• 제목/요약/키워드: scale flexibility

검색결과 305건 처리시간 0.02초

전력수급기본계획의 정합성과 사회적 비용 (Consistency in the Basic Plan on Electricity Demand and Supply and Social Costs)

  • 이수일
    • KDI Journal of Economic Policy
    • /
    • 제34권2호
    • /
    • pp.55-93
    • /
    • 2012
  • 우리나라에서 에너지정책은 다양한 에너지 관련 계획들을 통해 구체화된다. 그런데 최근 비전으로서의 성격이 강한 상위계획에서 설정되는 부문별 목표가 지속적으로 상향 조정됨에 따라 상위계획과의 정합성을 유지해야 할 필요가 있는 (실행계획으로서의) 하위계획 수립에서 왜곡이 발생하고 있다. 이와 더불어 개별 하위계획 자체도 미래의 불확실성에 대응하여 계획의 유연성을 확보하는 측면에서 한계를 보이고 있다. 이러한 문제들은 잠재적으로 막대한 사회적 비용을 초래할 위험을 내포하고 있다. 이에 본 논문은 우리나라 에너지 계획의 수립 집행과 관련한 개선방안의 논의에 실증적인 근거를 제시하기 위해 실행계획 가운데 가장 중요하게 인식되고 있는 전력수급기본계획을 주된 분석대상으로 삼아, 전력수급기본계획 자체의 문제, 전력수급기본계획과 상위계획 간 정합성을 유지하는 과정에서 발생할 수 있는 문제를 논리적으로 설명하고, 현실적인 상황을 가정하여 그러한 문제들이 초래할 수 있는 사회적 비용의 규모를 추정하였다. 분석 결과, 전력수급기본계획 수립 시 최대전력이 실적치보다 7%(15%) 적게 추정되는 경우 2020년 기준으로 연간 발전비용이 약 2,860억원(1조 2,160억원) 증가하며, 이러한 사회적 비용은 상위계획인 국가에너지기본계획에서 설정한 미래 전력수요 목표치에 맞추어 전력수급기본계획이 수립 집행되는 경우에도 유사하게 발생함을 보였다. 또한 상위계획인 온실가스 감축 마스터플랜에서 전력부문에 부과하는 감축목표량이 과도하게 설정되어 탄소배출비용이 0일 경우의 적정 전원구성에서 발생하는 온실가스 배출량의 5%를 추가 감축해야 하는 경우에도 연간 발전비용은 2020년 기준으로 약 9,150억원 증가한다. 반면, 우리나라의 경우 전원별 경제성에 큰 차이가 존재하는 특성으로 인해 전력수급기본계획 수립 시 미래 $CO_2$ 가격의 불확실성이 초래하는 잠재적인 사회적 비용의 크기는 매우 작은 수준으로 분석되었다.

  • PDF

지역의 생태적 특성을 반영한 대형공원의 식재계획 전략 - 광주광역시 중앙근린공원을 사례로 - (Planting Design Strategy for a Large-Scale Park Based on the Regional Ecological Characteristics - A Case of the Central Park in Gwangju, Korea -)

  • 김미연
    • 한국조경학회지
    • /
    • 제49권3호
    • /
    • pp.11-28
    • /
    • 2021
  • 대형공원은 그 크기와 복잡한 특성 때문에 기존 도시 내에 조성되는 기회가 흔하지 않다. 또한, 대규모 부지에서의 식재설계 방법에 관한 실천적 연구 역시 부족한 상황이다. 본 연구는 광주광역시 중앙공원을 사례로 대형공원에서의 식재설계 접근방법과 생태적 이론이 실질적인 식재설계 방법으로 구체화 되는 과정을 설계가의 관점에서 설명함으로써, 유사한 규모의 공간 설계 시 시사점을 제공하고자 하였다. 이 연구는 구체적인 식재설계의 선행과정으로서, 거시적인 스케일에서 녹지의 연결, 식생의 변화, 경관의 흐름, 오픈스페이스의 분포 등 공원 전체의 녹지구조를 계획하고, 나아가 녹지구조를 구성하는 식생형과 식물군락의 구조를 제안하였다. 이 연구의 결과물은 식재 설계 단계에서 공간의 기능과 성격, 식재 연출효과 등 설계자의 의도와 해석을 담아 탄력적으로 적용될 수 있다. 이러한 접근법의 의의는 대형공원의 복잡성과 규모에도 불구하고, 계획된 범주 내에서 설계를 진행함으로써 첫째, 기존 수림을 포함한 공원전체 경관의 시각적 일관성과 의도된 질서를 유지할 수 있다는 점과, 둘째, 대형공원이 지닌 변동가능성, 예측불가능성 등의 특성에 효과적으로 대응할 수 있다는 것이다. 연구의 세부 내용은 다음과 같다. 녹지계획에 우선하여 대상지의 물리적 환경을 분석하였다. 특히, 토지이용변화를 분석하여 잠재된 서식처로서 습지와 초지의 가능성을 확인했다. 녹지구조는 서식처 유형에 따른 식생형으로 구성되며, 녹지의 모양, 배치, 관계에 대한 계획과 함께 식생형을 구성하는 식물군락의 특징과 목록도 제시하였다. 각 식물군락은 지역의 자연식생을 참고하여 군락의 구조를 모델화하였다. 특히, 이 모델은 특정식물군락을 목표로 한 것이 아니라 기대하는 효과에 부합되는 군락을 개념화한 것이므로 식생형의 조건과 군락의 목표에 부합된다면 다른 식물군락도 이 모델에 적용하여 대안으로 활용할 수 있는 유연함을 갖는다. 본 연구의 한계점으로는 첫째, 생태적 공원의 식재설계임에도 불구하고, 야생동물 및 조류, 곤충 등을 위한 서식환경에 대해 충분히 고려하지 못하였고, 둘째, 대상지내 기존 산림, 특히 조림 숲에 대한 관리 방안이 계획에서 배제되었으며, 셋째, 식물군락 모델계획은 기존의 식물사회학 연구를 참고하여 자연의 식물군락구조를 적용하였는데, 일부 식물군락의 경우 정량적이고 객관적인 기준의 적용에 한계가 있었다는 점 등을 들 수 있다.

