콘텐츠 바로가기
로그인
컨텐츠

Category Open

Resources

tutorial

Collection of research papers and materials on development issues

home

Resources
Government and Law Governance

Print

도시기본계획결정권한의 지방이양에 따른 제도보완방향(An approach to institutional provision for transfer of the approval right of urban master plans to local government)

Related Document
Frame of Image
  • 도시기본계획결정권한의 지방이양에 따른 제도보완방향(An approach to institutional provision for transfer of the approval right of urban master plans to local government)
  • 김상조; 신동진; 문채
  • 국토연구원


link
Title 도시기본계획결정권한의 지방이양에 따른 제도보완방향(An approach to institutional provision for transfer of the approval right of urban master plans to local government)
Similar Titles
Material Type Reports
Author(Korean)

김상조; 신동진; 문채

Publisher

경기도:국토연구원

Date 2003-12
Series Title; No 국토연 / 2003-21
ISBN 89-8182-068-6
Pages 123
Subject Country South Korea(Asia and Pacific)
Language Korean
File Type Link
Original Format pdf
Subject Government and Law < Governance
Holding 국토연구원

Abstract

In 1995, Korea entered into an era of self-governance with the election of heads of local governments. As social conditions change, concerns have been raised that the administrative system, which was mainly operated by the central government, should be decentralized. Furthermore, an issue is being raised that the decision-making right for Urban Master Plan system, which provides a framework for urban plan, should also be transferred to each local government.
Eventually, on 25th of June, 「the Presidential Commission on Devolution Promotion for Local Authorities」 decided to transfer the approval function for Urban master Plan to the provincial governments from the central government, and it is expected to open a new paradigm.
The purpose of this study is to analyze anticipated issues that may be caused from the empowerment, and to propose legal measures that can support administrative and institutional management.
Chapter 2 deals with the current Urban master Plan system and its major issues in terms of its planning content, establishment procedures, decision-making process, and management. Firstly, main issues of the content include logical feasibility, consistency with the superior plan or related laws, and environmentally friendly aspects. Secondly, regarding the procedure for planning and decision-making, democratic procedure, consensus between the central and local governmental bodies, and the time required for the whole process are pointed out to be major problems. And finally, from an operational point of view, the role of the guidelines in the process of overall urban policy making, feasibility of the plan, and countermeasures against public grievance were the major issues.
Meanwhile, if we look at the reasons why local governments pursue decentralization, first, it is because of a lack of flexibility due to long processing time. Secondly, there is no more need for the central government to hold power over urban planning because the national plan or policy can be reflected in the superior planning with the newly consolidated Act on National Land Plan and Use. Thirdly, it could bring inefficiency of administrative systems because local governments handle all the procedures for the approval as same as the central government does. Finally, it is difficult for central government officials or Urban Master Plan committee members to make a reasonable, in-depth review due to lack of local knowledge.
After much debate, the Presidential Commission transferred the decision-making right for Urban Master Plan on Devolution Promotion for Local Authorities to provincial governments on June 25th of 2003. However, to enforce the consolidated Act on National Land Plan and Use, the decision-making for the first urban plan under the new law is made by the central government and then the provincial governments will take over thereafter. But Seoul and other six metropolitan cities will still be taken care of by the central government for the time being.
Chapter 3 contains the analysis of similar legal frame works in other advanced countries to our Urban Master Plan system.
UK has experience in transferring the planning and decision-marking right on their Structure Plan, which was similar to our Urban Master Plan, to local governments in 1992. The background was not much different from our situation. The previous system, whereby it took a long time to establish an Structure Plan, made management of development activities difficult and also could not promptly cope with changing situations.
In the case of France, after its decentralization in 1983, local governments played the key role in the process of planning and decision-making. The reason for the transfer was that state-driven planning caused too much difficulty, complicated problems and a long processing time.
(The rest is omitted)

User Note

이 연구보고서의 내용은 국토연구원의 자체 연구물로서 정부의 정책이나 견해와는 상관없습니다.