대한지리학회지 (Journal of the Korean Geographical Society)

대한지리학회 (The Korean Geographical Society)
권호 표지

스케일의 정치: 한국 주택 정치에서의 지리적 스케일의 사회적.정치적 구성

The Politics of Scale: The Social and Political Construction of Geographical Scale in Korean Housing Politics

  • 류연택 (충북대학교 사범대학 지리교육과)
  • Ryu, Yeon-Taek (Department of Geography Education, Chungbuk National University)
  • 발행 : 2007.12.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구는 한국 주택정치에서의 '지리적 스케일의 사회적 정치적 구성(social and political construction of geographical scale)'을 분석하였다. 최근 미국 및 유럽에서 도시지리학을 포함한 인문지리학 분야에서 관심을 끌고 있는 주제 중 하나는 '지리적 스케일의 사회적 정치적 구성(또는 생산)'이다. 이에 관한 논의의 출발점은 바로 공간적 스케일은 존재론적으로 미리 주어지거나 고정되어 있다기 보다는 사회적으로 구성되며, 정치적인 경쟁의 대상물이 될 수 있다는 인식이다. 'tm케일의 정치(politics of scale)' 또는 '지리적(공간적) 스케일의 사회적 정치적 구성(생산)'에 관한 기존의 연구들은 사회운동(social movement)에서 서로 다른 공간적 스케일이 어떻게 활용되었으며 접목되었는지에 연구의 초점을 두었다. '스케일의 정치' 관련 논문들은 사회운동에서의 스케일의 역할을 '스케일 상승(up-scaling)' 또는 '정치적 행동의 스케일(scales of activism)' 위주로 논의하였다. 반면에 풀뿌리 시민사회운동에서의 스케일의 역할 연구라는 특성으로 인해 '스케일 하강(down-scaling)' 또는 '규제의 스케일(scales of regulation)' 논의는 미약하다. 한편, '스케일의 정치' 논의는 스케일의 이용을 통한 소수정치세력 및 사회소외층의 정치적 사회적 '임파워먼트(empowerment)' 과정에 연구의 초점을 두었다. 하지만, 기존의 '스케일의 정치'와 관련해서 어떻게 스케일이(특히 '스케일 하강'이) 무특권 사회집단을 소외하고 배제시키는지에 사용될 수 있는지, 그리고 공간의 생산 및 재생산을 조절할 수 있는지에 대한 연구는 미비하다. 한국 정부는 주택시장 관리 체제 및 제도 하에서 '스케일 도약(jumping scales)' 구체적으로 '스케일 하강'을 통해 여러 지리적 스케일에서의 주택 공간 생산 및 재생산에 대한 헤게모니를 가지게 되었다. 한국 정부는 주택 개발에 대한 다스케일적(multiscalar) 정책을 사용함과 동시에 중앙 정부, 지방 자치단체, 정부 산하 주택 관련 기관, 그리고 한국 다국적 기업(재벌) 간의 다양한 스케일에서의 제도적 네트워킹을 통해 '스케일 도약' 능력을 점점 더 획득하게 되었다. 전통적으로 지리적 스케일은 분석의 공간 단위 또는 범주로 인식되어 왔다. 하지만, 지리적 스케일은 사회적 내포(social inclusion), 사회적 배제(social exclusion), 정당화(legitimation)의 수단이 될 수 있다. 사회적으로 그리고 정치적으로 연대할 또는 배제할 기관 또는 조직을 선택하는 것 자체가 조직 네트워킹시의 공간적 스케일의 선택과 범위의 결정을 수반하며, 이는 '정치의 스케일 공간성(scale spatiality politics)'과 밀접히 연관되어 있다. 다양한 형태의 '규제의 스케일'을 전개해 온 한국 정부는 정부의 주택 개발 논리의 정당화를 위해 재벌, 고소득층, 중산층을 의사결정 과정에 포함시켰으나, 국지적 스케일에서의 서민 조직들과 사회소외계층을 의사결정 과정으로부터 제외시켰다.

