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
This report analyzes the economic effects of the regulatory reform for the capital region by region and by industry so as to derive a reference for and to suggest a remedy for the current regulatory measures on the capital region. We adopt a methodology estimating the total factor productivities from the trans-log production function using the firm level data. For a proxy of regulatory constraints, two variables are constructed: total plottage of all companies in the entire capital region (Model 1) and total plottage of major large companies in Gyeonggi-do and Inchon (Model 2). The coverage and the unit of study by region are the national economy, the non-capital region, the six geographic provinces and the 15 administrative locals. The models use the OLS and the robust standard errors clustered by industry. The data are from the Mining and Manufacturing Survey for the period 1992~2003.
The results are as follows. First, the regulatory constraint for the metropolitan area does not exhibit a single effect on the non-capital region on the aggregated level, implying that the current uniform policy measures, which divide the regions into capital and non-capital, are not effective. Second, the relaxation of the capital region regulations does not hamper the growth of the non-capital regions, but contributes to the productivity growth of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the non-capital regions and the productivity growth of the capital region. Third, the relaxation of regulatory constraints for Gyeonggi-do and Inchon does not have negative influences on the growth and development of SMEs in the non-capital regions. Forth, the current metropolitan regulation does not contribute to the local development of the non-capital areas and does not take into considerations the industrial characteristics and differentiation of each province and local area. For the effective implementation of the targeted development of the entire economy as well as of the non-capital regions, the regulatory measures, if unavoidable, should reflect the regional networks by industry. Fifth, geographical regulations without reference to industrial differentiation would incur the inefficiency and impede the industrial development.
The capital region regulations should be immediately eliminated for the sake of the national competitiveness. These regulations are 'however' supported by public sympathy and political consensus. The political dimension of the current regulatory process puts the limits in implementing the first best option above. The remedies to partially improve the regulatory measures in the current framework are as follows. First of all, the central government needs to operate selective regulations considering industrial and regional characteristics of the local areas instead of pursuing a measure uniformly applied to all local areas. Second, the current framework, designed to develop the non-capital regions by suppressing the growth of the metropolitan region, is not effective. More effective are institutional measures to stimulate the economic motives of the non-capital region, thereby, to attract more companies. In doing so, the rights regarding the establishment and the expansion of plants should be entrusted to local governments so that they can build up and develop the industrial structure reflecting the local economy. Third, the wrong-directed perception should be corrected that the capital and the non-capital areas are in rivalry to gain the limited economic resources. The actual competition in this globalized world takes place for among the competitive economic areas around the globe. Finally, there is a need to establish the municipality-led decision making medium in which each stake-holder including local government, firms and experts can take part and the central government plays a role of a coordinator and advisor.
The results are as follows. First, the regulatory constraint for the metropolitan area does not exhibit a single effect on the non-capital region on the aggregated level, implying that the current uniform policy measures, which divide the regions into capital and non-capital, are not effective. Second, the relaxation of the capital region regulations does not hamper the growth of the non-capital regions, but contributes to the productivity growth of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the non-capital regions and the productivity growth of the capital region. Third, the relaxation of regulatory constraints for Gyeonggi-do and Inchon does not have negative influences on the growth and development of SMEs in the non-capital regions. Forth, the current metropolitan regulation does not contribute to the local development of the non-capital areas and does not take into considerations the industrial characteristics and differentiation of each province and local area. For the effective implementation of the targeted development of the entire economy as well as of the non-capital regions, the regulatory measures, if unavoidable, should reflect the regional networks by industry. Fifth, geographical regulations without reference to industrial differentiation would incur the inefficiency and impede the industrial development.
The capital region regulations should be immediately eliminated for the sake of the national competitiveness. These regulations are 'however' supported by public sympathy and political consensus. The political dimension of the current regulatory process puts the limits in implementing the first best option above. The remedies to partially improve the regulatory measures in the current framework are as follows. First of all, the central government needs to operate selective regulations considering industrial and regional characteristics of the local areas instead of pursuing a measure uniformly applied to all local areas. Second, the current framework, designed to develop the non-capital regions by suppressing the growth of the metropolitan region, is not effective. More effective are institutional measures to stimulate the economic motives of the non-capital region, thereby, to attract more companies. In doing so, the rights regarding the establishment and the expansion of plants should be entrusted to local governments so that they can build up and develop the industrial structure reflecting the local economy. Third, the wrong-directed perception should be corrected that the capital and the non-capital areas are in rivalry to gain the limited economic resources. The actual competition in this globalized world takes place for among the competitive economic areas around the globe. Finally, there is a need to establish the municipality-led decision making medium in which each stake-holder including local government, firms and experts can take part and the central government plays a role of a coordinator and advisor.
목차
제1장 연구의 개요
제2장 수도권 규제정책의 현황과 특징
제3장 수도권 규제의 경제적 파급효과 분석
제4장 수도권 규제개혁 방향
제5장 결론 및 정책제언
참고문헌
부록
연구요약
ABSTRACT
연구요약
머리말
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
수도권 규제개혁의 경제적 파급효과 분석과 정책적 시사점
한국경제연구
2009 .03
-
수도권규제정책의 기본전제에 대한 재검토
도시행정학보
2011 .12
-
수도권 규제시책의 향후과제
경기논단
2008 .09
-
수도권 경쟁력 강화와 지방발전을 위한 수도권-비수도권 상생전략
경기논단
2008 .03
-
수도권 성장관리를 위한 계획적 토지개발 및 관리방안
경기논단
2004 .09
-
Regulations for the Capital Region and Metropolitan Knowledge-based Industrial Development
지역연구
2002 .12
-
동북아 중심지역으로 도약하기 위한 수도권의 전략
경기논단
2001 .07
-
제3차 수도권정비계획의 실효성 평가와 향후과제
정책연구
2017 .12
-
외부자본 유치가 지역경제에 미치는 경제적 효과
지역연구
1997 .12
-
중국 국유기업의 자본형태와 지역경제성장
산업경제연구
2018 .06
-
수도권 정책 및 입지규제에 대한 지역 간의 인식 차이에 관한 연구
도시행정학보
2013 .12
-
수도권 정책전환과 수도권 성장관리체제의 구축방안
경기논단
2004 .09
-
수도권 규제완화 효과의 산업부문별 차이와 지역적 분화 : 지역고용에 대한 영향을 중심으로
한국지역개발학회지
2015 .12
-
Interregional Income Differentials and Migration Between the National Capital Region and the Non-National Capital Region in Korea
한국도시행정학회 학술발표대회 논문집
2011 .11
-
중국현지기업의 사회자본이 지적자본과 기업의 혁신활동에 미치는 영향
지식경영연구
2014 .01
-
지역의 인구변화에 영향을 미치는 사회경제적 특성 연구 : 수도권과 비수도권 비교를 중심으로
한국지역개발학회지
2014 .11
-
Intellectual Capital: A Review from the Literature
산경연구논집
2016 .01
-
국가균형발전정책의 평가와 전환방안에 관한 연구
경기논단
2005 .12
-
경제통합지역에서 사회자본이 경제성장에 미치는 영향에 대한 연구
무역학회지
2005 .10
-
인적자본형성과 지역경제성장
지역연구
1997 .06
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-309-002941976