122
• 4. 집단별 세부항목 평균 124
• 제5장 분석결과의 논의 및 개선방안 131
• 제1절 분석결과의 논의 131
• 제2절 개선방안 137
• 1. 광역자치단체에 적합한 주민참여예산제도로의 재설계 137
• 2. 예산참여시민위원회 구성 및 운영방식 개편 138
• 3. 공무원 인식과 자세 변화 139
• 4. 예산참여시민위원의 네트워크화 및 리더십 강화 140
• 5. 시민교육의 강화 140
• 6. 주민참여예산연구회의 활성화 141
• 7. 활동성과에 대한 피드백 강화 141
• 제6장 요약 및 결 론 142
• 참 고 문 헌 145
• ABSTRACT 154
• 부 록 1: 대전광역시 주민참여기본조례, 운영규정 157
• 부 록 2: 설문조사표 165