Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design (대한건축학회논문집:계획계)

Architectural Institute of Korea (대한건축학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Attractiveness Valuation of Phenomenal Architectural Aesthetic by Mixing the Fuzzy Logic with Contingent Valuation - Availing the Use Fares of Facility within Nodle Islet Cultural Center as Valuation Scale -

퍼지논리와 가상가치법 혼합을 통한 현상적 건축미의 매력가치 - 노들섬 문화센터 시설이용료를 가치 척도로 -

  • 이동주 (연세대학교 심바이오틱라이프텍연구원) ;
  • 고은형 (계명문화대학교 건축인테리어과)
  • Received : 2017.07.24
  • Accepted : 2018.03.13
  • Published : 2018.05.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to estimate the attractiveness value according to the preference level on architectural aesthetic. This research starts from the concept that aesthetic is phenomenon and from the viewpoint of 'attraction value' which affects goods. Interactive internet surveys were conducted for 500 citizens of Seoul metropolitan city who are potential users of the Nodle Islet Cultural Center. Based on the scenarios and questionnaires with fuzzy models, we have examined the evaluation of architectural aesthetic and monetary willing-to-payment, and estimated the economic value by preference level of architectural aesthetic through linear regression analysis. The main results of the study are as follows: First, the economic value of the Nodle Islet Cultural Center was estimated at ?15,683.43/person. Residents of Seoul metropolitan city were willing to accept the increase in the above-mentioned amount of the facility fares when their preferred works (average 86.81 points) were constructed. (P <0/05) Second, it is confirmed that the economic value increases dramatically as the preference level of architectural aesthetic increases. Third, it is presumed that the infinite valuation of architectural aesthetic and the problem of free riding coexist in the estimation of economic valuation of architectural aesthetic for public buildings. Fourth, by mixing the fuzzy logic with contingent valuation method, starting point bias and no response biases that happened in contingent valuation could be disappeared. bias elimination must be considered seriously because another bias could be happened in full process of the research. The results of this study will serve as a basis for spreading architectural aesthetic value-oriented research from the vague and obscure aesthetic-centered discussion on the existing architectural aesthetic. In addition, it will be an opportunity to draw institutional application and utilization strategy of architectural aesthetic through architectural aesthetic value research.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 한국연구재단

References

  1. Allport, G. W. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality, Cambridge, MA, Harvard university press, 593.
  2. Carson, R. (1997). Contingent valuation: theoretical advance and empirical tests since the NOAA panel, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 79(5).
  3. Davis, R. K. (1963). The value of outdoor recreation: an economic study of the Maine Woods, Ph.D dissertation, Harvard university.
  4. Hull IV, R. B. & Stewart, W. P. (1992). Validity of photo-based scenic beauty judgements, Journal of environmental psychology, Academic press Ltd, 101-114.
  5. Ilozor, B. D. & King, S. (1998). Has aesthetics been objectified in building project evaluation?, Architectural science review, 41(1), 21.
  6. Kaplan, S. (1973). Cognitive maps, Human needs and the designed environment, In W. Preiser (Ed), Environmental design research (4th international EDRA conference), Pennsylvania, Hutchinson & Ross.
  7. Kapper, T. (2004). Bring beauty to account in the environmental impace statement: The contingent valuation of landscape aesthetics, Environmental practice, 6(4), 302-304.
  8. Kim, H. (1996). The Study of Fuzzy Decision Makings Based on the Comparison of Fuzzy Linear Regression and Classical Linear Regression, Korean Jouranl of Business Administration, 13(6), 57-71.
  9. Kwon, O. (1999). Environmental Economics, Pakyoungsa publishing, 264-289.
  10. Lee, D. (2009). A study on the effects of the architecture aesthetic on the potential use value, Ph.D. Dissertation, Kyungpook National University.
  11. Lee, D. & Ko, E. (2009). A study on the analysis for architectural designers' aesthetic valuation as a factor of alternative selection, Journal of the Regional Association of Architectural Institute of Korea, 11(3), 91-98.
  12. Lee, D. & Ko, E. (2009). A study on the effect of exterior design of buildings on choice of shopping malls, Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea(AIK), Planning and Design Section, 25(10), 57-66.
  13. Lee, D. & Ko, E. (2012). A Methodological Approach on Economic Valuation of the Phenomenal Architectural Aesthetic by Integrating the Fuzzy Theory with Contingent Valuation, Journal of the AIK, Planning and Design Section, 28(3), 63-72.
  14. Lee, I., Moon, Y. & Shin, S. (2008). An Analysis of the Effects of Aesthetic Design Factors on Apartment Price, Journal of the AIK, Planning and Design Section, 24(2), 121-128.
  15. Lynch, K. (1976). Managing the sense of a region, Cambridge, MA, MIT press, 221.
  16. Rader, M. & Jessup, B. E. (1976). Art and human values, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice hall, 15.
  17. Samuelson, P. A. (1954). The pure theory of public expenditure, Review of economics and statistics, 36, 387-389. https://doi.org/10.2307/1925895
  18. Shabman, L. & Stephenson, K. (2000). Environmental valuation and its economics critics, Journal of water resources planning and management, 126(6).
  19. Stamps III & Arthur, E. (1989). Are environmental aesthetics worth studying, Journal of architectural and planning research, 6(4), 344-355.
  20. Wantrup, S. V. (1947). Capital returns from soil-conservation practicies, Journal of farm economics, 29, 1181-1196. (Received Jul. 24 2017 Revised Sep. 4 2017 Accepted Mar. 13 2018) https://doi.org/10.2307/1232747