Environment of ancient Chinese Buddhist temple can be classified to three types such as regional society(鄕村), famous mountain(名山), and urban areas(都市). This made differences in environment where a temple existed and in turn, affected development of Buddhism. And this made another type in relationship between Buddhist temple and a society. This study explains influences which regional society gave on not only Buddhist temple and a monk but also existence and development of Buddhism. When temples are placed in different environmental position, that is, urban areas and regional society, among a social structure, they eventually should adapt to a different society externally and internally. As told in above, ancient Chinese Buddhist temple was located in regional society, famous mountain, and urban areas. Since Eastern Jin and Sixteen Kingdoms, as number of temple much increased, and temples and monks were concentrated on famous mountain, temples in famous mountains and urban areas had developed showing similar aspects each other. But because temples in regional society were influenced a little differently, this study focused on the point. There are four kinds of influences between temples and monks in regional areas. Monks in regional areas had a comparatively close relationship with a society because they came from same area or surrounding areas. Therefore,powers of regional areas restrict influences made by monk group in temple. Second, temples in regional areas shared their joys and sorrows depending on regional economy. Temples in regional areas became a public place for the society and often a market place. In fact, construction and existence of a temple originally became a driving force in regional economy. This is because construction of temple needs artisans and materials and some temples had visitors and included market economy like consumption of incense and candles, though the economic size was large or small. And when regional areas experienced natural disaster or man-made disaster or had poor harvest or economy was in depression, monks left temples and then, temples themselves could not exist. Third, the relationship between temples in regional areas and Buddhists was distinguished from the temples in urban areas and famous mountains. This is because temples in China were places where monks practiced and at the same time, places where general Buddhists worshipped. So there were always a number of Buddhists around the temples. Forth, Buddhism in resional areas was connected to regional Folk beliefs. As a result, Buddhism was spread across the nation, worship with local color often was changed to Buddhist belief or was tinged with Buddhism. While temples in regional areas maintained a close relationship with regional society.they were influenced by the region or gave influences. As a representative example, temples in regional areas showed model behaviors instead of roles of facilities related to various cultures with comparatively advanced level - for example, school, hospital etc. The temples highly affected funerary rites in regional areas. Chinese tombs were mainlymade in regional areas. After death,people living in urban areas were buried in hometown or at least, they were buried in suburbs not urban areas. Temples in regional areas generally participated in funerary rites. Above shows that though most of famous Buddhist temples were located in urban areas not in famous mountains,majority of temples were located in vast regional areas. Through mutual interaction between temples and regional society, the temples in the regional areas were related to Chinese people of over 90% and regional areas became the most important foundation for Buddhism in China. Mutual influences between temples in regional areas and the general public in regions were omnidirectional and spreaded to every aspects of social life in small or large degree. Thus Tombs in temple were widely spreaded across regional areas over time and space. This is enough to explain a close relationship between Buddhist temples and rural society in ancient China.
The purpose of this study is to propose learning objectives in social dental hygiene by analyzing and reviewing learning objectives in oral health administration area of the existing public oral health. This study is a cross-sectional study. The subjects of the study selected with convenience extraction were 15 members of the social dental hygiene subcommittee of the Korean Society of Dental Hygiene Science. Data collection was conducted by self-filling questionnaire. The research tool is from 48 items of A division in the book of learning objectives in the dental hygienist national examination, and this study classified each of them into 'dental hygiene job relevance', 'dental hygiene competency relevance', 'timeliness', and 'value discrimination of educational goal setting' to comprise 192 items. Also, to collect expert opinions, this study conducted Delphi survey on 7 academic experts. Statistical analysis was performed using the IBM SPSS Statistics ver. 23.0 program (IBM Co., Armonk, NY, USA). Recoding was performed according to the degree of relevance of each learning objective and frequency analysis was performed. This study removed 18 items from the whole learning objectives in the dental hygienist national examination in the oral health administration area of public oral health. Fifteen revisions were made and 15 existing learning objectives were maintained. Forty-five learning objectives were proposed as new social dental hygiene learning objectives. The topics of learning objectives are divided into social security and medical assistance, oral health care system, oral health administration, and oral health policy. As a result of this study, it was necessary to construct the learning objectives of social dental hygiene in response to changing situation at the time. The contents of education should be revised in order of revision of learning objectives, development of competency, development of learning materials, and national examination.
