한국환경복원기술학회지 (Journal of the Korean Society of Environmental Restoration Technology)

  • 제22권4호
  • /
  • Pages.15-34
  • /
  • 2019
  • /
  • 1229-3032(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2733-5011(eISSN)
한국환경복원기술학회 (The Korea Society of Environmental Restoration Technology)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

공원 재생을 위한 정책 및 지속 가능한 경영구조 연구 - 그린 에스테이트 사례를 중심으로 -

Exploring Policy Contexts and Sustainable Management Structure for Park Regeneration - A Focus on the Case of Green Estate Ltd, Sheffield, UK -

  • 남진보 (영국 셰필드대학교 The Place-keeping Research Group) ;
  • 김남춘 (단국대학교 녹지조경학과) ;
  • 김두원 (달랏대학교 생물학과)
  • Nam, Jin-Vo (The Place-keeping Research Group, The University of Sheffield) ;
  • Kim, Nam-Choon (Dept. of Green & Landscape Architecture, Dankook University) ;
  • Kim, Du-Won (Faculty of Biology, Da Lat University)
  • 투고 : 2019.05.06
  • 심사 : 2019.08.23
  • 발행 : 2019.08.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Today, there is increasing recognition of the importance of urban regeneration for better public places. Urban parks as a public area play an important role in harnessing its positive impact on people's well-being: where the standards and funding of/for the parks are getting worse. There is however less a focus on policy approach to park regeneration in the country. Neverthless, a few UK's cases of such innovative park management(PM) has shown successful park regeneration based on policy support. Therefore, the aim of this research is to draw policy implications by exploring a case of successful park regeneration. To address the aim, this research conducts an in-depth case study of 'Manor Fields Park, UK', digging into its PM structure and PM body 'Green Estate Ltd' in relation to relevant policy. The data is mainly collected by interviews including a group interview. The analytical framework 'Place-keeping(PK)' and its six dimensions are employed to determine the characteristics of MFP's PM structure. Resultingly, there is a significant shift in the approach to PM which stresses the principle of long-term and self-sustaining structure led by a non-profit organisation and strong impacts of policy. In this context, PK highlights significant drivers for parks regeneration particularly in terms of policy implications: 1)providing policy support to encourage non-profit organisations in PM, 2)extending community involvement in decision-making processes, 3)promoting income generation by community groups, 4)shifting public awareness of shared responsibility for PM, 5)completing regular park maintenance assessment by community groups, and 6)delivering low-maintenance approaches to PM. To support these implications, PM structure for successful parks regeneration does meet a holistic and multi-dimensional approach of place-keeping underlined by understanding policy contexts and rethinking current status quo of PM. Addressing these implications will shed light on urban PM in an era of austerity and ultimately contribute to improving people's well-being.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Arts, B. . Leroy, P. 2006. Institutional dynamics in environmental governance. Dordrecht: Springer.
  2. Atkinson, G..Doick, K. J..Burningham, K. and France, C. 2014. Brownfield regeneration to greenspace: Delivery of project objectives for social and environmental gain. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 13(2014): 586-594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2013.04.002
  3. Baik, M. S. and Hwang, J. 2016. Distribution of Opinion Decision-making among Participatory Citizen in the Urban Regeneration Project. Korea Real Estate Academy 67: 45-57 (in Korean with English summary).
  4. CLG. 2006. Effectiveness of Aftercare Provisions for Minerals Workings. Research report to The Stationery Office.
  5. DCLG. 2015. English Indices of Deprivation 2015. Research report to Department for Communities and Local Government.
  6. De Magalhaes, C. 2015. Urban Regeneration. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (2015): 919-925.
  7. De Magalhaes, C. and Carmona, M. 2009. Dimensions and models of contemporary public space management in England. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 52: 111-129. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640560802504704
  8. Dempsey N..Burton, M. and Duncan, R. 2016a. Evaluating the effectiveness of a cross-sector partnership for green space management: The case of Southey Owlerton, Sheffield, UK. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening 15:155-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2015.12.002
  9. Dempsey, N..Burton, M. and Selin, J. 2016b. Contracting Out Parks and Roads Maintenance in England. International Journal of Public Sector Management 29(5): 441-456. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-02-2016-0029
  10. Dempsey, N. and Burton, M. 2012. Defining place-keeping: The long-term management of public spaces. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 11(2012): 11-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2011.09.005
  11. DETR. 1999. New Deal for Communities: Developing Delivery Plans. Research report to Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions.
