글로벌 테마파크 유치에 요구되는 정부 지원 요소 분석 : 화성시 유니버설 스튜디오 유치 실패 사례를 중심으로 = Analysis of Government Support Factors Required for Attracting Global Theme Parks - Focusing on the case of failure to attract Universal Studios to Hwaseong City -

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

As the importance of leisure in modern society grows day by day, interest in theme parks as a space for leisure activities is also continuously growing. The global theme park industry has been growing steadily since the 2000s, but it experienced a crisis in which the number of visitors plummeted for a while due to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, it has recently been recovering to the pre-COVID level, and among them, visitors from Disney and Universal Group have an overwhelming influence in the industry, with a market share of 78.4% based on the world's top 25 theme parks.
Countries around the world are making efforts at the central and local government levels to attract competitive global theme parks such as Disney or Universal, but in the past 10 years, there have been no successful cases other than Shanghai Disneyland and Beijing Universal Studios in China. In Korea, the representative cases of failure to attract global theme parks are Seoul Land in Gwacheon and Songsan Green City in Hwaseong City. In particular, the Hwaseong Universal Studios Korea Resort project reached the final business agreement stage, but the project fell through due to lack of active support from the Korean government.
It is difficult to find academic research or practical reports that deeply analyze the causes of failure in attracting global theme parks domestically and internationally. Therefore, the Universal Studios Korea Resort project, which was suspended at the previously presented business agreement stage and in which the researcher directly participated in the global theme park attraction work, was selected as a case study and the causes of failure were analyzed.
The purpose of this study is to derive policy implications for attracting global theme parks through expert analysis of the causes of USKR failure. In order to effectively achieve this purpose, expert analysis of the case study was conducted in three stages as follows.
First, the necessity of government support factors was recognized when attracting global theme parks, and the key success factors and support scale of successful overseas global theme park cases such as Disney and Universal were identified. The factors were identified as government support factors such as land provision, financial support, infrastructure support, taxation, and other support, and the support scale is as follows.
In the case of land provision, the government provided long-term free leases or low-price sales, and in the case of financial support, direct investment and long-term low-interest loans from the public sector were provided. In addition, in terms of infrastructure and tax support, transportation infrastructure such as railways and roads and other infrastructure support were provided, and in particular, tax support was found to have secured the stability of the project and promoted investment attraction.
Second, based on the AHP analysis results centered on government support factors derived from overseas success stories, the importance of government land provision, government financial support, government infrastructure support, and other government support was analyzed in order of importance in the upper factors. Meanwhile, the importance of good accessibility, public sector equity investment, large-scale land, favorable provision conditions, and public sector long-term low-interest loans were analyzed in order of importance in the lower factors, and it was confirmed that these factors were ranked at the top of the final importance. Therefore, it was proven that government-level land provision and financial support are important factors in attracting global theme parks.
Third, the results of expert interviews on the reasons for the failure of the USKR are as follows. In terms of land, the public sector, including the government, did not sold land at low prices and did not provide free leases. The main reasons were the lack of national awareness of the reality of attracting global theme parks and the lack of consensus due to the inefficient decision-making system of public institutions and government organizations. This was confirmed to be an important cause of the breakdown of negotiations.
In terms of finance, the failure to make equity investments in the public sector and the failure to provide long-term low-interest loans by state-run banks were the causes. In the case of the failure to make equity investments in the public sector, the financial burden of K-water, the management difficulties of the Industrial Bank of Korea, and the lack of financial capacity of the business operator were the causes. On the other hand, in the case of the failure to provide long-term low-interest loans by state-run banks, the lack of financial capacity of the business operator was the main cause, and this was also confirmed to be an important cause of the failure to attract the project.
In terms of infrastructure, the construction of the railway, which was most importantly requested, was not a problem because it was already planned to be built in connection with the Songsan Green City development project where the theme park site is located, and it was confirmed that other factors such as tax benefits could not be considered causes of failure because the USKR negotiations had not yet reached that stage.
