자연취락지구 기반시설의 가치 분석 : 청주시 지구단위계획에 의한 사업 중심으로

자연취락지구 지구단위계획 사업의 기반시설 비용과 편익을 분석했다.

The purpose of this study is to measure the consumption costs and benefits when conducting environmental enhancement projects based on the resident participative district planning established on urban settled villages. The spatial range of the study included Geomdoonggol, Jooseong, Shinmokgol and Hyeonam, and the secondary influence areas were expanded and set under the decision that the aftermath due to the district planning would influence the surrounding areas by performing an expert survey. The analysis period was set to 35 years referring to the 「Modification and Supplementation Research of Basic Guidelines for Performing Preliminary Feasibility Study」of Korea Development Institute.

Prior to analyzing the costs and benefits, the costs and benefits items were derived by referring to the report of 「2010 District-Unit Plan for Cheongjoo City Rural Settlement Zone」and advanced studies, in order to measure the consumption cost and the generated benefits of the project. In this study, CVM was used as the benefits were non-market valuation and WTP of the concerned residents was estimated using the Logit Model after estimating the function through the logistic regression. The derived WPT secured its reliability through a non-parametric approach.

As the result, firstly, construction cost, subsidiary cost, spare cost and land acquisition cost were generated on each district for the project cost, and converting by each district - it was predicted to be 3,724 M Won for Geondoonggol , 5,491 M Won for Jooseong, 879 M Won for Shinmokgol and 5,467 M Won for Hyeonam. WTP of the concerned district derived through CVM for the primary influence area was estimated to be 5,233 Won for roads, 2,826 Won for parking lots and 3,705 Won for parks, and the secondary influence area was estimated to be 4,910 Won for roads, 2,242 Won for parking lots and 3,620 Won for parks.

To secure the reliability of WTP and calculated the non-parametric WTP with 95% reliability interval, other projects excluding the parking lot of the secondary influence area were included within the reliability interval. Measuring the benefits based on this result, 11,764 Won per month per household for Geondoonggol, Jooseong and Hyeonam and 5,233 Won for Shinmokgol. For the secondary influence areas, 10,772 Won per month per household for Geondoonggol, Jooseong and Hyeonam, and 4,910 Won for Shinmokgol.

Calculating the total yearly benefits by adding the primary and secondary influence areas by each district, 64,376,472Won for Geomdoonggol, 35,078,016 for Jooseong, 26,884,560 Won for Shinmokgol and 22,252,032 Won for Hyeonam were showed to be generated. Secondly, by performing NPV and B/C Ratio through the cost generated during the set period and the discounted value of the benefits, they were calculated to be -2,594 M Won of NPV with 0.22 B/C Ratio for Geomdoonggol, -4,662 M Won NPV with 0.08 B/C Ratio for Jooseong, -472 M Won NPV with 0.4 B/C Ratio for Shinmokgol and -4,662 M Won NPV with 0.05 B/C Ratio for Hyeonam.

Thirdly, B/C Ratio became inverse-proportionally low when 3%, 4% downward and 7%, 9% upward discount rates were applied as the parameters, and NPV showed closed to a negative(-) value for Geomdoonggol and Shinmokgol districts and a positive(+) value for Jooseong and Hyeonam. Looking at the individual WTP results in this study, the WTP on ‘New construction and facility of roads was estimated the highest. This implies that road projects are the most required project for the concerned residents.

On the other hand, the WTP for parks and parking lots came out to be relatively low, and this seems to be due to the fact not-high income level of the concerned residents was indirectly reflected through the study or of low awareness of the significance relative to road projects. Also, by looking at the CBA results, both the NPV and B/C ratio showed very poor results in terms of economic efficiency, and this implies the fact that infrastructure should be provided in terms of welfare projects and not economic efficiency for policy decisions.

As the conclusion of this study, it is very significant in terms of the fact that costs and benefits of the infrastructures provided through district planning at urban settled villages were estimated prior to performing the project. However, the point it has been represented with the project benefits by deriving WTP in the form of maintenance fund could be impractical at this time point where there are numerous varieties of benefits depending on the project and no resident has experienced the effect.

Furthermore, there was a limit on the fact that an identical WTP had been derived and reflected to all 4 districts as no sufficient samples were secured due to limited number of households for each district although WTP should have been derived depending on the characteristics of the district planning by the districts. In the future, sufficient number of samples should be secured when predicting the benefits of a district planning, and researches which WTP with appropriately reflected district characteristics should be derived.