참여정부의 주택정책 참여자간 사회관계망 구조분석

Social Network Analysis of Housing Policy Participants for 'Participatory Government'

1. CONTENTS (1) RESEARCH OBJECTIVES The purpose of this paper is to analyze the influencing forces and social network of housing policy participants to the 'Participatory Government's housing policy development stage and policy making stage. Furthermore, we will find out housing policy participant's values for decision making of policy development stage and policy making stage. (2) RESEARCH METHOD The analytical approach based on a survey method was used in this article for social networking analysis of housing policy making. Questionnaire was gathered from government officials, professors, researchers and NGO etc. About 203 people were selected through face-to-face inteniews, e-mails and posts from Oct 22, 2009 to Nov 10, 2009. The data collected from the survey were analysed through the UCINET social networking analysis program. (3) RESEARCH FINDINGS Analytical results are as follows: First, an important order that influencing forces for housing policy environment is increased in order of social environment) political environment) economic environment) administrative environment. Second, communication between the bureaucracy housing policy participants and non-bureaucracy participants was insufficient. Third, an important order that influenced the forces for the housing policy development and policy making was increased in order of an interest group) NGO, president, scholars) congressman) parties) mayor) media scrutiny, judge, general officers. Forth, ron-bureaucracy participant's influencing forces to control a communication flow were more influenced than bureaucracy participants. Fifth, it was in policy making stage that governance was evaluated better between the policy development stage and policy making stage. Sixth, President's power of housing policy was evaluated much by development stage and an advice appeared to play a great role by development stage. Seventh, an important order that influences the forces for bureaucracy participant's decision making standard of policy development am policy making is increased in order of politics) public opinions, interest groups) advice of specialist) participant's values. 2. RESULTS Suggestions are as follows: First, housing policy participants of bureaucracy and non-bureaucracy participants need to communication network, am need to improve of citizen's participation for governance. Second, an adjustment mediator between the government and citizen is necessary for housing policy making.