  12. Greenhalgh, L. and Parsons, A. 2004. Raising the Standard: The Green Flag Award Guidance Manual. Research report to CABE.
  13. Hall, T. and Hubbard, P. 1996. The entrepreneurial city: new urban politics, new urban geography. Progress in Human Geography 20: 153-174. https://doi.org/10.1177/030913259602000201
  14. Heath, S. C.. Rabinovich, A. and Barreto, M. 2017. Putting identity into the community: Exploring the social dynamics of urban regeneration. European Journal of Social Psychology 47(7): 855-866. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2296
  15. Heritage Lottery Fund. 2016. State of UK Public Parks 2016. Research report to Heritage Lottery Fund.
  16. Hoyle, H..Jorgensen, A..Warren, P..Dunnett, N. and Evans, K. 2017. "Not in their front yard" The opportunities and challenges of introducing perennial urban meadows: A local authority stakeholder perspective. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 25(2017): 139-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.05.009
  17. Jang, N. J..Kim, J. and Hwang, J. A. 2011. A Study on the Urban Park Management System with Special Use Permits in Seoul. Research report to Seoul Development Institute.
  18. Jun, S. M..Yeom, J. W. and Jung, J. C. 2019. The Impact of Urban Regeneration Projects on Livability: Focusing on Urban Regeneration Priority Areas in South Korea. Korea Environmental Policy and Administration Society 27(1): 27-54 (in Korean with English summary) https://doi.org/10.15301/jepa.2019.27.1.27
  19. Kim, H. 2012. A Management Characteristics of the National Government Park in Japan. The Journal of Korea Society of Environmental Restoration Technology 15(5): 1-17 (in Korean with English summary) https://doi.org/10.13087/kosert.2012.15.5.001
  20. Kim, H. J..Cho, J. H. and Kang, E. J. 2010. An Evaluation on Management Types by Characteristics of Urban Parks. Journal of Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture 38(5): 21-30 (in Korean with English summary).
  21. Kim, H. J..Kang, E. J. and Jo, J. H. 2010. An Evaluation on Management Types by Characteristics of Urban Park. Journal of Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture 38(5): 21-30 (in Korean with English summary).
  22. Kim, J. and Woo, H. D. 2010. A Study of the British City Regeneration Policy and the Implementation System. Korea Real Estate Academy 40: 181-191 (in Korean with English summary).
  23. Kim, T. D. 2014. Comparative Resident Satisfaction Studies between Changwon and Cheongju Regeneration Projects. Korea Environmental Policy and Administration Society 22(2): 153-181 (in Korean with English summary).
  24. Kim, Y. H..Kim, S. H. and Kang, Y. J. 2015. The Impact of Public Participation on the Management of Geumgang Park: Focusing on the Participation of the Advancement Committee Formed by Resident Interest Groups. Korea Environmental Policy and Administration Society 23(4): 29-56 (in Korean with English summary). https://doi.org/10.15301/jepa.2015.23.4.29
  25. Kim, Y. G..Cho, J. H. and Park, T. H. 2002. A Survey on the Awareness of Citizen Participation in Urban Park Management -The Case Study of Choansan Urban Neighborhood Park. Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology 16(3): 287-295 (in Korean with English summary).
