지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The purpose of this study is to explore the factors which influence successful mediation of public policy related conflicts by comparing two contrasting cases; Hantangang Dam Project and the National Mental Hospital. According to the analysis results, in the case of the Hantangang Dam Project, mediators are considered to have had an intermediate or high level of autonomy and stakeholder representation, and communication failures. On the other hand, the National Mental Hospital was able to overcome limitations in the process of adjustment. Despite some problems regarding stakeholder representation and the professionalism of the mediator, the effectiveness of other factors remained high, so efforts to reach an agreement were successful.
Based on comparative analysis of the cases, the following points should be noted for successful mediation and resolution of public conflicts, First, consensus building is likely to be difficult when the autonomy and representativeness of the stakeholders is neglected. Second, the impartiality of the mediator is a top priority in the resolution of policy related conflicts. Third, it is important to ensure the impartiality of experts consulted in the mediation process. Fourth, it is advantageous for the negotiation of value conflicts to run parallel with a deliberative consensus-building approach. Lastly, the intervention of third parties like politicians or non-governmental organizations is useful when they take on the role of neutral mediators rather than stakeholders.
Based on comparative analysis of the cases, the following points should be noted for successful mediation and resolution of public conflicts, First, consensus building is likely to be difficult when the autonomy and representativeness of the stakeholders is neglected. Second, the impartiality of the mediator is a top priority in the resolution of policy related conflicts. Third, it is important to ensure the impartiality of experts consulted in the mediation process. Fourth, it is advantageous for the negotiation of value conflicts to run parallel with a deliberative consensus-building approach. Lastly, the intervention of third parties like politicians or non-governmental organizations is useful when they take on the role of neutral mediators rather than stakeholders.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 이론적 논의 및 분석틀
Ⅲ. 사례분석
Ⅳ. 정책적 시사점 및 결론
참고문헌
참고문헌 (8)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
한국사회의 갈등구조와 공공갈등 : 국책사업 갈등사례를 중심으로
정정화
한국사회와 행정연구
2011
.11
비선호시설 입지과정 갈등요인과 조정전략에 관한 비교연구 : 영월댐ㆍ내린천댐ㆍ한탄강댐댐 건설사례를 중심으로
김승일
한국행정과 정책연구
2007
.10
공공갈등의 원인과 해결과정에 관한 연구 : 4대강사업 갈등사례를 중심으로
이용훈
한국공공관리학보
2013
.03
인간학으로서의 행정학을 위하여 : 엘리아스의 결합태(figuration) 개념을 중심으로
안지호
한국사회와 행정연구
2013
.02
정부변동과 정책변동 관계 이해 연구 : 영국 사례를 중심으로
정용남
한국사회와 행정연구
2013
.02
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2013-350-003251758