Lastly, there was the lack of communication between the business operator consortium and the licensor UPR. Although it is not a direct government support factor, communication between the licensor UPR and the business operator is an important factor due to the nature of the licensing business of the global theme park project. However, it was confirmed that there was a problem of mutual communication because the business operator did not accurately understand the licensor's exact position and global business relationship. Therefore, this lack of communication also acted as a major cause of the failure to attract.
The implications of this study are as follows. First, attracting a global theme park is a negotiation process with a licensor who has formed a monopoly in the market, and their demands are difficult to respond to in the private sector, such as land, finance, and infrastructure, so active support from the government is essential. Currently, many local governments in Korea are hoping to attract a global theme park to vitalize the local economy and develop the tourism industry, but they should consider whether they can achieve a national project at the central government level.
Second, there is a priority among the government support factors essential to attracting a global theme park according to their importance. Therefore, the priority should be considered when providing support at the government level.
In order to successfully attract a global theme park in the future, it is necessary to consider the characteristics of such license negotiations and prepare sufficiently in advance.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제1장 서론 1
• 제1절 연구의 배경과 목적 1
• 1. 연구의 배경 1
• 2. 연구의 목적 3
• 제2절 연구의 구성과 절차 4
• 제2장 이론적 고찰 및 대상 사업개요 7
• 제1절 글로벌 테마파크의 의의 7
• 1. 테마파크의 개념 7
• 2. 테마파크의 역사 10
• 3. 테마파크의 특성 13
• 4. 글로벌 테마파크의 경제적 파급효과 23
• 제2절 글로벌 테마파크의 현황 31
• 1. 주요 글로벌 테마파크 입장객 현황 32
• 2. 해외 유치 디즈니 현황 38
• 3. 해외 유치 유니버설 스튜디오 현황 41
• 제3절 선행연구 및 본 연구의 차별성 44
• 제4절 유니버설 스튜디오 코리아 리조트 사업개요 56
• 1. 사업추진 배경 56
• 2. 사업추진 계획 57
• 3. 사업관련 이해당사자 및 역할 61
• 4. 사업추진 과정 63
• 제3장 글로벌 테마파크 정부 지원 사례 66
• 제1절 조사개요 66
• 제2절 디즈니랜드 67
• 1. 도쿄 디즈니 리조트 67
• 2. 디즈니랜드 파리 69
• 3. 디즈니랜드 홍콩 71
• 4. 상하이 디즈니 리조트 73
• 제3절 유니버설 스튜디오 75
• 1. 유니버설 스튜디오 재팬 75
• 2. 유니버설 스튜디오 싱가포르 77
• 3. 유니버설 베이징 리조트 79
• 제4절 정부 지원 요소 82
• 제4장 국내 유치 실패 원인 전문가 AHP 86
• 제1절 AHP 방법론 86
• 1. AHP의 개념과 절차 86
• 2. 쌍대 비교 및 일관성 검증 88
• 제2절 설문 개요 90
• 1. 질문설계 90
• 2. 전문가 선정 98
• 3. 자료수집 99
• 제3절 분석 결과 100
• 1. 상위요인 상대적 중요도 102
• 2. 하위요인 상대적 중요도 103
• 제5장 국내 유치 실패 원인 전문가 인터뷰 111
• 제1절 전문가 인터뷰 개요 111
• 1. 질문설계 111
• 2. 자료수집 115
• 제2절 전문가 인터뷰 결과 116
• 1. 토지제공 협상 진행과정 및 실패 원인 분석 116
• 2. 금융지원 협상 진행과정 및 실패 원인 분석 123
• 3. 인프라 지원 협상 진행과정 및 실패 원인 분석 128
• 4. 기타 정부 지원 협상 진행과정 및 실패 원인 분석 131
• 제3절 소결 137
• 제6장 결론 140
• 제1절 연구의 요약 및 시사점 140
• 제2절 연구의 한계와 향후 과제 142
• 참고 문헌 144
• 부 록 157
• Abstract 169