Journal of Korean Society of Rural Planning (농촌계획)

Korean Society of Rural Planning (한국농촌계획학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Meaning of Differentiation in Rural Development Projects and Its Implications on Resident Assessment

농촌개발사업에서 차별화가 갖는 의미와 주민평가에 주는 함의

  • Received : 2015.04.16
  • Accepted : 2015.06.15
  • Published : 2015.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

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.

Keywords

References

  1. Ahn S. and K. Nah, 2014. A Study on the Strategy for "Promoting Strong and Small Farm" from Design Management Perspective, Journal of Digital Design 14(4) : 947-957.
  2. An S. and W. Jeong, 2014. the Factors Analysis about Residential Satisfaction of Rural Village Comprehensive Development Project, the Proceeding in the Korean Association for Local Government Studies.
  3. Chai J. and J. Seo, 2011. Analysis on the Economic Achievement Factor of the Comprehensive Rural Village Development Project in Jeolllanam-do area, ournal of The Korean Regional Development Association 23(3) : 107-126.
  4. Choi E, 2004. The Residential Segregation and the Differentiation of Housing Value in Seoul, Journal of The Korean Association of Regional Geographers, 10(3) : 592-605.
  5. Cho J, 2013. Territory-Specialized Rural Development Strategy in Case of the County Jangseong in South-Korea, Journal of The Korean Regional Development Association 25(1) : 79-102.
  6. Choi Y., Park J. and Y. Kim, 2011. Improvement and Evaluation of Resident Satisfaction Degree on Rural Village Development Project by Rural Territory, Journal of Agriculture & Life Science 45(6): 227-235
  7. Cho Y, 2010. A Study on Propulsion System of Rural Development Program in Chungnam Province, Journal of Korean Society of Rural Planning 16(1): 35-47.
  8. Cummins, R. A. 2000. Objective and subjective quality of life : an interactive model, Social indicators Research. 52. pp. 119-131.
  9. Heady, B. and Wearing, A. 1992. Understanding happiness : a theory of subjective well-being. Melbourne : Longman Cheshire.
  10. Jeong D. 1983. Research about the Effect on the Action by Comparison of Social Reference Group, Korean Journal of Social Theory 17(1) : 94-111.
  11. Je J., Lee K. and Song K, 2006, Local Festivals Differentiation Strategy of the Local Government, the Proceeding in the Korean Association for Local Government Studies.
  12. Joo K, 2004. Policy Direction of Rural Village Comprehensive Development Project, Rural and Environment 14(1) : 3-10.
  13. Kang J, 2004. A Study of Reform for Rural Policy and Rural Development in Korea : A Case of New Rural Village Construction Drive, Ph. D. thesis in Kangwon National University Graduate School.
  14. KFN, 'The Differentiation of Rural Village Development' Seminar in Newspaper Article by KFN in 2013. 10.07.
  15. Kim B. and S. Lee, 2011. Quantitative Analysis of the Effect of Fishing Village Development Project. Ocean Policy Research 26(2) : 107-130.
  16. Kim C. and H. Goo. 2014. Policy Response Measure by Rural typology in Urban-Rural Exchange period, Land Policy Brief 1-8.
  17. Kim J, 2013a. An Analysis on the change Factor Based on the Industrial GRDP of 5 Gun in Chungcheongnam-do, Journal of Agricultural Extension & Community Development 19(4) : 1041-1066. https://doi.org/10.12653/jecd.2012.19.4.1041
  18. Kim J, 2013b. Analysis of Industry-dependent Employment Change Factors in Rural Areas : Targeting 5 Counties in Chungnam, Journal of Korean Society of Rural Planning 19(1) : 123-135. https://doi.org/10.7851/ksrp.2013.19.1.123
  19. Kim J, 2005. Measurement of Community Welfare level Considering inter-regional Linkage and Traits. Ph. D. thesis in Seoul National University Graduate School.
  20. Kim J. and J. Chai, 2011. Analysis on the impact of Comprehensive Rural Village Development Project on the Satisfactions and Incomes of Residents, Journal of Industrial Economics and Business 24(5) : 2671-2691.
  21. Kim Y. 2012. Introduction to Sociology for New Generation, Seoul : Humanist Publishing Group.
  22. KRC. 2010. The Synthesis Report about Rural(Myeong) Village Comprehensive Development Project Master Plan, Weswang : KRC.
  23. KRC. 2008. Effectiveness Analysis of The Rural Village Comprehensive Development Project, Weawang : KRC
  24. Lee B, 2008. A Review on Rural Development Policies of the Participatory Government, Journal of Agricultural Extension & Community Development 15(1) : 145-175.
  25. Lee S. and S. Yun, 2008. Quantitative Approaches for Agricultural and Rural Policy Evaluation, Journal of Korean Society of Rural Planning 14(4) : 97-108.
  26. Lee S. and H. Lee. 2011. An Analysis on the Economic Effect of the Regional Development Projects for the Basic Settlement Area : In Terms of Income and Employee, The Journal of Korean Public Policy 13(1) : 81-112.
  27. Lee W, 2004. Improvement Directions of Eup Development Project, Land Policy Brief 62 : 1-6.
  28. Lee C. and J. Im, 2015. A Study on Color Improvement for Regional Identity : Focusing on Gongju, Archives of Desing Forum 28(1) : 233-250.
  29. Lee S, 2009. Implementing the Place Marketing Strategy in the Rural Development Projects, Journal of The Korean Regional Development Association 21(3) : 71-101.
  30. Lee S, 2009. Development a Competitive Strategy for Community Festivals in Gyeonggi-do, Suwon : Gyeonggi Research Institute.
  31. Lee S, 2012, Differentiated Regional Development Strategy in Chungbuck, Chungbuck Issue & Trend 8 : 2-3
  32. Lee Y., Kwak C. and J. Na, 2013. The Differentiation Strategy Considering Brand Position : Moderating Roles of Align ability and Type of Attribute, The Korean Journal of Advertising, 24(7) : 175-193.
  33. Lee J, 2004. Reconstructing the Methodology of Place Analysis for Positioning Unique Place Image in Regional Development, The Geographical Journal of Korea 38(4) : 479-495.
  34. MAFRA. 2010. "Rural Survives by Comprehensive Rural Village Development", Press release(2010.7)
  35. MAFRA.KARICO, 2006. Development of Evaluation Index for Efficient Progress of Integrated Rural Village Development Project, Gwacheon : MAFRA.
  36. Sim k. and D. Cho, 2009. Analysis on Influence of Local Festival Satisfaction in Rural Area on Regional Revitalization, Journal of The Korean Regional Development Association 21(4) : 249-263.
  37. Yang W. and S. Choi, 2013. Performance Analysis on Income Generation Works in Comprehensive Rural Village Development Project by Their Implementation, Journal of Korean Society of Rural Planning 19(1) : 55-70. https://doi.org/10.7851/ksrp.2013.19.1.055
  38. MAFRA. 2006. The Enforcement Guidelines of MAFRA Projects in 2006.
  39. MAFRA. 2009. The Enforcement Guidelines of MAFRA Projects in 2009.
  40. MAFRA. 2015. The Enforcement Guidelines of MAFRA Projects in 2015.
  41. NIKL Standard Korean Dictionary (http://stdweb2.korean.go.kr/)

Cited by

  1. 농촌주민의 중심지활성화 사업에 대한 효과인식 vol.23, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.7851/ksrp.2017.23.4.015
  2. 읍·면 소재지 종합정비사업의 성과경로 분석 vol.25, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.7851/ksrp.2019.25.2.047