RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기

    수도권 과밀부담금제도의 평가와 개선방안에 관한 연구 = (A) study on the improvement and evaluation of the policy of change on developing large scale building in seoul metropolitan area

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=T8108257

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
      • URL 복사
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    The policy of charging on developing a large scale building is one of the management policy of seoul metropolitan Area.
    This policy is a way of economic regulation that imposes charge on the external diseconomies caused by constructing large buildings in a metropolitan area. It also charges a tax on the economical profit that the owner of the building might gain.
    This policy will not only restrain the concentration of population and businesses, but also the collected revenue will be re-invested in developing local areas. Despite its policy merits, there has been no effects during the process of its implementation, also many problems has been discovered.
    The purpose of this study is to analyze the effects and the problems of the policy which has been implemented since 1994 and to suggest its improvements.
    This study has been done through the following steps.
    Firstly, it has investigated the expected effects and the limitations of the policy through theoretical background. It also studied the general problems by means of going over the existing studies.
    Secondly, it has analyzed the background when it was adopted and the current situation.
    Thirdly, it has analyzed the effects of and the problems of the policy currently being implemented to show its failure.
    Lastly, it has suggested the recommendations to improve the effects of the policy by summarizing the previous steps.
    Followings are the reasons why the policy has been ineffective.
    First of all, the formula of charging fees is multiplication of the building floor area by the standard construction cost and the imposition ratio. The charged building will be selected by concept of main use and whether it exceeds the standard area. As a result, the current policy does not consider the probability of concentration.
    Secondly, there have been problems of the unrealistically selected area, the unclear way of using the revenue, the inconsistency of the collecting charges.
    This study shows two ways of Improvements.
    Firstly, to change the formula to produce the amount of the charge.
    The new formula will include the degree of probability of concentration, the land cost and the construction density all of which are omitted in the current policy.
    Secondly it suggest to correct the managerial problems which the currently policy has by adopting policy suggestions.
    Finally, there should be more active and flexible management of the policy. There also should be fundamental reformation which considers the current situation to implement the policy as it is originally intended.
    the current policy.
    Secondly it suggest to correct the managerial problems which the
    currently policy has by adopting policy suggestions.
    Finally, there should be more active and flexible management of the
    policy. There also should be fundamental reformation which considers
    the current situation to implement the policy as it is originally intended.
    번역하기

    The policy of charging on developing a large scale building is one of the management policy of seoul metropolitan Area. This policy is a way of economic regulation that imposes charge on the external diseconomies caused by constructing large building...

    The policy of charging on developing a large scale building is one of the management policy of seoul metropolitan Area.
    This policy is a way of economic regulation that imposes charge on the external diseconomies caused by constructing large buildings in a metropolitan area. It also charges a tax on the economical profit that the owner of the building might gain.
    This policy will not only restrain the concentration of population and businesses, but also the collected revenue will be re-invested in developing local areas. Despite its policy merits, there has been no effects during the process of its implementation, also many problems has been discovered.
    The purpose of this study is to analyze the effects and the problems of the policy which has been implemented since 1994 and to suggest its improvements.
    This study has been done through the following steps.
    Firstly, it has investigated the expected effects and the limitations of the policy through theoretical background. It also studied the general problems by means of going over the existing studies.
    Secondly, it has analyzed the background when it was adopted and the current situation.
    Thirdly, it has analyzed the effects of and the problems of the policy currently being implemented to show its failure.
    Lastly, it has suggested the recommendations to improve the effects of the policy by summarizing the previous steps.
    Followings are the reasons why the policy has been ineffective.
    First of all, the formula of charging fees is multiplication of the building floor area by the standard construction cost and the imposition ratio. The charged building will be selected by concept of main use and whether it exceeds the standard area. As a result, the current policy does not consider the probability of concentration.
    Secondly, there have been problems of the unrealistically selected area, the unclear way of using the revenue, the inconsistency of the collecting charges.
    This study shows two ways of Improvements.
    Firstly, to change the formula to produce the amount of the charge.
    The new formula will include the degree of probability of concentration, the land cost and the construction density all of which are omitted in the current policy.
    Secondly it suggest to correct the managerial problems which the currently policy has by adopting policy suggestions.
    Finally, there should be more active and flexible management of the policy. There also should be fundamental reformation which considers the current situation to implement the policy as it is originally intended.
    the current policy.
    Secondly it suggest to correct the managerial problems which the
    currently policy has by adopting policy suggestions.
    Finally, there should be more active and flexible management of the
    policy. There also should be fundamental reformation which considers
    the current situation to implement the policy as it is originally intended.