일본의 중견기업에 관한 연구 : 현황과 특징, 정책을 중심으로 (A Study on Medium-Sized Enterprises of Japan)

  • 강철구;김현성;김현철
    • 중소기업연구
    • /
    • 제32권2호
    • /
    • pp.209-223
    • /
    • 2010
  • 본고에서는 일본 중견기업의 위상, 특징, 관련 정책을 검토함으로써 우리나라에서의 중견기업 정책의 방향을 모색하고자 한다. 일본의 경쟁우위업종인 기계, 전자부품업의 출하와 고용비중은 여타 업종보다 높아, 그 저변에 두터운 중견기업이 존재하고 있음을 알 수 있다. 일본의 중견기업 육성정책은 연구개발과 환경대책을 위한 기업간 제휴 유도라는 측면에서 간접적으로 지원하고 있다. 우리나라도 특정 정책사업에 있어서 기업간 협력 유도를 통하여 중견기업을 육성할 수 있을 것이다.

외식 프랜차이즈 가맹본부의 사후 지원서비스가 가맹점의 관계품질과 경영성과에 미치는 영향 (The Effect of Franchisor's On-going Support Services on Franchisee's Relationship Quality and Business Performance in the Foodservice Industry)

  • 이재한;이용기;한규철
    • 한국유통학회지:유통연구
    • /
    • 제15권3호
    • /
    • pp.1-34
    • /
    • 2010
  • 본 연구의 목적은 국내 외식 프랜차이즈 시스템에서 가맹점에 대한 가맹본부의 관계품질에 영향을 미치는 변수를 사후 지원서비스로 설정하고, 사후 지원서비스가 가맹점의 관계품질(신뢰, 만족, 몰입)과 경영성과(재무적 성과, 비재무적 성과)에 미치는 영향에 대한 포괄적인 모형을 개발하는 것이다. 제안된 모형을 검증하기 위하여 서울 및 경기 지역의 외식 프랜차이즈 가맹점 경영자 500명을 대상으로 설문 조사를 하여, 구조방정식을 통해 실증 분석하였다. 분석결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 사후 지원서비스 요인 중 제품범주 및 가격 요인과 정보제공 및 문제해결 능력 요인은 가맹점의 만족과 몰입에만 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 둘째, 물류지원과 슈퍼바이저 지원 요인은 신뢰와 만족에만 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 셋째, 재교육 및 훈련지원 요인은 가맹점의 신뢰와 몰입에만 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 넷째, 판매촉진 요인은 신뢰 만족, 그리고 몰입 모두에 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 다섯째, 관계품질요인들 간의 관계는 신뢰가 만족에 긍정적인 영향을 미치지만 몰입에는 직접적으로 영향을 미치지 못하고, 만족을 통해서 몰입에 긍정적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 여섯째, 신뢰는 재무적 성과에만 긍정적인 영향을 미치고, 만족과 몰입은 재무적 성과와 비재무적 성과 모두에 긍정적 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 마지막으로 본 연구의 결과요약과 시사점, 그리고 연구의 한계점과 향후 연구방향이 제시되었다.

