한국조경학회지 (Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture)

  • 제43권3호
  • /
  • Pages.92-100
  • /
  • 2015
  • /
  • 1225-1755(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-9566(eISSN)
한국조경학회 (The Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

브라운필드 재생을 위한 협력적 계획 모델 연구

Collaborative Planning Model for Brownfield Regeneration

  • 김유진 (미국 버지니아 폴리테크닉 주립대학교 건축도시대학) ;
  • 패트릭 밀러 (미국 버지니아 폴리테크닉 주립대학교 건축도시대학)
  • Kim, Eujin Julia (College of Architecture and Urban Studies, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University) ;
  • Miller, Patrick (College of Architecture and Urban Studies, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University)
  • 투고 : 2015.05.02
  • 심사 : 2015.06.10
  • 발행 : 2015.06.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

대부분의 일반적인 계획 과정과 달리, 브라운필드 계획은 잠재된 오염문제로 인한 기술적, 법률적 전문지식을 필요로 한다. 성공적으로 통합적인 의사결정에 관여하기 위해서는 조정된 협력적 계획 모델이 중요하다. 본 연구는 기존의 협력적 계획 접근방식이 브라운 필드 재생에 있어 상반된 분야의 전문가들 및 지역 주민들이 함께 일하며 적절하게 균형 잡힌 협력을 이루어 내기 위한 어려움들을 극복하는 데에 어떻게 효과적으로 적용될 수 있는지 알아보는 것을 목표로 한다. 의사소통적 계획이론 관련 문헌분석을 통해 적절한 지표들을 찾아내어, 네 단계의 브라운 필드 계획과정(대상지 선별, 평가, 정화, 디자인)에 적용시켜 본 후, 중요한 부분들을 짚어내었다. 본 연구의 결과, 크게 세 가지 점에 초점을 맞춘, 브라운 필드 재생에 적합한 협력적 계획 모델의 필요성이 인식되었다(1. 사회, 문화, 디자인 분야와 과학, 기술 분야의 전문가 간의 균형 잡힌 대화의 촉진, 2. 일반주민들과의 잠재적 오염 위험과 관련한 커뮤니케이션을 위한 적절한 방법개발, 3. 전문가 주도의 객관적 데이터와 주민 의견 중심의 주관적 데이터의 통합을 위한 의사결정지원 시스템의 마련).

