한국의 지방자치단체 재난대응체계 : 정책네트워크 이론의 호혜성과 확장성을 중심으로 = (The)disaster response systems of local governments in Korea : with reference to the reciprocity and expansion of the policy network theory

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The present study began with the question of why damages caused by natural disasters are different between Korea and the U.S. while the two countries suffer from similar types of natural disasters. We tried to find answers to the question in differences between the disaster response system in Korea and that in the U.S. and consequent differences in network components and the type of policy network. That is, this study was conducted focused on why Korean local governments and American local governments are different in forming networks to respond to disasters. The ultimate objective of this study is to suggest a desirable networking method of Korean local governments for effective disaster response.
For this purpose, we selected hurricane Isabel and Katrina in the U.S. and typhoon Maemi and Ewiniar in Korea. In addition, theoretical analysis and case study were adopted as methodologies for solving research problems. In addition, network analysis was made using NetMiner 2.6. In addition, AHP analysis was used to compare the importance and priority of disaster response functions. Lastly, to complement the case study, we conducted in?]depth interviews with researchers and specialists related to disaster management.
According to the result of analyzing the disaster response network in Cheongju, Chungcheongbuk?]do, there were local disaster response organizations such as Local Safety Control Committee, Local Disaster Safety Center and Local Emergency Rescue Control Team, and as permanent disaster management organizations, the Disaster Management Departments of the province and the city were responding to disasters. In addition, there were many local disaster response organizations involved according to disaster type and the six key functions of disaster management. Although there should have been a cooperation network of these organizations, each organization was representing its own interest without cooperation with others. We analyzed the network among the disaster response organizations in Cheongju, Chungcheongbuk-do. According to the result, a weak cooperation network existed including the exchange of information, opinions and documents. However, there was no high?]level cooperation network such as the exchange of human resources, official projects, etc. This shows that cooperation among the organizations has been superficial, limited to the exchange of information and public documents, but a network has not been established for practical cooperation such as the exchange of human resources and joint execution of projects.
In addition, we analyzed the relative importance of disaster response functions in establishing a cooperation network in the future. According to the result, the improvement of disaster areas, the prevention of secondary disasters, and evacuation were considered important. As a whole, the function of establishing order was regarded as relatively more important than other functions. That is, disaster management specialists considered that, in disaster response, it is most important to keep order in the disaster area, and next to evacuate people from the dangerous area to safe places and to prevent secondary disasters such as riots and terrors. In addition, it was considered critical to prepare places safe from disasters in advance and to construct facilities for disaster response.
