주민자치센터 참여가 커뮤니티 사회자본에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study focuses on possible effects of joining community center upon better and more robust community social capital. More specifically, it aims at categorically examining into the differences in the level of community social capital between participants and non-participants in community center, and also investigating how much significantly community center participation might have effects on creation of community social capital in practice by means of empirical survey. Furthermore, the additional purpose of this study is to seek for alternative ways to facilitate community's capabilities through joining community center, and thereby explore into the possibility of community center as a new alternative way to resolve contemporary social problems or boost up institutional performance.
To meet these goals, this study established a theoretical framework on the basis of existing literatures, and also applied a questionnaire survey for empirical research. Here, sampling was limited to both Jung-gu and Seo-gu district in Daejeon metropolitan city, and a questionnaire survey was applied to 550 participants in community center(including resident autonomy committee in community center, participants in voluntary activities, and participants in lifelong learning programs at community center) and 350 non-participants at age 18 or older living.
Total 900 sheets of questionnaire were distributed from May 2 to 12, 2006. Out of total 853 sheets recollected, 16 sheets as incompletely or improperly filled were first excluded from data analysis. And for the benefit of consistent comparison of various analytic models that become a focus in this study, questionnaire sheets without any reply to items about certain variables were also eliminated in the lump. As a result, total 814 sheets were used as final data for analysis. Collected data were processed through t-test, F-test, regression analysis, correlation analysis and more using SAS Package.
The results of empirical analysis as derived in this study can be summed up as follows:
The analysis of the effects to join community center upon factors of community social capital showed that participants in community center scored higher average in all those factors than non-participants.
In terms of trust in neighbors, daily relationship and social ties, it was found that volunteer group scored higher average than any other groups. And in terms of tolerance, lifelong learning participants scored the highest average, which was followed by volunteer group, resident committee group, and non-participant group. Particularly, it was noted that passive resident autonomy committee didn't show any significant difference from non-participant group in terms of involvement in community, tolerance, and resolution of local questions.
Moreover, the district with community center under successful administration scored the highest average in institutional trust. In a further view of how much closely resident autonomy committee got involved in community, it was found that actively participating committee members showed far higher level of community social capital than non-participants. And it was also interesting that female group and low academic career group tried to have more influences on creating community social capital and positively resolving local questions, while high academic career group tended to overlook community's questions.
In regard to the sense of political efficacy and the institutional reliance, it was found that high academic career group and male group felt higher sense of political efficacy than female, non-participant and low academic career group, while all the participants hereof scored significantly lower total average in institutional trust than in other dimensions of community social capital on a statistical level.
The political suggestions derived in this study can be outlined as follows:
First, the promotion of community center and participation requires the promotion of autonomous community organism as driven by private sector, and legal and institutional instruments should be prepared in advance for this sake. Furthermore, it is also crucial to relieve severe residential instability by means of various residential stability policies in the governmental or local aspect. Next, it is required to promote community social capital for community by participating volunteer activities and lifelong learning programs.
Finally, it is necessary to promote community social capital for community through women's involvement in community and enhanced partnership between private and public sector, and enhance the right of citizen autonomy council in parallel with reinforcing community and citizens' capability for local autonomy.
Conclusively, it is important that our society should take more cares of boosting up community social capital for the benefit of community's sense of bond or secured reliance. In this regard, it is critical that community center should focus on promoting and motivating participation in community so that more citizens can take part in and even commit themselves to community positively with affluent community social capital. Above all, it is essential that community center should be a fountain for implementing ‘grass-roots democracy’ and ‘living autonomy.’

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제1장 서론∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙1
• 제1절 연구의 목적∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙1
• 제2절 연구의 범위와 방법∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙5
• 제2장 이론적 배경과 실태∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙8
• 제1절 커뮤니티 주민조직의 개념과 이론적 논의∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙8
• 1. 커뮤니티의 개념과 성격∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙8
• 2. 커뮤니티 주민조직의 중요성∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙12
• 3. 커뮤니티 주민조직으로서의 주민자치센터∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙15
• 제2절 커뮤니티 사회자본의 개념과 의의∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙22
• 1. 사회자본의 개념∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙22
• 2. 커뮤니티 사회자본의 개념과 구성요소∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙26
• 3. 주민자치센터와 커뮤니티 사회자본의 관계∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