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
    KCI등재

    지역개발영향부담금 집행 차이에 대한 원인 탐색하기: 플로리다 카운티를 중심으로 = Exploring Causes of Local Development Impact Fees: Empirical evidence from Florida counties

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A105884036

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

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

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    Up until now, 29 states in the USA have adopted their own Development Impact Fee (DIF) Acts. Many scholars indicate that DIFs have been recognized as a financial policy tool closer to environmental policy than developmental policy. Namely, DIFs are one of institutions that stakeholders pursuing environment conservation prefer. Based on these perspectives, this study targets to empirically scrutinize why counties as local governments more actively implement development impact fees. For this, the study constructs a final equation model, which is composed of six hypotheses, and estimates each hypothesis. The final statistical findings reveal that counties with many wealthy residents and many homeowners as interest groups implement more DIFs. These empirical findings support that residents in high socioeconomic status prefer environmental policy to developmental policy. These days, Korea has been a democratic country embracing a dynamic circumstance. In this current situation, scholars need to analyze explanatory power of interest groups in studying mechanisms of the policy process in Korea. On the other hand, the author proposes to compare these research results with studies analyzing counties in other states to confirm these research results’ generalizability.
    번역하기

    Up until now, 29 states in the USA have adopted their own Development Impact Fee (DIF) Acts. Many scholars indicate that DIFs have been recognized as a financial policy tool closer to environmental policy than developmental policy. Namely, DIFs are on...

    Up until now, 29 states in the USA have adopted their own Development Impact Fee (DIF) Acts. Many scholars indicate that DIFs have been recognized as a financial policy tool closer to environmental policy than developmental policy. Namely, DIFs are one of institutions that stakeholders pursuing environment conservation prefer. Based on these perspectives, this study targets to empirically scrutinize why counties as local governments more actively implement development impact fees. For this, the study constructs a final equation model, which is composed of six hypotheses, and estimates each hypothesis. The final statistical findings reveal that counties with many wealthy residents and many homeowners as interest groups implement more DIFs. These empirical findings support that residents in high socioeconomic status prefer environmental policy to developmental policy. These days, Korea has been a democratic country embracing a dynamic circumstance. In this current situation, scholars need to analyze explanatory power of interest groups in studying mechanisms of the policy process in Korea. On the other hand, the author proposes to compare these research results with studies analyzing counties in other states to confirm these research results’ generalizability.

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    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