Journal of the Korean Regional Science Association (지역연구)

Korean Regional Science Association (한국지역학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Exploring Possibilities of Social Integration in Inclusionary Housing: Focusing on Inclusionary Zoning in the United States

포용주택 공급을 통한 사회적 혼합 가능성 탐색 - 미국의 포용주택 제도를 중심으로 -

  • 박미선 (국토연구원 주택토지연구본부)
  • Received : 2020.12.08
  • Accepted : 2020.12.26
  • Published : 2020.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aims to explore the possibilities of social integration focused on the inclusionary housing scheme developed in the United States. Inclusionary housing is produced by inclusionary zoning with planning power. One of the main goals of developing inclusionary housing is to achieve social integration in neighborhoods. The author investigates the origin, evolution, characteristics, and mechanism of the inclusionary housing scheme in the United States. Results show that the inclusionary housing scheme utilizes market mechanism such as the incentives of floor ratio bonus, fast tract permit approach as well as the affordability obligation for the low-income households. Considering the policy orientation in the United States toward market mechanism, the inclusionary housing program has played a significant role in producing and preserving affordable housing for the underprivileged in affluent neighborhoods and has produced meaningful results in academic achievements, better job outcomes, health results, and social interaction even though it has been also criticized with by its superficiality. Finally, the author draws policy implications for housing policy in Korea from the lessons and limitations of the inclusionary housing mechanism.

본 논문은 미국 포용주택 제도를 중심으로 사회적 혼합 달성가능성을 탐색하는 것을 주 목적으로 한다. 계획고권을 활용한 포용주택 제도의 발생 배경과 운영방식, 사회적 혼합 달성의 효과 및 한계를 검토하여 우리나라 주거정책에 대한 시사점을 도출하였다. 분석 결과, 시장중심적 정책이 우세한 국가임에도, 주택가격이 높고 부담가능주택이 부족한 대도시 중심으로 포용주택 제도가 활성화되고 있으며 용적률 보너스를 포함한 다양한 인센티브를 제공하며 민간의 참여를 유도하고 있었다. 또한 정책대상이 되는 중저소득층이 부담가능하도록 주택을 공급하며 최대한 장기간 저렴하게 유지되도록 의무화하고 있다. 이를 통해 확정적이지는 않지만, 사회적 혼합에 긍정적인 효과가 발견되고 특히 아이들의 교육 성취도가 높은 편이나, 유의미한 사회적 상호작용에 대해서는 여전히 그 성과가 실험중이다. 포용주택을 직접 해당부지에 건설하는 경우와 인근에 건설하는 경우로 나누어 사례분석한 결과 장단점이 모두 존재하는 것이 확인되었다. 이는 주택가격이 높고 빠르게 상승하는 대도시지역에서 중저소득층을 위한 부담가능한 주택공급 가능성의 단초를 제공한다.

Keywords

References

  1. 국토교통부, 2020, 2020년 주택업무편람.
  2. 박미선, 2016, 유엔 해비타트 III 새로운 도시의제의 기조에 비추어 본 한국 주택정책의 성과와 과제, 공간과 사회, 26(4), pp.40-76.
  3. Brophy, P. and R. Smith., 1997, Mixed-Income Housing: Factors for Success. Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research, 3(2), pp.3-31.
  4. Calavita, N, and A. Mallach., 2010, Inclusionary Housing, Incentives, and Land Value Recapture, Land Lines, January 7.
  5. Gans, H., 1961, Planning and Social Life: Friendship and Neighbor Relations in Suburban Communities, Journal of the American Planning Association, 27(2), pp.134-140. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366108978443
  6. Hickey, R., L. Sturtevant, and E. Thaden., 2014, Achieving Lasting Affordability through Inclusionary Housing, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
  7. Jacobus R., 2015, Inclusionary Housing: Creating and Maintaining Equitable Communities, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
  8. Johnson, P., H. Ladd, and J. Ludwig., 2001, The Benefits and Costs of Residential-Mobility Programs for the Poor, Prepared for the Conference: "Opportunities, Deprivation, and the Housing Nexus: Trans-Atlantic Perspectives".
  9. Joseph, M., and R. Chaskin., 2010, Living in a Mixed-Income Development: Resident Perceptions of the Benefits and Disadvantages of Two Developments in Chicago, Urban Studies, 47(11), pp.1-20.
  10. Joseph, M, R. Chaskin, and H. Webber., 2008, The Theoretical Basis for Addressing Poverty through Mixed-Income Development, Urban Affairs Review, 42(3), pp.369-409. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087406294043
  11. Kleit, R., 2002, Job Search Networks and Strategies in Scattered-site Public Housing, Housing Studies, 17(1), pp.83-100. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673030120105910
  12. Levy, D., Z. McDade., and K. Dumlao., 2011, Effects from Living in Mixed-Income Communities for Low-Income Families, Urban Institute.
  13. Popkin, S., L. Buron, D. Levy, and M. Cunningham., 2000, The Gautreaux Legacy: What Might Mixed-Income and Dispersal Strategies Mean for the Poorest Public Housing Tenants, Housing Policy Debate, 11(4), pp.911-942. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2000.9521392
  14. Saldov, M., 1998, "Social Mix", In W van Vliet (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Housing, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp.549-550.
  15. Sarkissian, W., 1976, "The Idea of Social Mix in Town Planning: An Historical Review", Urban Studies, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp.231-246. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420987620080521
  16. Schwartz, A., 2006, Housing Policy in the United States: An Introduction. Routledge.
  17. Schwartz, A., and K. Tajbaksh., 2001, Mixed-Income Housing as Social Policy: The Case for Diminished Expectations, Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning.
  18. Schwartz, H., 2010, Housing Policy Is School Policy: Economically Integrative Housing Promotes Academic Success in Montgomery County, Maryland, A Century Foundation Report.
  19. Thaden, E. and R. Wang., 2017, Inclusionary Housing in the United States: Prevalence, Impact, and Practices, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
  20. Wilson W., 1987, The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, the Underclass, and Public Policy, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  21. van Vliet W., 1998, The Encyclopedia of Housing, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  22. 뉴욕타임스 기사 (2014.7.27.) https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/27/nyregion/on-the-upper-west-side-a-house-divided-by-income.html (뉴욕타임즈 2014. 7.25. 논설: 최종접속 2019.11.13.)
  23. 미국 포용주택 프로그램 DB제공 홈페이지 (최종접속 2020.10.25.) https://gsn.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=7703d10c1b964eb5b91a1d699944e95c