도움말

A Comparative Study on Two Ways of Community Building with Different Commons Ownership Modes

- Focusing on the cases of Gasi-ri and Seonheul 1-ri

DEVELOPMENT AND SOCIETY Vol.47 No.2, 2018.6, 211-236 (26 pages)
인용정보 복사
Quick View Quick View
구매하기 6,000원
인용하기
이용수 : 9건
피인용수 : 0건
분야내 활용도 : 67%
자세히 보기 >

· 이용수 : 2010년부터 집계한 원문다운로드수

· 피인용수 : DBpia 논문 가운데 해당 논문을 인용한 논문수

· 분야내 활용도 : 최근 24개월간 DBpia 이용수를 기준으로 산출 / 0%에 가까울 수록 활용도가 높고, 100%에 가까울 수록 활용도가 낮음

초록
This paper compares the cases of Seonheul 1-ri and Gasi-ri, where communities were built based on commons, but commons ownership modes were different. Seonheul 1-ri built a community based on “Dongbaekdongsan” owned by Jeju-do and the central government, while Gasi-ri built a community based on a common pasture owned by a farm association. In comparing these two cases, this paper will discuss how the difference in ownership modes affected the community building and commons management methods. This paper shows that a village’s ownership of the commons may paradoxically interfere with the formation of a stable commons management body in some cases. Whereas the farm cooperative association, of which the members are 270 village residents, has the ownership of the common pasture in the case of Gasi-ri, the central government owns “Dongbaekdongsan” in the case of Seonheul 1-ri. Although both villages successfully built communities, in the case of Gasi-ri, the members of the village council, which is the commons management body, are divided into association members and non-association members. In the case of Seonheul 1-ri, all members of the village are equal in their statuses in the village council since there is no farm cooperative association with the ownership of commons. Therefore, the community of Seonheul 1-ri has a good structure for immigrants to settle into. The non-association members who have actively participated in community building in Gasi-ri are leaving, and thus the population of Gasi-ri is stagnant. On the contrary, the population of Seonheul 1-ri is increasing rapidly as the number of immigrating residents grows. Even when the village manages the commons, conflicts can be amplified in cases where some of the residents, or the association to which some but not all of the residents belong, owns the commons. Due to the inequality between persons with and without ownership, the managing body of the commons can become unstable. To stably promote community building, the commons should be owned by the village or the villagers rather than by outsiders, an enterprise, or the state. However, even when the village or the villagers have the ownership of the commons, if there is inequality among village residents around the commons it may interfere with community building or the maintenance of the sustainability of the commons. On the contrary, if the commons is expropriated by the government and the right of the village to stably manage the commons is guaranteed although the village does not have first-hand ownership, a community can be built and the sustainability of the commons can be maintained for a long time because the residents are equal. To manage the commons effectively to remain sustainable hereafter, village residents should be continuously filled, and to this end the village council should have an equal and open structure.

목차
Preface
Precedent Studies
Present Situation and Commons Ownership Modes of Gasi-ri and Seonheul 1-ri
Comparative Analysis of Community Building
Conclusion
Reference
키워드

논문의 주요 키워드를 제공합니다. 키워드를 클릭하여 관련 논문을 확인해 보세요!

참고문헌 (0)

현재 논문의 참고문헌을 찾아 신청해주세요!

해당 논문은 참고문헌 정보가 없습니다.

인용된 논문 (0)

알림서비스 신청하고 '인용된 논문' 정보를 메일로 확인 하세요!

해당 논문은 인용된 논문 정보가 없습니다.

제 1 저자의 다른 논문 (27)

HYUN CHOE 식별저자 저자의 상세정보를 확인해 보세요.

  • 처음
  •  
  • 이전
  •  
  • 1
  •  
  • 2
  •  
  • 3
  •  
  • 다음
  •  
  • 마지막
권호 내 다른 논문 (10)

DEVELOPMENT AND SOCIETY Vol.47 No.2 의 상세정보를 확인해 보세요.

추천 논문 (5)

DBpia 추천논문과 함께 다운받은 논문을 제공합니다. 논문 초록의 텍스트마이닝과 이용 및 인용 관계 분석을 통해 추천해 드리는 연관논문을 확인해보세요.

DBpia 추천논문

더 많은 추천논문을 확인해 보세요!

함께 다운받은 논문

해당 논문은 함께 다운받은 논문 정보가 없습니다.

지표

이용현황

· 이용수

· 이용순위 상위 Top3

자세히 보기 >
No 상위 이용이관 이용수
1 제주대학교 3
2 행정안전부 2
3 목포대학교 2

활용도

· 활용지수

· 논문의 활용도 추이 (주제분야 기준)

자세히 보기 >

: %

2016-09
2016-10
2016-11
2016-12
0
20
40
60
80
100
  • 0%
  • 20%
  • 40%
  • 60%
  • 80%
  • 100%

피인용수

상세정보
저작권 정책

누리미디어에서 제공되는 모든 저작물의 저작권은 원저작자에게 있으며, 누리미디어는 각 저작물의 내용을 보증하거나 책임을 지지 않습니다. 단, 누리미디어에서 제공되는 서지정보는 저작권법에 의해 보호를 받는 저작물로, 사전 허락 없이 임의로 대량 수집하거나 프로그램에 의한 주기적 수집 이용, 무단 전재, 배포하는 것을 금하며, 이를 위반할 경우, 저작권법 및 관련법령에 따라 민, 형사상의 책임을 질 수 있습니다.

맨 위로 이동