DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

제주항 재개발사업의 경제적 가치 및 지역경제 파급효과 분석

Analysis of Economic Value and Regional Economic Impact of Jeju Port Redevelopment Project

  • 심기섭 (한국해양수산개발원 항만연구본부)
  • 투고 : 2022.07.25
  • 심사 : 2022.09.30
  • 발행 : 2022.09.30

초록

본 연구에서는 제주내항 재개발사업에 따른 경제적 가치와 경제적 파급효과를 추정하였다. 경제적 가치는 어메니티(Amenity)관점에서 경관개선, 환경개선, 레크레이션효과 등 비시장재화의 가치를 추정하였다. 추정결과, 모집단은 제주도와 기타지역으로 구분하여 개인의 지불의사금액을 조사한 결과, 제주도는 2,952.9원, 기타지역은 4,722.8원으로 추정되었다. 한편, 제주내항 재개발사업에 따른 경제적 파급효과는 사업기간중과 사업완료 이후의 경제적 파급효과를 추정하였다. 추정결과, 사업중에는 생산유발가치는 84,387백만원, 부가가치 유발효과는 37,292백만원, 고용유발가치는 (직접고용+간접고용)효과를 합치면 5,846명으로 나타났다. 사업기간 종료이후에는 2022년 기준으로 외국인 관광객 518천명이고, 부가가치 유발효과는 약 149,885백만원으로 추정되었다.

In this study, the economic value and economic ripple effect of the Jeju Inland Port redevelopment project were estimated. The economic value was estimated from the viewpoint of amenity, the value of non-market goods such as landscape improvement, environmental improvement, and recreation effects. As a result of the estimation, the population was divided into Jeju Island and other regions and the individual's willingness to pay was estimated to be 2,952.9 won in Jeju Island and 4,722.8 won in other regions. On the other hand, the economic ripple effect of the Jeju Inland Port redevelopment project was estimated during the project period and after the completion of the economic ripple effect was estimated. As a result of the estimation, the production inducement value was KRW 84,387 million, the value-added inducement effect was KRW 37,292 million, and the employment inducement value was 5,846 employment when the (direct employment + indirect employment) effect was combined. After the end of the project period, as of 2022, there were 518,000 foreign tourists, and the value-added inducing effect was estimated to be about 149,885 million won.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 심기섭(2021), 항만재개발사업의 경제적 가치추정에 관한 연구 : 어메너티의 관점에서, 한국해양대학교 박사학위논문, 35-79.
  2. 심기섭(2021), 항만재개발사업의 경제적 가치추정에 관한 연구 : 어메너티의 관점에서, 한국항만경제학회지, 제37집 제2호, 33-55.
  3. 조필규(2017), 항만재개발사업의 원도심 연계형 생활권계획 도입방안 연구, 25-28.
  4. 한국개발연구원(2012), 예비타당성조사를 위한 CVM 분석 지침 개선 연구, 공공투자관리센터, 70-90.
  5. 한국개발연구원(2014), "항만부문 사업의 예비타당성조사 표준지침연구(제3판)", 219-200.
  6. 제주특별자치도(2021), 제주통계포털, 각년도.
  7. 한국은행(2014), 산업연관분석해설, 49-69.
  8. 해양수산부(2016), 제2차 항만재개발기본계획, 제주도편.
  9. 해양수산부(2020), 제3차 항만재개발기본계획, 해양수산부 고시 제2020-233호.
  10. FreemanIII, AM(1993), The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values, Resources for the Future : Washington, D.C.
  11. Bishop,R.C and Richard C. and Thomas A. Heberlein(1979), Measuring Values of Extra-Market Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 61(5), 926-930. https://doi.org/10.2307/3180348
  12. David S. Brookshire., Larry S. Eubanks and Alan Randall(1983), Estimating Option Prices and Existence Values for Wildlife Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, 59(1), 1-15.
  13. Hanmann, W. M.(1984), Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 66(3), 332~341. https://doi.org/10.2307/1240800
  14. McConnell K. E.(1990), Models for referendum data: the structure of discrete choice models for contingent valuation, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 18, 19-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/0095-0696(90)90049-5
  15. Randall(1992), Measuring the Demand for Environmental quality, North-Holland Press.
  16. Krutilla, J.V(1984), Economics of Nature Preservation, Handbook of Natural Resource and Energy Economics, 165-189.
  17. LookWood(2012), The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values, Resources for the Future : Washington, D.C.