All Issue

2025 Vol.47 Preview Page

Article

Preference Differences Between Development and Conservation in Regional Projects: A Comparative Study of Local Residents and the General Public Regarding the Saemangeum Development Project

지역 개발사업을 둘러싼 개발과 보전에 대한 선호 비교: 새만금 개발사업에 대한 지역주민과 일반국민 간 인식을 중심으로

Namhee Kim1
,
Jungho Nam2
,
Chi-Ok Oh3*
김 남희1
,
남 정호2
,
오 치옥3*
1Inclusive City Research Lab, Gwangju Institute, Gwangju 62465, Korea
2Marine Policy Research Division, Korea Maritime Institute, Busan 49111, Korea
3Graduate School of Culture, Chonnam National University, Gwangju 61186, Korea
1광주연구원 포용도시연구실 (62465) 광주광역시 광산구 진곡산단중앙로 55
2한국해양수산개발원 해양연구본부 (49111) 부산광역시 영도구 해양로 301번길 26
3전남대학교 문화전문대학원 (61186) 광주광역시 북구 용봉로 77
*Corresponding Author
24 June 2025. pp. 1-15
PDF XML Citation
Abstract

Most environmental conflicts are caused by competing interests between development and conservation. The Saemangeum development project has also been highly controversial due to the conflicting values of development and conservation, and the direction of the project has been constantly changing due to conflicting interests among stakeholders. This study employed choice experiments to evaluate preferences regarding the main components of the Saemangeum development project (industrial, renewable energy, and ecological sites, and so on) and aims to identify a viable consensus for the project's direction. The survey included 500 local residents and 1,000 non-residents of the Saemangeum area, utilizing a mixed logit model to estimate preferences and marginal willingness to pay. Results revealed that local residents favored development features, particularly the construction of an international airport, while non-residents showed stronger preference for environmental conservation elements such as renewable energy and ecological sites. Scenario analysis further confirmed this divide, with residents preferring development-oriented scenarios and non-residents favoring environmental conservation approaches. These results suggest the need to consider the perspectives of various stakeholders in the process of development projects, the need to develop a plan to mutually understand the interests of each stakeholder, and the need to actively invest in renewable energy and ecological land.

Keywords
regional development project
Saemangeum project
environmental conflict
choice experiment
References
1

김종호, 이창훈, 신창현 (2004) 환경분야 갈등 유형 및 해결방안 연구. 한국환경연구원, 정책보고서, WO-02, pp 1-96

2

박지혜, 권성우 (2016) 환경보전과 개발, 두 평행선의 만남: 청주 원흥이 두꺼비 생태공원 조성 갈등 해결 사례. 협상연구 19(2):5-31

3

심원섭 (2016) 국립공원 내 케이블카 설치 허용정책을 둘러싼 관광개발과 환경보전의 딜레마-공리주의와 보호된 가치 프레임의 충돌을 중심으로. 관광학연구 40(1):111-132

10.17086/JTS.2016.40.1.111.132
4

안혜원, 박대운, 김학돈 (2009) 정책인식프레이밍 관점에서 새만금 사례와 동강댐 사례의 갈등 비교연구. 한국콘텐츠학회논문지 9(3):270-277

10.5392/JKCA.2009.9.3.270
5

양기용, 김창수 (2009) 정책갈등의 구조와 사회적 합의의 조건-국책사업을 둘러싼 갈등에 대한 지역주민의 인식을 중심으로. 한국행정논집, 21(3):967-998

6

유영성, 안광일 (2005) 경기도의 환경 갈등ㆍ분쟁문제 해결방안에 관한 연구. 경기연구원, 정책연구, 2005-12, pp 1-279

7

윤지현, 이환봉 (2008) 지역사회 애착도와 지역민의 관광개발 태도 연구. 관광경영연구, 35:76-102

8

이대인, 탁대호, 김귀영 (2016) 해양환경보전과 이용· 개발의 상충 분석과 해양공간계획에 대한 시사점. J Korean Soc Mar Environ Energy 19(3):227-235

10.7846/JKOSMEE.2016.19.3.227
9

이승민 (2003) 새만금 간척사업을 둘러싼 담론변화와 갈등구조 분석. 환경사회학연구 ECO 4:46-93

10

임재형 (2016) 한국사회 환경갈등의 발생원인과 특징에 관한 연구. 분쟁해결연구 14(2):109-136

10.16958/drsr.2016.14.2.109
11

장현주 (2019) 개발과 환경보전을 둘러싼 공공갈등의 재해석: 옹호연합모형과 갈등주기모형을 통해 본 국립공원 케이블카 설치 사업 갈등. 정책분석평가학회보 29(4):57-88

12

조명래 (2003) 국책사업을 둘러싼 환경갈등의 원인과 구조. 환경사회학연구 ECO 5:110-146

13

함한희, 강경표 (2007) 어민, 환경운동가, 그리고 정부의 바다인식: 새만금사업을 둘러싼 갈등을 중심으로: 새만금사업을 둘러싼 갈등을 중심으로. 환경사회학연구 ECO, 11 (2):247-284

