Çѱ¹ÀÎÀÇ º¹ÁöÁ¤Ã¥ ¼±È£¿¡ °üÇÑ ¿¬±¸: ¼ºÀå°ú ºÐ¹è, ¼±º°°ú º¸ÆíÀ» Áß½ÉÀ¸·Î
Welfare Policy Preference in South Korea: Growth versus Redistribution and Targeting versus Universalism
»çȸº¸À忬±¸ 2014³â 30±Ç 2È£ p.67 ~ p.90
±è¼ö¿Ï(Kim Soo-Wan) - °³²´ëÇб³ »çȸº¹ÁöÇкÎ
±è»óÁø(Kim Sang-Jhin) - °³²´ëÇб³ Çѱ¹»çȸº¹Áö¿¬±¸¼Ò
°¼øÈ(Kang Soon-Wha) - °³²´ëÇб³ Æò»ý±³À°¿ø
Abstract
º» ¿¬±¸´Â Çѱ¹ÀÎÀÇ º¹ÁöÁ¤Ã¥ ¼±È£¸¦ ¼ºÀå°ú ºÐ¹è ÁöÇ⼺, ¼±º°°ú º¸Æí ÁöÇ⼺À» Á᫐ À¸·Î ½ÇÁõÀûÀ¸·Î ±Ô¸íÇϰíÀÚ ÇÏ¿´´Ù. Çö ½ÃÁ¡¿¡¼ Çѱ¹ÀÎÀº ¼ºÀå°ú ºÐ¹è, ¼±º°Àû º¹Áö¿Í º¸ÆíÀû º¹Áö Áß ¾î´À ÂÊÀ» ´õ ¼±È£Çϴ°¡? ´©°¡ ¼ºÀå ÁöÇâÀûÀ̸ç, ´©°¡ º¸Æí ÁöÇâÀûÀΰ¡? ¶ÇÇÑ ¼ºÀå°ú ºÐ¹è, ¼±º°°ú º¸ÆíÀ̶ó´Â µÎ ÃàÀ» Áß½ÉÀ¸·Î º¼ ¶§ Çѱ¹ÀÎÀÇ º¹ÁöÁ¤Ä¡ ¼±È£ ´Â ¾î¶² À¯ÇüÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³ª´Â°¡? ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ ¿¬±¸ Áú¹®¿¡ ´ëÇØ Çѱ¹º¹ÁöÆÐ³Î ÀÚ·á(2010)¸¦ ºÐ¼® ÇÑ °á°ú´Â ´ÙÀ½°ú °°´Ù. ù°, ¼ºÀå°ú ºÐ¹è Áß ¾î´À °ÍÀ» ´õ Áß½ÃÇϴ°¡¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÀǰßÀº ¾çºÐµÇ¾î ÀÖ´Â ¹Ý¸é, ¼±º°-º¸Æí ÁöÇâ¿¡ À־ º¸ÆíÁöÇâÀÇ ÀǰßÀÌ ´õ Áö¹èÀûÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. µÑ°, ¼ºÀå-ºÐ¹èÁöÇâ, ¼±º°-º¸ÆíÁöÇâ °£¿¡´Â »ó°ü°ü°è°¡ Á¸ÀçÇÏÁö ¾ÊÀ½À» È®ÀÎÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¼Â°, ¼ºÀå-ºÐ¹èÁöÇâ¿¡ Å« ¿µÇâÀ» ¹ÌÄ¡´Â º¯¼ö´Â ÀÚ½ÅÀÇ Á¤Ä¡Àû ¼ºÇâ°ú ¼Òµæ¼öÁØÀÎ ¹Ý¸é, ¼±º°-º¸ÆíÁöÇâ¿¡ ¿µÇâÀÌ Å« º¯¼ö´Â ¿¬·É°ú ±³À°¼öÁØÀ¸·Î »óÀÌÇÏ°Ô ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. ³Ý°, µÎ ÃàÀ» Á¶ÇÕÇÏ¿© ¼ºÀ塤¼±º°Çü, ºÐ¹è¡¤¼±º°Çü, ºÐ¹è¡¤º¸ÆíÇü, ¼ºÀ塤º¸ÆíÇüÀ¸·Î ±¸ºÐÇÏ¿´À» ¶§, ³× °¡Áö À¯Çü¿¡ ¼ÓÇÏ´Â ºóµµ¼ö°¡ ºñ±³Àû °í·ç ºÐÆ÷µÇ¾ú´Ù. ´Ù¼¸Â°, ¿¬·É´ë°¡ ³ôÀ»¼ö·Ï ¼ºÀåÁöÇâÀûÀÌ°í ¼±º°ÁöÇâÀûÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³ª, º¹Áö¼±È£¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¼¼´ëÈ¿°ú°¡ Á¸ÀçÇÔÀ» º¸¿©ÁÖ°í ÀÖÀ¸¸ç, ±³À°¼öÁØÀÌ ³·À»¼ö·Ï ¼ºÀåÁöÇ⼺ÀÌ ³ô°í, ¼±º°ÁöÇ⼺ÀÌ ³ô°Ô ³ªÅ¸³µ´Âµ¥, ÀÌ´Â ±âÁ¸ ¿¬±¸µé¿¡¼ ÁöÀûÇÑ ÇÏÀ§°èÃþÀÇ ºñ°è±Þ¼º°ú º¸¼ö ¼ºÇâ°úµµ ÀÏÄ¡ÇÏ´Â °á°ú ÀÌ´Ù.
This study examined welfare policy preference in South Korea, focusing on two dimensions of ¡®Growth versus Redistribution¡¯ and ¡®Targeting versus Universalism¡¯. On the research questions such as, ¡®Are contemporary Koreans growth oriented or redistribution oriented?¡¯ ¡®Do they prefer targeting welfare policy or universalism welfare policy?¡¯ ¡®Who are growth oriented as well as who prefer universalism welfare policy?¡¯ ¡®Which type of welfare policy is most preferred?¡¯, this study analysed quantitatively using the 5th wave of Korean Welfare Panel data (2010). The main results are as follows. First, more Koreans prefer universal policy (50%) rather than targeting (35%), while the ratio of the growth-oriented and that of the redistribution-oriented show almost the same frequencies. Second, there is no correlation between ¡®growth/redistribution orientation¡¯ and ¡®targeting/universalism preference¡¯. Third, among six independent variables, political ideology and income level affect the orientation of growth/redistribution while age and education affect the preference of targeting/universalism. Fourth, when generating four welfare policy types using two dimensions, frequencies of each type, i.e, ¡®Liberal Market type(growth/targeting oriented)¡¯, ¡®Redistribution type(redistribution/ targeting oriented)¡¯, ¡®Social Protect type(redistribution/universalism oriented)¡¯, ¡®Growth-Universalism type¡¯, do not shows much differences. Fifth, age effect exists as older people have the more targeting- and growth- orientedness, but class cleavage is not found as those with low education also prefer targeting welfare policy and growth. Finally, those who are males, younger, higher educated, higher incomers, conservative, and not economically active in labor market tend to be included in the ¡®Growth-Universalism type¡¯.
Ű¿öµå
º¹ÁöÀνÄ, º¹ÁöÁ¤Ã¥¼±È£, ¼ºÀå°ú ºÐ¹è, ¼±º°ÁÖÀÇ, º¸ÆíÁÖÀÇ
Welfare attitudes, Welfare Policy Preference, Growth and Redistribution, Selectivism, Universalism
KMID :
1124020140300020067
¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸
µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸
À¯È¿¼º°á°ú(Recomendation)