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

    계획가 특성에 따른 계획이론의 실무적합성 분석

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A60193400

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    Planning theories have been criticized for a lack of relevance to practice. Previous studies argued that for the relevance, planners adopt a group of theories instead of attempting to identify one best theory. Planners were not considered in the studies, however, although they actually use the theories and assess the relevance in practice. Thus, this study explores how the practical relevance differs according to characteristics planners have. For empirical analysis, individual theories of planning are categorized into groups, each of which proposes a certain planner role. Then, this study investigates which role is adopted in practice, that is, which theory is practically relevant. Logit models find that planners’ sociodemographics, work settings, and specialties are associated with the relevance of the theories. Chi-squared test of association and tetrachoric correlation confirm that for the relevance, planners choose either the group of rational-refined rational-transactive/communicative planning or that of radical-advocacy planning.
    번역하기

    Planning theories have been criticized for a lack of relevance to practice. Previous studies argued that for the relevance, planners adopt a group of theories instead of attempting to identify one best theory. Planners were not considered in the studi...

    Planning theories have been criticized for a lack of relevance to practice. Previous studies argued that for the relevance, planners adopt a group of theories instead of attempting to identify one best theory. Planners were not considered in the studies, however, although they actually use the theories and assess the relevance in practice. Thus, this study explores how the practical relevance differs according to characteristics planners have. For empirical analysis, individual theories of planning are categorized into groups, each of which proposes a certain planner role. Then, this study investigates which role is adopted in practice, that is, which theory is practically relevant. Logit models find that planners’ sociodemographics, work settings, and specialties are associated with the relevance of the theories. Chi-squared test of association and tetrachoric correlation confirm that for the relevance, planners choose either the group of rational-refined rational-transactive/communicative planning or that of radical-advocacy planning.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 봉인식, "도시정비사업 의사결정과정에서 계획가의 역할에 관한 연구" 경기개발연구원 2010

    2 권원용, "계획환경의 변화에 대처하는 도시계획가의 역할 모색에 관한 연구" 한국도시행정학회 21 (21): 3-24, 2008

    3 전상인, "계획이론의 탈근대적 전환에 대한 비판적 성찰" 대한국토·도시계획학회 42 (42): 7-24, 2007

    4 Friedmann, J, "Why do planning theory?" 2 (2): 7-10, 2003

    5 Aitken, S. C, "Who contrives the “ real” in GIS?" 22 (22): 17-29, 1995

    6 Verma, N, "What is planning practice? The search for suitable categories" 14 (14): 178-182, 1995

    7 Alexander, E. R, "What do planners need to know? Identifying needed competencies, methods, and skills" 22 (22): 91-106, 2005

    8 Frank, N, "Values, Information, and Power, Baltimore: Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning 2002"

    9 Guzzetta, J. D, "Urban planners’skills and competencies" 23 (23): 96-106, 2003

    10 Myers, D, "Toward greater heights for planning" 71 (71): 121-129, 2005

    1 봉인식, "도시정비사업 의사결정과정에서 계획가의 역할에 관한 연구" 경기개발연구원 2010

    2 권원용, "계획환경의 변화에 대처하는 도시계획가의 역할 모색에 관한 연구" 한국도시행정학회 21 (21): 3-24, 2008

    3 전상인, "계획이론의 탈근대적 전환에 대한 비판적 성찰" 대한국토·도시계획학회 42 (42): 7-24, 2007

    4 Friedmann, J, "Why do planning theory?" 2 (2): 7-10, 2003

    5 Aitken, S. C, "Who contrives the “ real” in GIS?" 22 (22): 17-29, 1995

    6 Verma, N, "What is planning practice? The search for suitable categories" 14 (14): 178-182, 1995

    7 Alexander, E. R, "What do planners need to know? Identifying needed competencies, methods, and skills" 22 (22): 91-106, 2005