This paper investigates the social and political construction of geographical scale in conjunction with Korean housing politics. Recently, attention has been drawn to the issue of the social and political construction of geographical scale. Spatial scales have increasingly been regarded as socially constructed and politically contested rather than ontologically pregiven or fixed. The scale literature has paid attention to how different spatial scales can be used or articulated in social movements, with an emphasis on 'up-scaling' and 'scales of activism' rather than 'down-scaling' and 'scales of regulation.' Furthermore, the scale literature has focused on the aspect of empowerment. However, it is worthwhile to examine how scale-especially 'down-scaling' and 'scales of regulation'-can be used not only for marginalizing or excluding unprivileged social groups, but also for controlling the (re)production of space, including housing space. Under a regulatory regime, the Korean central government gained more control over the (re)production of housing space at geographical multi-scales by means of 'jumping scales,' specifically 'down-scaling.' The Korean central government has increasingly obtained the capacity to 'jump scales' by using not only multiscalar strategies for housing developments, but also taking advantage of various scales of institutional networking among the central and local governments, quasi-governmental institutions, and Chaebols, across the state. Traditionally, scale has been regarded as an analytical spatial unit or category. However, scale can be seen as means of inclusion(and exclusion) and legitimation. Choosing institutions to include or exclude cannot be separated from the choices and range of spatial scale, and is closely connected to 'scale spatiality of politics.' Facilitating different forms of 'scales of regulation,' the Korean central government included Chaebols and upper- and middle-income groups for the legitimization of housing projects, but excluded local-scale grassroots organizations and unprivileged social groups as decision-makers.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Agnew, J.. 1997, The dramaturgy of horizons: geographical scale in the 'reconstruction of Italy' by the new Italian political parties, 1992-1995, Political Geography, 16, 99-121
  2. Brenner, N., 1997a, Global, fragmented, hierarchical: Henri Lefebvre's geographies of globalization, Public Culture, 10(1), 137-169
  3. Brenner, N., 1997b, State territorial restructuring and the production of spatial scale: urban and regional planning in the Federal Republic of Germany, 1960-1990, Political Geography, 16(4), 273-306
  4. Brenner, N., 1998a, Between fixity and motion: accumulation, territorial organization and the historical geography of spatial scales, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 16(4), 459-481 https://doi.org/10.1068/d160459
  5. Brenner, N., 1998b, Global cities, glocal states: global city formation and state territorial restructuring in contemporary Europe, Review of International Political Economy, 5(1), 1-37 https://doi.org/10.1080/096922998347633
  6. Brenner, N., 1999, Globalisation as reterritorialisation: the re-scaling of urban governance in the European Union, Urban Studies, 36(3), 431-451 https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098993466
  7. Brenner, N., 2000, The urban question as a scale question: reflections on Henri Lefebvre, urban theory and the politics of scale, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 24(2), 361-378 https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00234
  8. Brenner, N., 2001, The limits to scale? Methodological reflections on scalar structuration, Progress in Human Geography, 25(4), 591-614
  9. Cerny, P., 1995, Globalization and the changing logic of collective action, International Organization, 49, 595-625 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300028459
  10. Delaney, D. and Leitner, H., 1997, The political construction of scale, Political Geography, 16(2), 93-97 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0962-6298(96)00045-5
  11. Elwood, S. and Martin, D., 2000, Placing interviews: location and scales of power in qualitative research, The Professional Geographer, 52(4), 649-657 https://doi.org/10.1111/0033-0124.00253
  12. Fuller, D. and Jonas, A., 2001, Contradictions of spatial scale: the British credit union movement and scalar-strategic choices, paper presented at the 97th Annual Meeting of the Association of American Geographers, New York City
  13. Gough, J., 2001, Workers' strategies to secure jobs, their uses of scale, and competing notions of justice, paper presented at the 97th Annual Meeting of the Association of American Geographers, New York City
  14. Herod, A., 1991, The production of scale in United States labour relations, Area, 23(1), 82-88
  15. Herod, A., 1997, Labor's spatial praxis and the geography of contract bargaining in the US east coast longshore industry, 1953-1989, Political Geography, 16, 145-169
  16. Jessop, B., 1994, Post-Fordism and the state, in Amin, A.(ed.), Post-Fordism: A Reader, Blackwell, Oxford, 251-279
  17. Jonas, A., 1991, Urban growth coalitions and urban development policy: postwar growth and the politics of annexation in metropolitan Columbus, Urban Geography, 12(3), 197-225 https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.12.3.197
  18. Jonas, A., 1992, A place for politics in urban theory: the organization and strategies for urban coalition, Urban Geography, 13(3), 280-290 https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.13.3.280
  19. Jonas, A., 1994, The scale politics of spatiality, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 12, 257-264 https://doi.org/10.1068/d120257
  20. Jung, H. J., 2005, Scale in contentious politics: the case of greenbelt controversy, Journal of the Korean Urban Geographical Society, 8(3), 121-137
