위험시설 입지정책결정의 합리성:방폐장 입지선정 사례를 중심으로 = The Rationality of Location Policy Making on the Dangerous Facilities:Focusing on Siting Radioactive Waste Disposal Facilities

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Location policy making on dangerous facilities in South Korea has caused severe resistance from community residents because of its top-down and technical-bureaucratic approach. After the Buan case, the government has changed the system of siting which give to pledge in procedural democratization and technical security. As a result, the government decided the site for a radioactive waste disposal facility in Gyeongju, which had encountered policy failure for 19 years. By analyzing the level of rationality, the consensus-building model which satisfies technical-economical rationality and political rationality has not yet been found. The Anmyon-Do, Gulup-Do, and Wi-Do cases are technical-economical models which are based on technical-economical rationality rather than political rationality. On the other hand, the Gyeongju case is a political-process model with a high level of political rationality. To achieve an ideal model on dangerous facilities, there should be three stages. First of all, social consensus on the nuclear energy policy should be built up. Second, in the aspect of technical-economical rationality, the suitability of a site should take precedence over the economical efficiency. Third, we should improve competitive referendums in order to rationalize the decision making structure.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

정부의 초기 방폐장 입지정책은 일방적이고 하향적인 기술관료적 방식으로 접근함으로써 격렬한 주민저항을 초래하여 정책실패를 거듭하였다. 정부는 부안사태 이후 절차적 민주성과 기술적 안전성을 담보하는 획기적인 제도의 변화를 통해 2005년 경주에서 19년간의 정책실패에 종지부를 찍고 후보지를 선정하였다. 4개 사례의 입지정책결정의 합리성 수준을 분석한 결과 기술경제적 합리성과 정치적 합리성을 모두 충족하는 ‘합의형성모형’(consensus building model)은 발견되지 않았다. 안면도, 굴업도, 위도 등 3개 사례는 정치적 합리성보다 기술경제적 합리성이 중시되는 후보지 선정이어서 기술경제모형에 가깝고, 경주 사례는 정치적 합리성 제고에 비중을 둔 정치과정모형에 접근하고 있었다. 위험시설 입지결정의 이상적인 모형으로 상정한 ‘합의형성모형’이 실현되기 위해서는 첫째, 핵에너지 정책에 대한 사회적 합의를 도출하는 작업이 선행되어야 하고, 둘째, 기술경제적 합리성은 사업추진의 경제성 측면보다 부지의 적합성을 우선적으로 고려하여야 하며, 셋째, 경쟁적 주민투표제도의 문제점을 개선하여 의사결정구조를 합리화해야 할 것이다.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 "searching for Civil Society; Changing Patterns of Governance in Britain" 81 (81): 41-62, 2003

2 "Urban Regimes in Comparative Perspective The Politics of Urban Development in Britain" 54-83, 1993

3 "Urban Regime Theory in Comparative Perspective" 1994195-212

4 "Urban Policy in Huston" 144-154, 1989

5 "University of Texas Press" 1981

6 "University of Chicago Press" 1981

7 "Understanding Governance" Buckingham: Open University Press 1997

8 "The Threat to Autonomy of Elected Local Government Britain Out of Step in Europe?" Basil Blackwell 3-20, 1989

9 "The Politics of Urban America: A Reader" New York: Pearson Education 2002

10 "The Politics of Place: Contentious Urban Development in Pittsburgh" Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press 2006

11 "The Politics of Local Government" Macmillan 1988

12 "The Political Economy of Growth Machine Journal of Urban Affairs 15" 29-53, 1993

13 "The New Politics of British Local Governance" New York: Macmillan 2000

14 "The New Management of British Local Governance" London: Palgrave Macmillan 1999

15 "The Institutional Context of Local Economic Development" 1990

16 "The Governance of Urban Regeneration: A Critique of the 'Goverining Without Government' Thesis" 80 (80): 301-322, 2002

17 "The Economic Case for Private Residential Government" New York: Routledge 2006

18 "Sunbelt City? A Study of Economic Change in Britain's M4 Growth Corridor" Clarendon Press 1986

19 "Regime Formation in Manchester and Edinburgh" London: Macmillan 2000

20 "Power in Metropolitan America" Peacock Publishers 1991

21 "Power and City Governance: Comparative Perspective on Urban Development" Minneapolis: the University of Minesota Press 1999

22 "Place Matters" Lawrence: University Press of Kansas 2001

23 "Place Marketing: A Historical Comparison of Britain and North America" New York: John Wiley & Sons 1998

24 "Partnerships, Business Elites and Urban Politics: New Forms of Governance in a English City?" 33 (33): 539-549, 1998

25 "Partnerships and Regimes: the Politics of Urban Regeneration in the UK" Aldershot: Ashgate 2001

26 "Partnership in Urban Regeneration in the U" 1303-24, 1994

27 "Organizing for Local Economic Development: The Growth Coalition as a Cross-National Comparative Framework" Albany, NY: State University of New York 1999

28 "Management Change in Local Governance" 1999

29 "Labor in City Port Sell-Off" Western Daily Press 1991

30 "Investigating the Structural Dominants of Homelessness The Case of Houston" 617-640, 1993

31 "Institute for Govermental Studies" 1991

32 "Houston in Political-economic Perspective" Rutgers University Press 1988

33 "Growth Coalitions in Britain's Waning Sunbelt: Some Reflections" Albany: State University of New York Press 1999

34 "Economic Restructuring and the Rise of Urban Social Movement" 1985187-206

35 "Downtown America: A History of the Place and the People Who Made It" Chicago: University of Chicago Press 2004

36 "Cooperative Forms of Governance" 42 : 473-501, 2006

37 "Comparative Urban Governance" 40 (40): 446-62, 2005

38 "City and Regime in the American Republic University Press of Chicago" 1987

39 "City Politics: Private Power and Public Policy" New York: Pearson Education 2004

40 "Central Control in British Urban Economic Development In The New Centralism Britain Out of Step in Europe?" Basil Blackwell 1989

41 "1995 Partners in Regeneration" Department of Environment, Eland House, Bressenden Place, London SWI 1995