    8 Frank, N, "Values, Information, and Power, Baltimore: Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning 2002"

    9 Guzzetta, J. D, "Urban planners’skills and competencies" 23 (23): 96-106, 2003

    10 Myers, D, "Toward greater heights for planning" 71 (71): 121-129, 2005

    11 Lim, G.-C, "Toward a synthesis of contemporary planning theories" 5 (5): 75-85, 1986

    12 Friedmann, J, "The uses of planning theory" 28 (28): 247-257, 2008

    13 Mazziotti, D. F, "The underlying assumptions of advocacy planning: Pluralism and reform" 40 (40): 38-47, 1974

    14 Beauregard, R. A, "The occupation of planning: A view from the Census" 42 (42): 187-192, 1976

    15 Helling, A, "The central sixth theme" 16 (16): 228-, 1997

    16 Weber, M, "The Theory of Social and Economic Organization" Free Press 1997

    17 Schon, D. A, "The Reflective Practitioner" Basic Books 1983

    18 Rodwin, L, "The Profession of City Planning" Center for Urban Policy Research 2000

    19 Friedmann, J, "Teaching planning theory" 14 (14): 156-162, 1995

    20 Ozawa, C. P, "Taking our bearings" 18 (18): 257-266, 1999

    21 Lindblom, C. E, "Still muddling, not yet through" 39 (39): 517-526, 1979

    22 Baum, H. S, "Social science, social work, and surgery" 63 (63): 179-188, 1997

    23 Alexander, E. R, "Response to ‘Why do planning theory?" 2 (2): 179-182, 2003

    24 Faludi, A, "Rationality, critical rationalism, and planning doctrine" 1996

    25 Kaufman, S, "Quantitative and research methods in planning" 15 (15): 17-33, 1995

    26 Dalton, L. C, "Preparing planners for the breadth of practice" 73 (73): 35-48, 2007

    27 March, A, "Practising theory" 9 (9): 108-125, 2010

    28 Harris, N, "Practice through a lens: A metaphor for planning theory" 19 (19): 309-315, 2000

    29 Meyerson, M, "Politics, Planning and the Public Interest: The Case of Public Housing in Chicago" Free Press 1955

    30 Edwards, M. M, "Planning’s core curriculum" 31 (31): 172-183, 2011

    31 Healey, P, "Planning through debate: The communicative turn in planning theory" 63 (63): 143-162, 1992

    32 Innes, J, "Planning theory’s emerging paradigm: Communicative action and interactive practice" 14 (14): 183-189, 1995

    33 Yiftachel, O, "Planning theory at the crossroad: The Third Oxford Conference" 18 (18): 267-270, 1999

    34 Friedmann, J, "Planning in the Public Domain" Princeton University Press 1987

    35 Forester, J, "Planning in the Face of Power" University of California Press 1989

    36 Schonwandt, W. L, "Planning in Crisis?" Ashgate Publishing 2008

    37 Brooks,M.P, "Planning Theory for Practitioners" Planners Press 2002

    38 Baum, H. S, "Planners and Public Expectations" Schenkman 1983

    39 Kraushaar, R, "Outside the whale: Progressive planning and the dilemmas of radical reform" 54 (54): 91-100, 1988

    40 Beauregard, R. A, "Occupational transformations in urban and regional planning, 1960 to 1980" 5 (5): 10-16, 1985

    41 Wekerle, G. R, "New Space for Women" Westview 1980

    42 Etzioni, A, "Mixed scanning revisited" 46 (46): 8-14, 1986

    43 Mandelbaum, S. J, "Introduction" 11 (11): 1996

    44 Friedmann, J, "Insurgencies: Essays in Planning Theory" Routledge 2011

    45 Sanyal, B, "Globalization, ethical compromise and planning theory" 1 (1): 116-123, 2002

    46 Grabow, S, "Foundations for a radical concept of planning" 39 (39): 106-114, 1973

    47 Mandelbaum, S. J, "Explorations in Planning Theory" Center for Urban Policy Research 1996

    48 Liggett, H, "Examining the planning practice conscious(ness)" 299-306, 1996

    49 Dalton, L. C, "Emerging knowledge about planning practice" 9 (9): 29-44, 1989

    50 Watson, V, "Do we learn from planning practice?" 22 (22): 178-187, 2002

    51 미국 노동부 노동통계국, "Current Population Survey"

    52 Forester, J, "Critical Theory, Public Policy, and Planning Practice: Toward a Critical Pragmatism" State University of New York Press 1993

    53 Beard, V. A, "Covert planning for social transformation in Indonesia" 22 (22): 15-25, 2002

    54 Hoch, C, "Conflict at large: A national survey of planners and political conflict" 8 (8): 25-34, 1988

    55 Seltzer, E, "Clear signals: Moving on to planning’s promise" 22 (22): 77-86, 2002

    56 Meyerson, M, "Building the middle-range bridge for comprehensive planning" 22 (22): 58-64, 1956

    57 Knox, P. L, "Attitudes to Third World urban planning" 13 (13): 67-79, 1989

    58 Alexander, E. R, "After rationality, In Explorations in Planning Theory" Explorations in Planning Theory 45-64, 1996

    59 Davidoff, P, "Advocacy and pluralism in planning" 31 (31): 331-338, 1965

    60 미국도시계획협회, "APA/AICP 2006 Planners Salary Survey"

    61 Krumholz, N, "A retrospective view of equity planning: Cleveland, 1969- 1979" 48 (48): 163-174, 1982

    62 Murray, D, "A critical analysis of communicative rationality as a theoretical underpinning for collaborative approaches to integrated resource and environmental management" 33 (33): 17-34, 2005

    63 Davidoff, P, "A choice theory of planning" 28 (28): 103-115, 1962

    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

    인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

    학술지 이력

    학술지 이력
    연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
    2026 평가 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
    2020-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
    2017-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
    2013-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2010-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2007-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2006-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2005-10-11 학술지명변경 한글명 : 한국도시행정학보 -> 도시행정학보 KCI등재후보
    2004-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 0.79 0.79 1.01
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    0.98 0.93 1.292 0.22
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