지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Globalization is making economic environments complex by means of borderless network, international trade, FDI, coalition of multinational corporations, and customer-centered market, etc. Particularly, the influence of national level macroeconomic policies have been made limited over control and growth of national economy due to international spread of economic policies in the global environment. Also, the traditional policy process based on central authority has revealed limitations in solving complicated issues of regions as an economy has scaled up. As a result, there appeared the tendency of decentralization. So far, many advanced OECD countries have developed local economic policies based on the decentralization system. In Korea, by contrast, local governments’ planning of local economic policies and authorities of enforcement are insufficient. Particularly, lack of authorities and budgets is a primary reason why local governments have difficulty in initiating local-based economic policies. Also, both central and local governments have not made enough efforts to develop local economic systems appropriate for the new global environments.
Regions are primary bases of economic as well as social life. Along with globalization, the emergence of wide-range integrated economy makes region systematic unit of economy. Therefore, local economic policies are required for the sake of the creation of external economies, local revitalization and local competitiveness.
The policy implications are as follows that we learn from the experiences of several EU countries-Sweden with centralized local economic policies, France with decentralized local economic policy, and Italy with localized local economic policy. First, classification of regions is valid on EU level, but generally, European nations maintain systems that have been developed within a nation’s historical conditions. Second, because of changes in economic environments following the EU unification, direct developmental policies aimed at local balance have now converted to policies focusing on local competitiveness. In other words, local policies have changed to policies to develop further regions with potentials from policies to support underdeveloped regions. Third, the progress of EU unification has caused decentralization because the EU’s relief fund policy itself is for regions. On top of that, a region’s own policy is required for local competitiveness. Fourth, the governance of local economic policies for local growth has been made by means of foundation of local development organizations where private and public sectors like corporations, social partners, and government cooperate. Fifth, cluster support policies are selective by the characteristics of clusters. And both central and local governments are promoting cluster policies as industrial and business policies of the opening era. Sixth, although it is true that financial decentralization expands according to the growth of decentralization, there is no significant difference in relative importance of local finances between Italy with a federal system and centralized Sweden. This makes us reconsider on correlation between financial decentralization and local decentralization.
This study suggests financial decentralization, greater economic blocs led by local governments, and local governance reform to establish local economic policies. Also, this study proposes the following: ‘selection and concentration’ strategy and maximization of the effect of agglomeration; request of expanding the central government’s support on Gyeonggi-do’s underdeveloped regions; abolition of the tax policy discriminative to the capital region; and promotion of local development policy based on industrial policy.
Regions are primary bases of economic as well as social life. Along with globalization, the emergence of wide-range integrated economy makes region systematic unit of economy. Therefore, local economic policies are required for the sake of the creation of external economies, local revitalization and local competitiveness.
The policy implications are as follows that we learn from the experiences of several EU countries-Sweden with centralized local economic policies, France with decentralized local economic policy, and Italy with localized local economic policy. First, classification of regions is valid on EU level, but generally, European nations maintain systems that have been developed within a nation’s historical conditions. Second, because of changes in economic environments following the EU unification, direct developmental policies aimed at local balance have now converted to policies focusing on local competitiveness. In other words, local policies have changed to policies to develop further regions with potentials from policies to support underdeveloped regions. Third, the progress of EU unification has caused decentralization because the EU’s relief fund policy itself is for regions. On top of that, a region’s own policy is required for local competitiveness. Fourth, the governance of local economic policies for local growth has been made by means of foundation of local development organizations where private and public sectors like corporations, social partners, and government cooperate. Fifth, cluster support policies are selective by the characteristics of clusters. And both central and local governments are promoting cluster policies as industrial and business policies of the opening era. Sixth, although it is true that financial decentralization expands according to the growth of decentralization, there is no significant difference in relative importance of local finances between Italy with a federal system and centralized Sweden. This makes us reconsider on correlation between financial decentralization and local decentralization.
This study suggests financial decentralization, greater economic blocs led by local governments, and local governance reform to establish local economic policies. Also, this study proposes the following: ‘selection and concentration’ strategy and maximization of the effect of agglomeration; request of expanding the central government’s support on Gyeonggi-do’s underdeveloped regions; abolition of the tax policy discriminative to the capital region; and promotion of local development policy based on industrial policy.
목차
제1장 서론
제2장 개방화시대의 지역경제정책 프레임워크
제3장 해외사례
제4장 한국의 지역경제정책 정립 방향
제5장 결론
참고문헌
부록
ABSTRACT
연구요약
머리말
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
일본 자치체 정책법무의 개관과향후 연구과제
지방자치법연구
2018 .01
-
지역정책의 새로운 패러다임과 지역 거버넌스 구축 : 대경인력산업정책원 설립을 중심으로
한국사회과학연구
2008 .06
-
Regional Economic Policy Patterns of Local Government : Its Performance
지역연구
2001 .12
-
이명박 정부하의 지방분권정책 : 추진과제, 체제 및 전략을 중심으로
한국지방정부학회 학술대회자료집
2008 .09
-
Decentralization Policies in Korea : Problems and Tasks
한국비교정부학보
2007 .01
-
동북아 자치단체 국제교류
한국지방정부학회 학술대회자료집
2008 .09
-
평가지표분석을 통한 지역일자리 공시제 발전방안 연구 : 2013년 대구지역을 중심으로
한국사회과학연구
2014 .06
-
군포청소년교육특구 추진과 과제
경기논단
2005 .09
-
지방분권정책의 오뒷세이아 : 자치경찰, 교육자치, 특별지방행정기관을 중심으로
한국사회와 행정연구
2016 .05
-
The Adoption of Local Economic Development Policy Tools Under State Growth Management Act
정책분석평가학회보
2013 .09
-
지방분권적 시각에서의 지방중소기업청 조직통폐합 논의에 대한 평가
한국사회와 행정연구
2003 .11
-
지방분권화와 문화행정을 통한 지방재정확충방안에 관한 연구
문화산업연구
2005 .06
-
로컬푸드을 이용한 충북 농업․농촌의 활성화 방안
지역정책연구
2011 .12
-
지역고용정책 활성화 방안에 관한 연구 : 지역일자리공시제를 중심으로
지역사회연구
2012 .09
-
민주적 로컬 거버넌스 구성과 지방정부
한국사회와 행정연구
2005 .11
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
죽음에 이르는 도시 : 루이스 멈포드의 제도론과 기술
김종달
,
한동희
,
나중규
한국지역개발학회지
2015
.11
서울디지털산업단지의 변화과정 분석과 클러스터로서 현재의 수준 평가
정순구
,
최근희
서울도시연구
2013
.09
서울시 외국인 주거지의 공간적 분리패턴에 관한 연구
하성규
,
마강래
,
안아림
서울도시연구
2011
.09
우리 시대 도시담론 비판 : 동네의 소멸과 감옥도시에의 전조(前兆)
전상인
한국지역개발학회지
2010
.09
지방정부 재정지출의 지역경제활성화 효과분석
윤지웅
,
김태영
,
김주경
지방정부연구
2009
.11
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-309-002948379