문화기술의 융합 (The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology)

  • 제9권4호
  • /
  • Pages.51-60
  • /
  • 2023
  • /
  • 2384-0358(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2384-0366(eISSN)
국제문화기술진흥원 (The International Promotion Agency of Culture Technology)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

결혼과 출산 간의 관계에서 거주지 선택의 조절 효과 검증 -지방소멸 대응을 위한 광역화 관점에서-

Moderating Effect of Residential Selection on the Relationship between Marriage and Childbirth - From Perspective of Regional Integration against Local Extinction -

  • 투고 : 2023.05.16
  • 심사 : 2023.07.01
  • 발행 : 2023.07.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구는 결혼과 출산 간의 인과적 구조에서 거주지 선택의 조절 효과를 검증하여 거주지 선택이 출산에 어떠한 영향을 미치는지를 확인하였다. 분석 결과, 초혼은 지방정부의 공공서비스를 위한 재정적 역량, 주거 안정성, 지역 규모, 지역의 경제 상황과의 상호작용 그리고 재혼 및 외국인과의 결혼은 지방정부의 공공서비스를 위한 재정적 역량, 주거 안정성, 지역 규모와의 상호작용이 출산에 조절 효과를 지니는 것으로 확인되었다. 이런 분석 결과는 결혼 부부가 거주지로 농어촌 지역보다는 중소도시 및 대도시로 선택할 경우가 출산 의사에 더 긍정적인 영향을 미칠 수 있음을 의미한다. 결혼과 출산 간의 관계에서 거주지 선택의 조절 효과를 근거로 광역화를 주장하는 것이 논리적으로 문제가 있다는 의견도 존재할 수 있지만, 본 연구의 분석 결과와 현재의 결혼 부부 농어촌 지역으로서의 거주 회피현상은 광역화의 필요성을 제기하는데 기여할 수 있을 것으로 판단된다.

This study is to verify the moderating effect of residential selection on the relationship between marriage and childbirth. According to the analysis results, interactions of first marriage with the financial capacity of local governments for public services, residential stability, the scale of the region, and local economic situation have a moderating effect on childbirth. Interactions of remarriage and marriage with foreigners with the financial capacity of local governments for public services, residential stability, and the scale of the region have a moderating effect on childbirth. These results indicate that when married couples choose to reside in small and medium-sized cities or large cities rather than rural areas, it can more positively affect their intention to have children. While there may be a logical argument against advocating for regional integration based on the moderating effect of residential selection on the relationship between marriage and childbirth, the analysis results of this study and the phenomenon of married couples avoiding rural areas can contribute to raising the need for regional integration.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. K. Bassett and Short. J.R. Housing and Residential Structure, London: Taylor & Francis, 1980.
  2. J. Huinink & M. Wagner, Regional Living Conditions, Migration and Family Formation, Kolner Zeitschrift fur Soziologie und Sozial psychologie, Vo. 41, No. 4, pp. 669-689, 1989.
  3. D. Courgeau, Interaction between Spatial Mobility, Family and Career Life-cycle: A French Survey, European Sociological Review, Vo1. 1, No. 2, pp. 139-162, 1985. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.esr.a036382
  4. F. Michielin and C.H. Mulder, Family Events and the Residential Mobility of Couples, Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, Vol. 40, No. 11, pp. 2770-2790, 2008, doi.org/10.1068/a39374
  5. M. Wagner & C.H. Mulder, Spatial Mobility, Family Dynamics, and Housing Transitions, Kolner Zeitschrift fur Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, Vol. 60, pp. 111-135, 2015, doi: 10.1007/978-3-658-11490-9_6
  6. P. Feijten and C.H. Mulder, The Timing of Household Events and Housing Events in the Netherlands: A Longitudinal Perspective, Housing Studies, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 773-792, 2002, doi:10.1080/0267303022000009808
  7. H. Kulu and A. Vikat, Fertility Differences by Housing Type: The Effect of Housing Conditions or of Selective Moves? Demographic Research, Vol. 7, pp. 775-802. doi:10.4054/DemRes.2007.17.26
  8. H. Kulu, Fertility and Spatial Mobility in the Life Course: Evidence from Austria, Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 632-652, 2008, doi.org/10.1068/a3914
  9. U. Lindgren, Who is the Counter-urban Mover? Evidence from the Swedish Urban System, International Journal of Population Geography, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 339-418, 2003, doi:10.1002/IJPG.296
  10. G. Meil, Geographic Job Mobility and Parenthood Decisions, Zeitschrift jur Familienforschung, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 171-195, 2010, https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-354926 https://doi.org/10.20377/jfr-273
  11. H. Ruger, M. Feldhaus, K.S. Becker, & M. Schlegel, Circular job-related Spatial Mobility in Germany: Comparative Analyses of Two Representative Surveys on the Forms, Prevalence and Relevance in the Context of Partnership and Family Development, Comparative Population Studies, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 193-220, 2011, doi: https://doi.org/10.12765/CPoS-2011-05
  12. J. Huinink and M. Feldhaus, Fertility and Commuting Behaviour in Germany, Comparative Population Studies, Vol. 37, pp. 491-516, 2012. https://doi.org/10.12765/CPoS-2012-05
  13. W.A.V. Clark, Life Course Events and Residential Change: Unpacking Age Effects on the Probability of Moving, Journal of Population Research, Vol. 30, pp. 319-334, 2013, doi.org/10.1007/s12546-013-9116-y
  14. D. Courgeau, Migration, Family, and Career: A Life Course Approach. In P. B. Baltes, D. L. Featherman, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Life-span Development and Behaviour (Vol. 10, pp. 219-255). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  15. H. Kulu and P.J. Boyle, High Fertility in City Suburbs: Compositional or contextual effects? European Journal of Population, Vol. 25, pp. 157-174, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-008-9163-9
  16. W.A.V. Clark & D.S. Withers, Fertility, Mobility and Labour-force Participation: A Study of Synchronicity, Population, Space and Place, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 305-321, 2009, doi:10.1002/psp.555
  17. H. Kulu & N. Milewski, Family Change and Migration in the Life Course: An Introduction, Demographic Research, Vol. 77, pp. 567-590, 2007, doi:10.4054/DemRes.2007.17.19