Since 2000, the employment rate of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) has dwindled while the creation of new jobs and the emergence of healthy SMEs have been stagnant. The fundamental reason for these symptoms is that the economic structure is disadvantageous to SMEs. In particular, the greater gap between SMEs and large enterprises has resulted in polarization, and the resulting imbalance has become the largest obstacle to improving SMEs' competitiveness. For example, the total productivity has continued to drop, and the average productivity of SMEs is now merely 30% of that of large enterprises, and the average wage of SMEs' employees is only 53% of that of large enterprises. Along with polarization, rapid industrialization has also caused anti-enterprise consensus, the collapse of the middle class, hostility towards establishments, and other aftereffects. The general consensus is that unless these problems are solved, South Korea will not become an advanced country. Especially, South Korea is now facing issues that need urgent measures, such as the decline of its economic growth, the worsening distribution of profits, and the increased external volatility. Recognizing such negative trends, the MB administration proposed a win-win growth policy and recently introduced a new national value called "ecosystemic development." As the terms in such policy agenda are similar, however, the conceptual differences among such terms must first be fully understood. Therefore, in this study, the concepts of win-win growth policy and ecosystemic development, and the need for them, were surveyed, and their differences from and similarities with other policy concepts like win-win cooperation and symbiotic development were examined. Based on the results of the survey and examination, the study introduced a South Korean model of win-win growth, targeting the promotion of a sound balance between large enterprises and SMEs and an innovative ecosystem, and finally, proposing future policy tasks. Win-win growth is not an academic term but a policy term. Thus, it is less advisable to give a theoretical definition of it than to understand its concept based on its objective and method as a policy. The core of the MB administration's win-win growth policy is the creation of a partnership between key economic subjects such as large enterprises and SMEs based on each subject's differentiated capacity, and such economic subjects' joint promotion of growth opportunities. Its objective is to contribute to the establishment of an advanced capitalistic system by securing the sustainability of the South Korean economy. Such win-win growth policy includes three core concepts. The first concept, ecosystem, is that win-win growth should be understood from the viewpoint of an industrial ecosystem and should be pursued by overcoming the issues of specific enterprises. An enterprise is not an independent entity but a social entity, meaning it exists in relationship with the society (Drucker, 2011). The second concept, balance, points to the fact that an effort should be made to establish a systemic and social infrastructure for a healthy balance in the industry. The social system and infrastructure should be established in such a way as to create a balance between short- term needs and long-term sustainability, between freedom and responsibility, and between profitability and social obligations. Finally, the third concept is the behavioral change of economic entities. The win-win growth policy is not merely about simple transactional relationships or determining reasonable prices but more about the need for a behavior change on the part of economic entities, without which the objectives of the policy cannot be achieved. Various advanced countries have developed different win-win growth models based on their respective cultures and economic-development stages. Japan, whose culture is characterized by a relatively high level of group-centered trust, has developed a productivity improvement model based on such culture, whereas the U.S., which has a highly developed system of market capitalism, has developed a system that instigates or promotes market-oriented technological innovation. Unlike Japan or the U.S., Europe, a late starter, has not fully developed a trust-based culture or market capitalism and thus often uses a policy-led model based on which the government leads the improvement of productivity and promotes technological innovation. By modeling successful cases from these advanced countries, South Korea can establish its unique win-win growth system. For this, it needs to determine the method and tasks that suit its circumstances by examining the prerequisites for its success as well as the strengths and weaknesses of each advanced country. This paper proposes a South Korean model of win-win growth, whose objective is to upgrade the country's low-trust-level-based industrial structure, in which large enterprises and SMEs depend only on independent survival strategies, to a high-trust-level-based social ecosystem, in which large enterprises and SMEs develop a cooperative relationship as partners. Based on this objective, the model proposes the establishment of a sound balance of systems and infrastructure between large enterprises and SMEs, and to form a crenovative social ecosystem. The South Korean model of win-win growth consists of three axes: utilization of the South Koreans' potential, which creates community-oriented energy; fusion-style improvement of various control and self-regulated systems for establishing a high-trust-level-oriented social infrastructure; and behavioral change on the part of enterprises in terms of putting an end to their unfair business activities and promoting future-oriented cooperative relationships. This system will establish a dynamic industrial ecosystem that will generate creative energy and will thus contribute to the realization of a sustainable economy in the 21st century. The South Korean model of win-win growth should pursue community-based self-regulation, which promotes the power of efficiency and competition that is fundamentally being pursued by capitalism while at the same time seeking the value of society and community. Already existing in Korea's traditional roots, such objectives have become the bases of the Shinbaram culture, characterized by the South Koreans' spontaneity, creativity, and optimism. In the process of a community's gradual improvement of its rules and procedures, the trust among the community members increases, and the "social capital" that guarantees the successful control of shared resources can be established (Ostrom, 2010). This basic ideal can help reduce the gap between large enterprises and SMEs, alleviating the South Koreans' victim mentality in the face of competition and the open-door policy, and creating crenovative corporate competitiveness. The win-win growth policy emerged for the purpose of addressing the polarization and imbalance structure resulting from the evolution of 21st-century capitalism. It simultaneously pursues efficiency and fairness on one hand and economic and community values on the other, and aims to foster efficient interaction between the market and the government. This policy, however, is also evolving. The win-win growth policy can be considered an extension of the win-win cooperation that the past 'Participatory Government' promoted at the enterprise management level to the level of systems and culture. Also, the ecosystemic development agendum that has recently emerged is a further extension that has been presented as a national ideal of "a new development model that promotes the co-advancement of environmental conservation, growth, economic development, social integration, and national and individual development."