  • PDF

한국전쟁의 교훈과 대비 -병력수(兵力數) 및 부대수(部隊數)를 중심으로- (The lesson From Korean War)

  • 윤일영
    • 안보군사학연구
    • /
    • 통권8호
    • /
    • pp.49-168
    • /
    • 2010
  • Just before the Korean War, the total number of the North Korean troops was 198,380, while that of the ROK(Republic of Korea) army troops 105,752. That is, the total number of the ROK army troops at that time was 53.3% of the total number of the North Korean army. As of December 2008, the total number of the North Korean troops is estimated to be 1,190,000, while that of the ROK troops is 655,000, so the ROK army maintains 55.04% of the total number of the North Korean troops. If the ROK army continues to reduce its troops according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the total number of its troops will be 517,000 m 2020. If North Korea maintains the current status(l,190,000 troops), the number of the ROK troops will be 43.4% of the North Korean army. In terms of units, just before the Korean War, the number of the ROK army divisions and regiments was 80% and 44.8% of North Korean army. As of December 2008, North Korea maintains 86 divisions and 69 regiments. Compared to the North Korean army, the ROK army maintains 46 Divisions (53.4% of North Korean army) and 15 regiments (21.3% of North Korean army). If the ROK army continue to reduce the military units according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of ROK army divisions will be 28(13 Active Division, 4 Mobilization Divisions and 11 Local Reserve Divisions), while that of the North Korean army will be 86 in 2020. In that case, the number of divisions of the ROK army will be 32.5% of North Korean army. During the Korean war, North Korea suddenly invaded the Republic of Korea and occupied its capital 3 days after the war began. At that time, the ROK army maintained 80% of army divisions, compared to the North Korean army. The lesson to be learned from this is that, if the ROK army is forced to disperse its divisions because of the simultaneous invasion of North Korea and attack of guerrillas in home front areas, the Republic of Korea can be in a serious military danger, even though it maintains 80% of military divisions of North Korea. If the ROK army promotes the plans in [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of military units of the ROK army will be 32.5% of that of the North Korean army. This ratio is 2.4 times lower than that of the time when the Korean war began, and in this case, 90% of total military power should be placed in the DMZ area. If 90% of military power is placed in the DMZ area, few troops will be left for the defense of home front. In addition, if the ROK army continues to reduce the troops, it can allow North Korea to have asymmetrical superiority in military force and it will eventually exert negative influence on the stability and peace of the Korean peninsular. On the other hand, it should be reminded that, during the Korean War, the Republic of Korea was attacked by North Korea, though it kept 53.3% of troops, compared to North Korea. It should also be reminded that, as of 2008, the ROK army is defending its territory with the troops 55.04% of North Korea. Moreover, the national defense is assisted by 25,120 troops of the US Forces in Korea. In case the total number of the ROK troops falls below 43.4% of the North Korean army, it may cause social unrest about the national security and may lead North Korea's misjudgement. Besides, according to Lanchester strategy, the party with weaker military power (60% compared to the party with stronger military power) has the 4.1% of winning possibility. Therefore, if we consider the fact that the total number of the ROK army troops is 55.04% of that of the North Korean army, the winning possibility of the ROK army is not higher than 4.1%. If the total number of ROK troops is reduced to 43.4% of that of North Korea, the winning possibility will be lower and the military operations will be in critically difficult situation. [Military Reform Plan 2020] rums at the reduction of troops and units of the ground forces under the policy of 'select few'. However, the problem is that the financial support to achieve this goal is not secured. Therefore, the promotion of [Military Reform Plan 2020] may cause the weakening of military defence power in 2020. Some advanced countries such as Japan, UK, Germany, and France have promoted the policy of 'select few'. However, what is to be noted is that the national security situation of those countries is much different from that of Korea. With the collapse of the Soviet Unions and European communist countries, the military threat of those European advanced countries has almost disappeared. In addition, the threats those advanced countries are facing are not wars in national level, but terrorism in international level. To cope with the threats like terrorism, large scaled army trops would not be necessary. So those advanced European countries can promote the policy of 'select few'. In line with this, those European countries put their focuses on the development of military sections that deal with non-military operations and protection from unspecified enemies. That is, those countries are promoting the policy of 'select few', because they found that the policy is suitable for their national security environment. Moreover, since they are pursuing common interest under the European Union(EU) and they can form an allied force under NATO, it is natural that they are pursing the 'select few' policy. At present, NATO maintains the larger number of troops(2,446,000) than Russia(l,027,000) to prepare for the potential threat of Russia. The situation of japan is also much different from that of Korea. As a country composed of islands, its prime military focus is put on the maritime defense. Accordingly, the development of ground force is given secondary focus. The japanese government promotes the policy to develop technology-concentrated small size navy and air-forces, instead of maintaining large-scaled ground force. In addition, because of the 'Peace Constitution' that was enacted just after the end of World War II, japan cannot maintain troops more than 240,000. With the limited number of troops (240,000), japan has no choice but to promote the policy of 'select few'. However, the situation of Korea is much different from the situations of those countries. The Republic of Korea is facing the threat of the North Korean Army that aims at