Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment (환경영향평가)

Korean Society of Environmental Impact Assessment (한국환경영향평가학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Key Factors Influencing Low Impact Development Adoption by Local Governments

지방정부의 저영향개발 적용에 영향을 주는 요인 연구

  • Received : 2015.01.12
  • Accepted : 2015.03.01
  • Published : 2015.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The paper reports on exploratory research into the factors influencing adoption of low impact development (LID) regulations by local government. The research uses ten case studies ranging from low to high level adoption of LID in Virginia. Based on the theory of diffusion of innovations, perceived characteristics of LID, characteristics of the adopting local government, motivations of the adopter, and the surrounding organizational context of the adopter are chosen for the key factors influencing on LID adoption. By reviewing the local governments regulations related to stormwater management, meeting minutes, reports and documents, and in-depth interviews, the evaluation of the key factors and the local LID adoption was conducted. As a result, adopters with a high level of LID adoption at the time of the study were heavily influenced by champions of LID within local government and communities. In contrast, moderate level adopters and low-level adopters emphasized the importance of external forces like state regulatory mandates and the need for clear models to implement.

본 연구의 목적은 탐색적 연구방법을 통해 지방정부의 LID 적용에 영향을 주는 인자를 밝히는데 있다. 이를 위해서 미국 버지니아주의 지방정부 10곳을 사례조사지로 선정하여 LID 적용정도를 구분하였고, 이에 영향을 주는 요인으로 LID의 특성, 지방정부의 특성, 지방정부의 동기요인, 지방정부 외부의 영향 등을 혁신의 확산이론을 바탕으로 발전시켰다. 지방정부의 LID 적용정도 및 영향인자는 우수관리관련조례, 회의록, 인터뷰와 그 밖의 지자체 문서를 바탕으로 평가하였다. 연구결과에 따라 높은 LID 적용정도를 보인 지방정부 사례의 경우 해당 지방정부와 지역 커뮤니티에서 LID를 적극적으로 옹호하는 챔피언의 역할이 매우 크게 나타났다. 반면에 중간 및 낮은 정도의 LID 적용상태를 보인 지방정부의 경우는 외부적 요인 즉, 주정부의 강제적 법적규제가 중요한 요인으로 작용했으며 명확한 LID 적용모델에 대한 요구가 높게 나타났다.