Unlike most other planning processes, brownfield planning generally requires a high level of technical and legal expertise due to potential site contamination. To successfully engage in inclusionary decision making, an adaptive collaboration strategy for brownfield planning is therefore critical. This study examines how a communicative planning approach can be used to overcome the challenge of enabling experts from different fields to work alongside lay people from the local community to achieve a properly balanced collaboration in brownfield planning. After identifying appropriate indicators for collaboration through a literature review of established communicative planning theory, these indicators are applied to the brownfield planning process, highlighting critical points of collaboration such as site prioritization, assessment, remediation, and redevelopment throughout. The results suggest the critical need for an adaptive model focusing on three aspects: 1. Facilitation of a balanced dialogue between the experts with social, cultural, and design-based knowledge and the ones with scientific and engineering-based knowledge, 2. Preparation of an appropriate tool for risk communication with the lay people, 3. Development of decision support system for the integration of expert-oriented technical data and public opinion-oriented subjective data.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Blokhuis, E. G. J., C. C. P. Snijders, Q. Han and W. F. Schaefer(2012) Conflicts and cooperation in brownfield redevelopment projects: Application of conjoint analysis and game theory to model strategic decision making. Journal of Urban Planning and Development 138(3): 195-205. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000122
  2. Caser, U. S., S. Annunziata and A. Makarenko(2013) Collaborative urban design, a promising approach to brownfield recovery-FRUNZE 35, Kiev UA.Revista de Geografia e Ordenamento do Territorio 1(4): 7-29.
  3. Comp, T. A.(2007) Science, art an environmental reclamation: Three projects and a few thoughts. In A. Berger(Ed.), Designing the Reclaimed Landscape. London: Routledge. pp. 63-76.
  4. Dukes, E. F. and K. Firehock(2001) Collaboration: A Guide for Environmental Advocates. Charlottesville, VA: Institute for Environmental Negotiation, University of Virginia.
  5. Dukes, E. F., M. A. Piscolish and J. B. Stephens(2008) Reaching for Higher Ground in Conflict Resolution: Tools for Powerful Groups and Communities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  6. Forester, J.(1999) The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  7. Geertman, S.(2002) Participatory planning and GIS: A PSS to bridge the gap. Environment and Planning B 29(1): 21-36. https://doi.org/10.1068/b2760
  8. Guo, G., Q. Zhou and L. Q. Ma(2006) Availability and assessment of fixing additives for the in situ remediation of heavy metal contaminated soils: A review. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 116(1-3): 513-528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-006-7668-4
  9. Healey, P.(1992) Planning through debate: The communicative turn in planning theory. Town Planning Review 63(2): 143-162. https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.63.2.422x602303814821
  10. Healey, P.(1999) Institutionalist analysis, communicative planning, and shaping places. Journal of Planning Education and Research 19(2): 111-121. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X9901900201
  11. Healey, P.(2006) Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies. London: Macmillan.
  12. Hollander, J. B.(2011) Sunburnt Cities: The Great Recession, Depopulation and Urban Planning in the American Sunbelt. London: Routledge.
  13. Hollander, J. B. and J. Nemeth(2011) The bounds of smart decline: A foundational theory for planning shrinking cities. Housing Policy Debate 21(3): 349-367. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2011.585164
  14. Huxley, M. and O. Yiftachel(2000) New paradigm or old myopia? Unsettling the communicative turn in planning theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research 19(4): 333-342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X0001900402
  15. Innes, J. E. and D. E. Booher(2010) Planning with Complexity: An Introduction to Collaborative Rationality for Public Policy. London: Routledge.
  16. International City/County Management Association and Superfund/Brownfield Research Institute(ICMA)(2001) Brownfields Redevelopment: A Guidebook for Local Governments and Communities. Washington, DC: author.
  17. Johnson, M. P., J. Hollander and A. Hallulli(2014) Maintain, demolish, re-purpose: Policy design for vacant land management using decision models. Cities 40: 151-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.05.005
  18. Lafortezza, R., R. C. Corry, G. Sanesi and R. D. Brown(2008) Visual preference and ecological assessments for designed alternative brownfield rehabilitations. Journal of Environmental Management 89(3): 257-269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.01.063
  19. Linkov, I., A. Varghese, S. Jamil, T. P. Seager, G. Kiker and T. Bridges (2005) Multi-criteria decision analysis: A framework for structuring remedial decisions at contaminated sites. In I. Linkov and A. B. Ramadan (Eds.), Comparative Risk Assessment and Environmental DecisionMaking. Amsterdam: Springer. pp. 15-54.
  20. McCall, M. K.(2003) Seeking good governance in participatory-GIS: a review of processes and governance dimensions in applying GIS to participatory spatial planning. Habitat International 27(4): 549-573. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0197-3975(03)00005-5
  21. McGuirk, P. M.(2001) Situating communicative planning theory: Context, power, and knowledge. Environment and Planning A 33(2): 195-217. https://doi.org/10.1068/a3355
  22. Nemeth, J. and J. Langhorst(2014) Rethinking urban transformation: Temporary uses for vacant land. Cities 40: 143-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.04.007
  23. Pearsall, H., Lucas, S. and Lenhardt, J.(2014) The contested nature of vacant land in Philadelphia and approaches for resolving competing objectives for redevelopment. Cities 40: 163-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.04.008
  24. Rieniets, T.(2009) Shrinking cities: Causes and effects of urban population losses in the twentieth century. Nature and Culture 4(3): 231-254. https://doi.org/10.3167/nc.2009.040302
  25. Sadoway, D. and S. Shekhar(2014) (Re)prioritizing citizens in smart cities governance: Examples of smart citizenship from urban India. The Journal of Community Informatics 10(3).
  26. Sen, B. and R. K. Sen(2014) Bottom-up integration of data-aware communities: Some initial work in Kapgari village community. In the Conference Proceedings of the Global Humanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC), 2014 IEEE. 10-13 October, San Jose, CA. pp. 445-450.
  27. Solitare, L.(2005) Prerequisite conditions for meaningful participation in brownfields redevelopment. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 48(6): 917-935. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640560500294475
  28. Talen, E.(2000) Bottom-up GIS: A new tool for individual and group expression in participatory planning. Journal of the American Planning Association 66(3): 279-294. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360008976107
  29. Tress, B. and G. Tress(2003) Scenario visualisation for participatory landscape planning: A study from Denmark. Landscape and Urban Planning 64(3): 161-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00219-0
  30. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA)(2010) Brownfield areawide planning program. Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/areawide_grants