  21. Jung, H. J., 2006, Towards the spatiality of social movements: exploring geographical contributions to the study of social movements, Journal of the Korean Geographical Society, 41(4), 470-490 (in Korean)
  22. Kim, W. J., 1997, Economic Growth, Low Income and Housing in South Korea, St. Martin's Press, Inc., New York
  23. Kurtz, H., 2000, The Politics ojEnvironmentaljustice as a Politics oj Scale: the Case oj the Shintech Controversy, St. james Parish, Louisiana, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota
  24. Le Gales, P., 2000, Symposium on globalization, politics and scale, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 24(2), 257 https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00248
  25. Lefebvre, H., 1991, The Production of Space, Blackwell, Cambridge, Mass
  26. Leitner, H., 1990, Cities in pursuit of economic growth: the local state as entrepreneur, Political Geography Quarterly, 9(2), 146-170 https://doi.org/10.1016/0260-9827(90)90016-4
  27. Leitner, H., 1997, Reconfiguring the spatiality of power: the construction of a supranational migration framework for the European Union, Political Geography, 16(2), 123-143 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0962-6298(96)00047-9
  28. Leitner, H. and Garner, M., 1993, The limits of local initiatives: a reassessment of urban entrepreneurialism for urban development, Urban Geography, 14(1), 57-77 https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.14.1.57
  29. Lipietz, A., 1993, The local and the global: regional individuality or interregionalism?, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers: new series, 18, 8-18 https://doi.org/10.2307/623066
  30. Lipietz, A., 1994, The national and the regional: their autonomy vis-a-vis the capitalist world crisis, in Palan, R. and Gills, B.(eds.), Transcending the State-Global Divide, Lynne Rienner, Boulder
  31. Marston, S., 1990, Introduction for review symposium on urban fortunes, Urban Geography, 11(2), 176-178 https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.11.2.176
  32. Marston, S., 2000, The social construction of scale, Progress in Human Geography, 24(2), 219-242 https://doi.org/10.1191/030913200674086272
  33. Marston, S. and Smith, N., 2001, States, scales and households: limits to scale thinking? A response to Brenner, Progress in Human Geography, 25(4), 615-619 https://doi.org/10.1191/030913201682688968
  34. Miller, B., 1995, The Power of Place, the Significance of Scale: the Geographic Structuring of Collective Action in the Boston Area Peace Movement, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota
  35. Miller, B., 1997, Political action and the geography of defense investment: geographical scale and the representation of the Massachusetts Miracle, Political Geography, 16(2), 171-185 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0962-6298(96)00049-2
  36. Peck, J. and Tickell, A., 1994, Searching for a new institutional fix, in Amin, A.(ed.), Post-Fordism: A Reader, Blackwell, Oxford, 280-315
  37. Peck, J. and Tickell, A., 1995, The social regulation of uneven development: 'regulatory deficit', England's south east and the collapse of Thatcherism, Environment and Planning A, 27(1), 15-40 https://doi.org/10.1068/a270015
  38. Ryu, Y. T., 2005a, Diverse perspectives on urban housing: institutional, political economy, identity, and feminist perspectives, Journal of the Korean Urban Geographical Society, 8(3), 103-119
  39. Ryu, Y. T., 2005b, Critical reflections on ecological, neoclassical, behavioral, and managerial perspectives on urban housing and residential structure, Journal of Geography Education, 49, 127-142
  40. Ryu, Y. T., 2006, Spatial inequalities and temporal variations in the change rates of house prices and rent levels across Korean cities, 1986-2000, Journal of the Korean Urban Geographical Society, 9(3), 139-151
  41. Scott, A, 1998, Regions and the World Economy, Oxford University Press, London
  42. Smith, N., 1992, Geography, difference and the politics of scale, in Doherty, J. et al.(eds,), Postmodernism and the Social Sciences, St. Martin's Press, New York, 57-79
  43. Smith, N., 1993, Homeless/global: scaling places, in Bird, J. et al.(eds.), Mapping the Futures: Local Cultures, Global Change, Routledge, New York, 87-119
  44. Smith, N., 1995, Remaking scale: competition and cooperation in prenational and postnational Europe, in Eskelinen, H. and Snickars, F.(eds,), Competitive European Peripheries, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 59-74
  45. Smith, N., 1996, The New Urban Frontier: Gentrification and the Revanchist City, Routledge, New York
  46. Smith, N. and Dennis, W., 1987, The restructuring of geographical scale: coalescence and fragmentation of the northern core region, Economic Geography, 63(2), 160-182 https://doi.org/10.2307/144152
  47. Swyngedouw, E., 1989, The heart of the place: the resurrection of locality in an age of hyperspace, Geograjiska Annaler B, 71, 31-42 https://doi.org/10.2307/490505
  48. Swyngedouw, E., 1992, The mammon quest: 'glocalisation', interspatial competition and the monetary order: the construction of new scales, in Dunford, M. and Kafkalas, G.(eds.), Cities and Regions in the New Europe, Belhaven Press, London, 39-68
  49. Swyngedouw, E., 1997a, Excluding the other: the production of scale and scaled politics, in Lee, R. and Wills, J.(eds.), Geographies of Economies, Arnold, London, 167-176
  50. Swyngedouw, E., 1997b, Neither global nor local: 'glocalization' and the politics of scale, in Cox, K.(ed.), Spaces of Globalization, Guilford Press, New York, 137-166
  51. Taylor, P., 1996, Embedded statism and the social sciences: opening up to new spaces, Environment and Planning A, 28, 1917-1928 https://doi.org/10.1068/a281917
  52. Walsh, J., 2000, Organizing the scale of labor regulation in the United States: service-sector activism in the city, Environment and Planning A, 32, 1593-1610 https://doi.org/10.1068/a32102