초록
본 연구는 기업의 외부통제에 관한 개념적인 논의와 함께, 한국의 제조업에서 80년 대 중반 이후(1986-1992)에 나타난 통제의 공간적 변화를 경험적으로 조사하였다. 15개의 지역 사이에 다입지 기업의 소유연계에 대한 자료가 외부통제의 대체척도로 이용되었다. 이 자료를 근거로 생산과정의 특성에 따른 세가지 유형의 제조업 부문별로 통제의 변화를 지도 화하여 분석하였다. 전반적인 외부통제의 지리적 특징은 서울이 탁월한 통제의 중심지로서, 서울의 영향력은 수도권과 동남권의 산업발달 지역에 집중되었지만, 최근에 그 영향력은 산 업이 낙후된 지역까지 확산되어 전국적이다. 또한 새로운 통제의 중심지로 수도권과 동남권 의 중심인 대도시가 서서히 부각되고 있다. 이러한 특징에도 불구하고, 제조업 유형별로 상 이한 외부통제의 공간적 패턴은 생산의 조직구조가 생산과정에서 필요로 하는 자본과 노동 은 물론 부문이 처한 외부환경에 따라 변화됨을 보여준다. 이러한 결과는 상이한 생산과정 을 채택하는 다입지 기업의 공간적 영향에 차별적 분석을 요구한다.
problems involved in defining and identifying it. However, data on ownership of business establishments may be useful and one of the best alternatives for this empirical research because of use of limited information about control This study examines the spatial patterns of external control in the Korean manufacturing activities between 1986 and 1992. Using the data on ownership iinkages of multilocational firms between 15 administrative areas, it was possible to construct a matrix of organizational control in terms of the number of establishments. The control matrix was disaggregated by three types of manufacturing industries according to the capital and labor requirements of production processes used in. On the basis of the disaggregated control matrix, a series of measures were calculated for investigating the magnitude and direction of control as well as the external dependency. In the past decades Korean industrialization development has risen at a rapid pace, deepening integration into the world economy, together with the continuing growth of the large industrial firms. The expanded scale of large firms led to a spatial separation of production from control, Increasing branch plants in the nation. But recent important changes have occurred in the spatial organization of production by technological development, increasing international competition, and changing local labor markets. These changes have forced firms to reorganize their production structures, resulting in changes of the organizational structures in certain industries and regions. In this context the empirical analysis revealed the following principal trends. In general term, the geography of corporate control in Korea is marked by a twofold pattern of concentration and dispersion. The dominance of Seoul as a major command and control center has been evident over the period, though its overall share of allexternally controlled establishments has decreased from 88% to 79%. And the substantial amount of external control from Seoul has concentrated to the Kyongki and Southeast regions which are well-developed industrial areas. But Seoul's corporate ownership links tend to streteh across the country to the less-developed regions, most of which have shown a significant increase of external dependency during the period 1986-1992. At the same time, a geographic dispersion of corporate control is taking place as Kyongki province and Pusan are developing as new increasingly important command and control reaions. Though these two resions contain a number of branch plants controlled from other locations, they may be increasingly attractive as a headquarters location with increasing locally owned establishments. The geographical patterns of external control observable in each of three types of manufacturing industries were examined in order to distinguish the changing spatial structures of organizational control with respect to the characteristics of the production processes. Labor intensive manufacturing with unskilled iabor experienced the strongest external pressure from foreign competition and a lack of low cost labor. The high pressure expected not only to disinte-grate the production process but also led to location of production facilities in areas of cheap labor. The linkages of control between Seoul and the less-developed regions have slightly increased, while the external dependency of the industrialized regions might be reduced from the tendency of organizational disintegration. Capita1 intensive manufacturing operates under high entry and exit barriers due to capital intensity. The need to increase scale economies ied to an even stronger economic and spatial oncentration of control. The strong geographical oncentration of control might be influenced by orporate and organizational scale economies rather than by locational advantages. Other sectors experience with respect to branch plants of multilocational firms. The policy implications of the increase of external dependency in less-developed regions may be negative because of the very share of unskilled workers and lack of autonomy in decision making. The strong growth of the national economy and a scarcity of labor in core areas have been important factors in this regional decentralization of industries to less-developed regions. But the rather gloomy prospects of the economic growth in the near future could prevent the further industrialization of less-developed areas. A major rethinking of regional policy would have to take place towards a need for a regional policy actively favoring indigenous establishments.