14

Adamowicz W, Boxall P, Williams M, Louviere J (1998) Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: Choice experiments and contingent valuation. Am J Agr Econ 80(1):64-75

10.2307/3180269
15

Alsaloum M, Romagosa F, Alotaibi S. (2024) Residents' perceptions of the benefits and costs of tourism development: a case study of Riyadh City (Saudi Arabia). Tour Hosp 5(3):753-781

10.3390/tourhosp5030044
16

Durán R, Farizo BA, Vázquez MX (2015). Conservation of maritime cultural heritage: A discrete choice experiment in a European Atlantic region. Mar Policy 51:356-365

10.1016/j.marpol.2014.09.023
17

Gursoy D, Ouyang Z, Nunkoo R, Wei W (2019) Residents' impact perceptions of and attitudes towards tourism development: a meta-analysis. J Hosp Mark Manag 28(3): 306-333

10.1080/19368623.2018.1516589
18

Kleijn D, Baquero RA, Clough Y, Díaz M, De Esteban J, Fernández F, Gabriel D, Herzog F, Holzschuh A, Jöhl R, (2006). Mixed biodiversity benefits of agri‐environment schemes in five European countries. Ecol Lett 9(3):243-254

10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00869.x16958888
19

Akella AK, Saini RP, Sharma MP (2009). Social, economical and environmental impacts of renewable energy systems. Renew Energ 34(2):390-396

10.1016/j.renene.2008.05.002
20

McFadden D. (1974) The measurement of urban travel demand. J Public Econ 3:303-328

10.1016/0047-2727(74)90003-6

국문 참고자료의 영문표기 English translation / Romanization of references originally written in Korean

1

Kim J, Lee C, Shin C (2004) A study on environmental conflict resolution policy. Korea Environment Institute, Policy Report, WO-02, pp 1-96

2

Park J, Kwon S (2016) Conservation of the environment versus development, parallel lines meet: a conflict management case of making an ecological park, 'Cheongju Wonheungii Toad ecological culture center'. KANS 19 (2):5-31

3

Shim WS (2016) A dilemma of tourism development and environment conservation over the permission policy of cable cars construction in national park: focusing on the frame collision of utilitarianism and protected values. JTS 40(1):111-132

10.17086/JTS.2015.39.10.111.132
4

Ahn HW, Park DW, Kim HD (2009) Comparison of conflict in Saemankum and Dong River Dam. Jour of KoCon.a 9(3):270-277

10.5392/JKCA.2009.9.3.270
5

Yang GY, Kim CS (2009) The structure of policy conflict and the conditions of social consensus: focusing on the resident's cognition of the conflict around national projects. KPAQ 21(3):967-998

6

Yoo YS, Ahn GI (2005) Public management strategies for conciliation or resolution of environmental conflicts or disputes in Gyeonggi province. Gyeonggi Research Institute, Policy Research, 2005-12, p 1-279

7

Yun JH, Lee HB (2008) The impact of community attachment on the residents' attitudes toward tourism development. TMRO 35:76-102

8

Lee DI, Tac DH, Kim GY (2016) Diagnosis of conflict problem between the marine environmental conservation and development, and policy implication for marine spatial planning. J Korean Soc Mar Environ Energy 19(3):227-235

10.7846/JKOSMEE.2016.19.3.227
9

Lee SM (2003) A discourse analysis of conflicts over the reclamation project of Saemangeum Tidal Flat. ECO 4:46-93

10

Lim JH (2016) A study on the causes and characteristics of environmental conflicts in South Korea. DRSR 14(2):109-136

10.16958/drsr.2016.14.2.109
11

Chang H (2019) Reinterpreting a public conflict over development and environmental conservation: a conflict in national park ropeway project through the advocacy coalition framework and the conflict cycle model. KJPAE 29(4): 57-88

12

Cho MR (2003) Causes and structure of environmental conflicts concerning national development projects. ECO 5:110-146

13

Ham H, Kang KP (2007) Fishermen, environmentalists, and government's perceptions of the sea: focusing on the conflicts of Saemangeum project. ECO 11(2):247-284

Information
  • Publisher :Korea Institute of Ocean Science and Technology
  • Publisher(Ko) :한국해양과학기술원
  • Journal Title :Ocean and Polar Research
  • Journal Title(Ko) :Ocean and Polar Research
  • Volume : 47
  • Pages :1-15
  • Received Date : 2025-01-15
  • Revised Date : 2025-05-20
  • Accepted Date : 2025-05-21
  • Published Date : 2025-06-24
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.4217/OPR.2025009
Journal Informaiton Ocean and Polar Research Ocean and Polar Research
Online Submission
Archives
: 2019 ~ 이전
  • scopus_OPR
  • NRF
  • KISTI Current Status
  • KISTI Cited-by
  • KCI 문헌 유사도 검사
  • orcid
  • open access
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close