    더보기

    목차 (Table of Contents)

    • 제1장 서 론 = 1
    • 제1절 연구의 배경 및 목적 = 1
    • 1. 연구의 배경 = 1
    • 2. 연구의 목적 = 3
    • 제2절 연구의 범위 및 방법 = 3
    • 제1장 서 론 = 1
    • 제1절 연구의 배경 및 목적 = 1
    • 1. 연구의 배경 = 1
    • 2. 연구의 목적 = 3
    • 제2절 연구의 범위 및 방법 = 3
    • 1. 연구의 범위 = 3
    • 2. 연구의 방법 = 4
    • 제2장 과밀부담금 제도의 이론적 고찰 = 6
    • 제1절 부담금의 의의 = 6
    • 1. 부담금의 개념 = 6
    • 2. 부담금의 분류 = 6
    • 제2절 과밀부담금제도의 이론적 배경 = 8
    • 1. 시장의 실패와 정부개입의 정당성 = 8
    • 2. 정부개입의 유형 = 9
    • 제3절 과밀부담금의 내용 = 11
    • 1. 과밀부담금의 성격 = 11
    • 1) 과밀부담금의 공간적 성격 = 11
    • 2) 과밀부담금의 법적 성격 = 11
    • 3) 과밀부담금의 경제적 성격 = 12
    • 4) 과밀부담금의 사회적 성격 = 13
    • 2. 과밀부담금의 기대효과 = 14
    • 1) 부담금 부과효과 = 14
    • 2) 재원활용의 효과 = 15
    • 3)과밀부담금을 통한 수도권정비정책 효과의 제고 = 15
    • 3. 과밀부담금제도의 한계점 = 16
    • 1) 부담금 산정의 어려움 = 16
    • 2) 부담의 형평성 = 16
    • 3) 사회적 문제 = 16
    • 4. 외국의 유사제도 = 17
    • 1) 영국의 사무실 규제정책 = 17
    • 2) 프랑스의 건축허가와 부담금제도 = 18
    • 3) 일본의 사무실입지정책 = 19
    • 제4절 선행연구의 검토 = 20
    • 1. 수도권정비계획법의 평가에 관한 연구 = 20
    • 2. 부담금제도에 대한 평가에 관한 연구 = 22
    • 3. 과밀부담금제도에 관한 연구 = 22
    • 제3장 과밀부담금제도의 내용 및 현황 = 26
    • 제1절 과밀부담금제도의 도입배경 = 26
    • 1. 수도권 집중과 문제점 = 26
    • 2. 수도권 시책의 전개와 한계 = 28
    • 3. 국내의 여건변화와 수도권정비시책의 변화 = 31
    • 4. 대형건축물의 입지규제 변천 = 34
    • 5. 과밀부담금제도의 정책결정 과정 = 37
    • 1) 과밀부담금제도의 시안 = 38
    • 2) 서울시의 입장 = 39
    • 3) 건설부의 수정안 = 40
    • 4) 과밀부담금제도의 최종안 = 41
    • 제2절 과밀부담금제도의 내용 및 시행 = 43
    • 1. 과밀부담금제도의 의의 = 43
    • 2. 과밀부담금제도의 시행 = 44
    • 1) 부과대상과 부담자 = 44
    • 2) 부담금의 산정기준 = 45
    • 3) 부담금의 감면 = 46
    • 4) 부담금의 부과.징수 = 46
    • 5) 부담금에 대한 이의 신고 = 47
    • 6) 부담금의 배분 = 47
    • 제3절 과밀부담금의 부과 및 징수 현황 = 48
    • 제4장 과밀부담금제도의 실효성 분석 및 문제점 = 53
    • 제1절 과밀부담금제도의 실효성 분석 = 53
    • 1. 과밀부담금제도의 실효성 분석의 기본방향 = 53
    • 2. 과밀억제 효과 분석 = 55
    • 3. 입지조절효과 분석 = 58
    • 4. 징수된 부담금의 재원활용 분석 = 61
    • 5. 소 결 = 63
    • 제2절 과밀부담금제도의 운용상 문제점 = 66
    • 1. 부과대상지역 적정성의 문제점 = 66
    • 2. 부담금산정기준의 문제점 = 68
    • 3. 부과대상의 기준의 문제점 = 70
    • 4. 재원조달기능 수행의 문제점 = 72
    • 5. 유사부담금과의 중복부과의 문제점 = 74
    • 6. 소 결 = 77
    • 제5장 과밀부담금 제도의 개선방안 = 79
    • 제1절 과밀부담금제도의 개선방안의 방향 = 79
    • 제2절 과밀부담금제도의 개선방안 = 83
    • 1. 산정식의 개선방안 = 83
    • 2. 정책방식의 개선에 대한 정책적 제언 = 87
    • 제6장 결 론 = 88
    • <참고문헌> = 92
    • <부 록> = 95
    • 서울특별시 과밀부담금 부과실태 현황 = 95
    • 연도별 표준건축비 = 103
    • 과밀부담금산정방식 = 105
    • = 109
    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