keeping a large-scale military force. In addition, the countries surrounding Korea are also super powers containing strong military forces. Therefore, to cope with the actual threat of present and unspecified threat of future, the importance of maintaining a carefully calculated large-scale military force cannot be denied. Furthermore, when considering the fact that Korea is in a peninsular, the Republic of Korea must take it into consideration the tradition of continental countries' to maintain large-scale military powers. Since the Korean War, the ROK army has developed the technology-force combined military system, maintaining proper number of troops and units and pursuing 'select few' policy at the same time. This has been promoted with the consideration of military situation in the Koran peninsular and the cooperation of ROK-US combined forces. This kind of unique military system that cannot be found in other countries can be said to be an insightful one for the preparation for the actual threat of North Korea and the conflicts between continental countries and maritime countries. In addition, this kind of technology-force combined military system has enabled us to keep peace in Korea. Therefore, it would be desirable to maintain this technology-force combined military system until the reunification of the Korean peninsular. Furthermore, it is to be pointed out that blindly following the 'select few' policy of advanced countries is not a good option, because it is ignoring the military strategic situation of the Korean peninsular. If the Republic of Korea pursues the reduction of troops and units radically without consideration of the threat of North Korea and surrounding countries, it could be a significant strategic mistake. In addition, the ROK army should keep an eye on the fact the European advanced countries and Japan that are not facing direct military threats are spending more defense expenditures than Korea. If the ROK army reduces military power without proper alternatives, it would exert a negative effect on the stable economic development of Korea and peaceful reunification of the Korean peninsular. Therefore, the desirable option would be to focus on the development of quality of forces, maintaining proper size and number of troops and units under the technology-force combined military system. The tableau above shows that the advanced countries like the UK, Germany, Italy, and Austria spend more defense expenditure per person than the Republic of Korea, although they do not face actual military threats, and that they keep achieving better economic progress than the countries that spend less defense expenditure. Therefore, it would be necessary to adopt the merits of the defense systems of those advanced countries. As we have examined, it would be desirable to maintain the current size and number of troops and units, to promote 'select few' policy with increased defense expenditure, and to strengthen the technology-force combined military system. On the basis of firm national security, the Republic of Korea can develop efficient policies for reunification and prosperity, and jump into the status of advanced countries. Therefore, the plans to reduce troops and units in [Military Reform Plan 2020] should be reexamined. If it is difficult for the ROK army to maintain its size of 655,000 troops because of low birth rate, the plans to establish the prompt mobilization force or to adopt drafting system should be considered for the maintenance of proper number of troops and units. From now on, the Republic of Korean government should develop plans to keep peace as well as to prepare unexpected changes in the Korean peninsular. For the achievement of these missions, some options can be considered. The first one is to maintain the same size of military troops and units as North Korea. The second one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea in terms of military force index. The third one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea, with the combination of the prompt mobilization force and the troops in active service under the system of technology-force combined military system. At present, it would be not possible for the ROK army to maintain such a large-size military force as North Korea (1,190,000 troops and 86 units). So it would be rational to maintain almost the same level of military force as North Korea with the combination of the troops on the active list and the prompt mobilization forces. In other words, with the combination of the troops in active service (60%) and the prompt mobilization force (40%), the ROK army should develop the strategies to harmonize technology and forces. The Korean government should also be prepared for the strategic flexibility of USFK, the possibility of American policy change about the location of foreign army, radical unexpected changes in North Korea, the emergence of potential threat, surrounding countries' demand for Korean force for the maintenance of regional stability, and demand for international cooperation against terrorism. For this, it is necessary to develop new approaches toward the proper number and size of troops and units. For instance, to prepare for radical unexpected political or military changes in North Korea, the Republic of Korea should have plans to protect a large number of refugees, to control arms and people, to maintain social security, and to keep orders in North Korea. From the experiences of other countries, it is estimated that 115,000 to 230,000 troops, plus ten thousands of police are required to stabilize the North Korean society, in the case radical unexpected military or political change happens in North Korea. In addition, if the Republic of Korea should perform the release of hostages, control of mass destruction weapons, and suppress the internal wars in North Korea, it should send 460,000 troops to North Korea. Moreover, if the Republic of Korea wants to stop the attack of North Korea and flow of refugees in DMZ area, at least 600,000 troops would be required. In sum, even if the ROK army maintains 600,000 troops, it may need additional 460,000 troops to prepare for unexpected radical changes in North Korea. For this, it is necessary to establish the prompt mobilization force whose size and number are almost the same as the troops in active service. In case the ROK army keeps 650,000 troops, the proper number of the prompt mobilization force would be 460,000 to 500,000.

  • PDF