In the results of case study that compared Korea with the U.S., it was found desirable to improve disaster response networks toward bi-directional open networks with high reciprocity and expansion. That is, it was considered desirable to enhance bi-directional reciprocity among disaster response organizations and to open doors to other disaster response organizations. Accordingly, it was concluded that it is desirable for Korean local governments as well to establish a bi?]directional open network with high reciprocity and expansion. Based on the state analysis, empirical analysis and case study, we identified problems in Korean local governments?f disaster response network as follows. First, in the aspect of network reciprocity, there were problems related to mutual contact and continuous relation, the application of regulations, the exchange of manpower and equipment and the direction of cooperation. Problems in the aspect of expansion were cooperation with new participants in private sectors, information exchange among the participating organizations, etc. Next, problems in Korean local governments?f disaster response system are as follows. First, in the aspect of disaster response capability, local governments?f ability to respond to disasters and disaster response personnel?fs specialty were low. Second, in the aspect of organization, local governments?f disaster response system was dualized and disaster response organizations were self?]interested. Third, in the aspect of disaster response command system, there was no integrated field command system. Fourth, in the aspect of disaster response resource exchange, information was not exchanged smoothly, there was no network between public and private sectors, and cooperation among areas for disaster response was weak. Lastly, in the aspect of perception on disaster response, the directors of local governments and residents lacked the consciousness of disaster response.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제1장 서론 1
• 제1절 연구의 배경 및 목적 1
• 1. 연구 배경과 문제 제기 2
• 2. 연구 목적과 필요성 7
• 제2절 연구의 범위 및 방법 11
• 1. 연구의 범위 11
• 2. 연구의 방법 12
• 제2장 재난대응체계와 정책네트워크 이론 15
• 제1절 재난대응체계의 영역과 연구 접근법 15
• 1. 재난대응체계의 영역과 의의 17
• 2. 재난대응체계의 특성과 기능 21
• 3. 재난대응체계의 접근법 28
• 4. 재난대응과정의 네트워크 관점 43
• 제2절 정책네트워크 이론의 발전과정과 구성요소 47
• 1. 네트워크 이론의 등장 47
• 2. 네트워크 이론의 전개 56
• 3. 네트워크 이론의 발전과정 57
• 4. 정책네트워크의 구성요소 66
• 제3절 재난대응 정책네트워크의 특성과 유형 69
• 1. 정책네트워크 유형 69
• 2. 재난대응체계에 적용 가능한 정책네트워크 73
• 3. 재난대응 정책네트워크의 특성과 변수 74
• 4. 재난대응 정책네트워크의 유형 76
• 제4절 연구의 분석 틀 77
• 1. 재난대응체계의 정책네트워크 분석 요소 78
• 2. 연구의 분석 틀: 정책네트워크 유형에 따른 재난대응과정 변화분석 85
• 제3장 한국의 지방자치단체 재난대응 네트워크 89
• 제1절 재난대응 네트워크 실태 분석 89
• 1. 중앙정부 재난대응 네트워크 실태 89
• 2. 지방자치단체 재난대응 네트워크 실태 분석 95
• 제2절 재난대응 행위자간 연결망 분석 101
• 1. 행위자간 연결망 분석을 위한 조사설계 101
• 2. 재난대응 행위자간 연결망 분석 결과 109
• 제3절 재난대응 기능에 대한 중요성 및 우선순위 비교 분석 117
• 1. 재난대응 기능간 중요도 및 우선순위에 관한 연구설계 117
• 2. 재난대응 기능간 중요도 및 우선순위 비교 분석 결과 124
• 제4절 소결론: 요약 및 시사점 129
• 1. 분석 결과의 요약 129
• 2. 지방자치단체의 재난대응 네트워크에 대한 시사점 130
• 제4장 지방자치단체 재난대응과정의 정책네트워크 분석 131
• 제1절 한국과 미국의 재난대응체계 131
• 1. 한국 지방자치단체의 재난대응체계 131
• 2. 미국 지방정부의 재난대응체계 142
• 제2절 한국 지방자치단체 재난대응과정의 정책네트워크 분석 : 태풍 매미와 에위니아 157
• 1. 태풍 매미 대응과정의 정책네트워크 분석 157
• 2. 태풍 에위니아 대응과정의 정책네트워크 분석 166
• 3. 사례 결과의 요약 173
• 제3절 미국 지방정부 재난대응과정의 정책네트워크 분석 : 허리케인 이사벨과 카트리나 175
• 1. 허리케인 이사벨 대응과정의 정책네트워크 분석 175
• 2. 허리케인 카트리나 대응과정의 정책네트워크 분석 185
• 3. 사례분석 결과의 요약 및 시사점 196
• 제4절 재난대응 정책네트워크의 문제 199
• 1. 재난대응 네트워크의 연결문제 199
• 2. 지방자치단체 재난대응체계의 문제 201
• 제5장 결론 205
• 제1절 연구의 요약 205
• 제2절 연구의 한계 및 후속연구를 위한 제언 215
• 참고문헌 217
• 부록 1. 심층면접 대상자 245
• 부록 2. 심층면접조사지(전문가) 247
• 부록 3. 연결망(네트워크)분석 조사지 249
• 부록 4. AHP조사지(전문가) 255