Keywords

References

  1. Alexander D, Heaney JP. 2002. Comparison of Conventional and Low impact Development Drainage Designs, Final Report to the Sustainable Futures Society, from http://www.sustainablefutures.us
  2. Berry FS, Berry WD. 1999. Innovation and diffusion models in policy research. In Sabatier, P. A., ed., Theories of the policy process. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 169-200.
  3. Center for Watershed Protection. 2008. Tool 4: Code and Ordinance Worksheet [online]. Managing Stormwater in Your Community, Ellicott City, MD. Available from: http://www.cwp.org
  4. Coffman LS et al. 1998. New Low Impact Design: Site Planning and Design Techniques for Stormwater Management, Proceedings of the 1998 national planning conference, AICP press.
  5. Daley DM, Garand JC. 2005. Horizontal diffusion, vertical diffusion, and internal pressure in state environmental policymaking, American Politics Research, 33(5), 615-644. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X04273416
  6. Damanpour F, Schneider M. 2009. Characteristics of Innovation and Innovation Adoption in Public Organizations: Assessing the Role of Managers, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(3), 495-522 https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mun021
  7. Dietz ME. 2007. Low Impact Development Practices: A review of current research and recommendations for future directions. Water, Air & Soil Pollution, 186 (1-4), 351-363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-007-9484-z
  8. Frambach RT, Schillewaert N. 2002. Organizational innovation adoption A multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research, Journal of Business Research, 55(2), 163-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00152-1
  9. Howell J, Higgins C. 1990. Champions of Technological Innovation, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 317-341. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393393
  10. Kang et al. 2014. Assessment of Low Impact Development (LID) Integrated in Local Comprehensive Plans for Improving Urban Water Cycle, Journal of the Korean Society of Civil Engineers, 34(5), 1625-1638. October. https://doi.org/10.12652/Ksce.2014.34.5.1625
  11. Koebel TC, Papadakis M, Hudson E, Cavell M. 2004. The Diffusion of Innovation in the Residential Building Industry, Washington, DC: US Department of Housing and Urban Development.
  12. Koebel TC, Cavell M. 2006. Characteristics of Innovative Production Home Builders. Washington, DC: US Department of Housing and Urban Development.
  13. Landers J. 2004. High-Impact Innovation, Civil Engineering, 74(2), 50-57.
  14. Lewis K. 2006. The Role of EPA Region 10 in Smart Growth and Low Impact Development Planning and Implementation in the Puget Sound Region. Master's Thesis. University of Washington
  15. MacMullan E, Reich S. 2007. The Economics of Low-Impact Development: A Literature Review, ECONorthwest, Eugene, OR.
  16. Matisoff DC. 2008. The Adoption of State Climate Change Policies and Renewable Portfolio Standards: Regional Diffusion or Internal Determinants? Review of Policy Research, 25(6), 527-546. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2008.00360.x
  17. NAHB (National Association of Home Builders). 2003. The Practice of Low Impact Development, U.S. HUD, Upper Marlboro, MD, Contract No. H-21314CA.
  18. National Research Council (NRC). 2008. Urban Stormwater Management in the United States, National Academies Press, Washington DC.
  19. NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council). 2001. Stormwater Strategies: Community Responses to Runoff Pollution [online], Available from: http://www.nrdc.org/water/pollution/storm/chap12.asp
  20. Nowacek D, Nelson E, Petchenik J. 2003. Social and Institutional barriers to Stormwater Infiltration, EPA/NSF/USDA 1999 Water and Watershed Research Grant.
  21. PGCDER (Prince George's County Department of Environmental Resources). 1999. Low-Impact Development Design Strategies, An Integrated Design Approach. (EPA 841-B-00-003) Largo, MD.
  22. Randolph J. 2004. Environmental Land Use Planning and Management, Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2004, pp. 664.
  23. Rogers EM. 2003. Diffusion of innovations, 5thed, NewYork:TheFreePress.
  24. SEMCOG (Southeast Michigan Council of Governments Information Center). 2008. Low Impact Development Manual for Michigan: A Design Guide for Implementers and Reviewer, Available from: http://www. semcog.org/LowImpactDevelopment.aspx
  25. Tornatzky LG, Klein KJ. 1982. Characteristics and Innovation adoption Implementation: A Meta-Analysis of Findings, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 29(1), 28-45.
  26. USEPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2000. Stormwater Phase II Final Rule-Small MS4Stormwater Program Overview, Fact Sheet 2.0, EPA 833-F-00-002.
  27. USEPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2007. Reducing Stormwater Costs through Low Impact Development (LID) Strategies and Practice, EPA 841-F-07-006.
  28. VADCR (Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation). 2009. Economic Impact Analysis Virginia Department of Planning and Budget, 4 VAC 50-60, Virginia Association of Zoning Officials.
  29. Vasi IB. 2006. Organizational Environments, Framing Processes, and the Diffusion of the Program to Address Global Climate Change Among Local Governments in the US, Sociological Forum, 21(3), 439-466.
  30. Walters J. 2002. Understanding innovation: What inspires it? What makes it successful? In Abramson, M. and Littman, I. (Eds), Innovation (Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, MA).
  31. Walker R. 2006. Innovation type and diffusion: an empirical analysis of local government, Public Administration, 84(2), 311-335. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2006.00004.x
  32. White SS, Boswell MR. 2006. Planning for Water Quality: Implementation of the NPDES Phase II Stormwater Program in California and Kansas, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 49(1), 141-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640560500373386

Cited by

  1. A Basic Study on the features of LID-related Ordinance Enactment conducted by Local Government - mainly on Seoul City, Suwon City and Namangju City - vol.25, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.14249/eia.2016.25.1.25