  26. Kim, Y. K. 2015. The Policy of Park Asset Transfers in England: A Move toward Community Ownership and Park Management. Journal of Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture 43(1): 108-119 (in Korean with English summary). https://doi.org/10.9715/KILA.2015.43.1.108
  27. Lee, D. 2011. A Study on the Activation Ways of Activating Urban Regeneration and Citizen-Governmental Partnership. Korea Real Estate Academy 44: 125-139 (in Korean with English summary).
  28. Lee, J. H. and Sung, H. C. 2013. A Study on the Post-management and Improvement of Ecosystem Conservation Fund Return Projects. The Korea Society of Environmental Restoration Technology 16(2): 1-12 (in Korean with English summary)
  29. Lees, L..Shin, H. B. and Lopez-Morales, E. 2015. Global Gentrifications: Uneven Development and Displacement. Bristol: Policy Press.
  30. Lim, S. S. and Park, J. H. 2014. A Study on the Introduction of Laws for Financial Stability of Local Government. Research report to Korea Institute of Local Finance.
  31. Madden, D. J. 2014. Neighborhood as spatial project: Making the urban order on the downtown Brooklyn waterfront. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 38: 471-497. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12068
  32. Mattijssen, T..Buijs, A..Elands, B. and Arts, B. 2018. The 'green' and 'self' in green self-governance-A study of 264 green space initiatives by citizens. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning 20: 96-113. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2017.1322945
  33. Mcinroy, N. 2000. Urban Regeneration and Public Space: The Story of an Urban Park. Space and Policy 4(1): 23-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/713697747
  34. Moon, S. W..Kim, E. and Ku, J. H. 2017. Analysis on the Effect of the Urban Park Development on Change of Urban Spatial Structures - Focused on Gentrification around Seoul Forestry Park in Seongdong-gu -. Journal of Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture 45(2): 76-88 (in Korean with English summary). https://doi.org/10.9715/KILA.2017.45.2.076
  35. Nam, J. and Dempsey, N. 2018. Community food growing in parks? Assessing the acceptability and feasibility in Sheffield, UK. Sustainability 10(8): 2887. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082887
  36. Nam, J. and Dempsey, N. 2019a. Understanding stakeholder perceptions of acceptability and feasibility of formal and informal planting in Sheffield's district parks. Sustainability 11(2): 360. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020360
  37. Nam, J. and Dempsey, N. 2019b. Acceptability of income generation practices in the 21st century urban park management: the case of Sheffield's district parks. Journal of Environmental Management (review in process).
  38. Nam, J. and Dempsey, N. 2019c. Place-keeping for Health? Charting the Challenges for Urban Park Management in practice. Sustainability, 11(16): 4383. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11164383
  39. Nam, J. and Kim, N. 2019a. An understanding of green space policies and evaluation tools in the UK: A focus on the Green Flag Award. Journal of the Korean Society of Environmental Restoration Technology 22(1): 13-31 (in Korean with English summary)
  40. Nam, J. and Kim, H. 2019b. Differential levels of governance and its impact on urban park management and users' satisfactions in Sheffield district parks, UK. Journal of Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture. 47(4) (accepted) (in Korean with English summary).
  41. Peters, K..Elands, B. and Buijs, A. 2010. Social interactions in urban parks: stimulating social cohesion?. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 9(2010): 93-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2009.11.003
  42. SCC. 2010. Sheffield's Great Outdoors. Research report to Sheffield City Council.
  43. Sim, J. Y. and Zoh, K. J. 2016. Strategies of Large Park Development and Management through Governance. Journal of Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture 44(6): 60-72. https://doi.org/10.9715/KILA.2016.44.6.060
  44. The Stationery Office, 2007, The Sustainable Communities Act 2007, London: The Stationery Office.
  45. You, J. Y..Jung, S. Y..Park, J. E..Jo, P. G..Kwon, H. I..Song, J. E. and Park, S. R. 2014. Promoting private sector's participation for urban regeneration. Research report to Korea Research Institute for Human Settlements.