양광혁.PDF

Similar documents
a16.PDF

2

정봉수.PDF

¨ë Áö¸®ÇÐȸÁö-¼Û°æ¾ðOK

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

이수진.PDF

남북한교과서에서나타난 민족정체성

264 축되어 있으나, 과거의 경우 결측치가 있거나 폐기물 발생 량 집계방법이 용적기준에서 중량기준으로 변경되어 자료 를 활용하는데 제한이 있었다. 또한 1995년부터 쓰레기 종 량제가 도입되어 생활폐기물 발생량이 이를 기점으로 크 게 줄어들었다. 그러므로 1996년부

<313120B9DABFB5B1B82E687770>

①국문지리학회지-주성재-OK

09구자용(489~500)

( )박용주97.PDF


232 도시행정학보 제25집 제4호 I. 서 론 1. 연구의 배경 및 목적 사회가 다원화될수록 다양성과 복합성의 요소는 증가하게 된다. 도시의 발달은 사회의 다원 화와 밀접하게 관련되어 있기 때문에 현대화된 도시는 경제, 사회, 정치 등이 복합적으로 연 계되어 있어 특

歯4차학술대회원고(장지연).PDF

PDF

겉표지.PDF

시안

hwp

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp DOI: * The Mediating Eff

IDP www idp or kr IDP 정책연구 한국경제의구조적문제와개혁방향 민주정책연구원 The Institute for Democracy and Policies

歯 PDF

±¹Á¦ÆòÈŁ4±Ç1È£-ÃÖÁ¾

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

에너지경제연구 Korean Energy Economic Review Volume 17, Number 2, September 2018 : pp. 1~29 정책 용도별특성을고려한도시가스수요함수의 추정 :, ARDL,,, C4, Q4-1 -

27 2, 17-31, , * ** ***,. K 1 2 2,.,,,.,.,.,,.,. :,,, : 2009/08/19 : 2009/09/09 : 2009/09/30 * 2007 ** *** ( :

¿¬°¨ÃÖÁ¾Àμ⺻-last

에너지경제연구 제14권 제1호

06_À̼º»ó_0929

歯논문손규만.PDF

大学4年生の正社員内定要因に関する実証分析

*5£00̽ÅÈ�

부문별 에너지원 수요의 변동특성 및 공통변동에 미치는 거시적 요인들의 영향력 분석

국토

에너지경제연구 Korean Energy Economic Review Volume 9, Number 2, September 2010 : pp. 19~41 석유제품브랜드의자산가치측정 : 휘발유를 중심으로 19

<3136C1FD31C8A35FC3D6BCBAC8A3BFDC5F706466BAAFC8AFBFE4C3BB2E687770>

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA


에너지경제연구 제13권 제1호

연합학술대회(국민연금윤석명1008)ff.hwp

歯4차학술대회원고(황수경이상호).PDF

<B0ADC0C7B3EBC6AE312D34C0E52E687770>

공휴일 전력 수요에 관한 산업별 분석

논총13집.PDF

수탁연구01-09(수요자 중심1).hwp

50-5대지05장후은.indd

untitled

송동우.PDF

<C7D1B1B9B0E6C1A6BFACB1B8C7D0C8B828C0CCC1BEBFF85FC0CCBBF3B5B75FBDC5B1E2B9E9292E687770>

歯 PDF

,,,.,,,, (, 2013).,.,, (,, 2011). (, 2007;, 2008), (, 2005;,, 2007).,, (,, 2010;, 2010), (2012),,,.. (, 2011:,, 2012). (2007) 26%., (,,, 2011;, 2006;

歯5-2-13(전미희외).PDF

대구전시컨벤션센터 전시행사의 지역경제 파급효과 분석

국제무역론-02장

<C5EBC0CFBFACB1B8BFF85F4B494E5520C5EBC0CFC7C3B7AFBDBA2832C8A3295FB3BBC1F628C0FCC3BC295F37C2F75F E687770>

<3036C0CCBCB1BFEC2E687770>

I

44-6대지.08김정희-5

44-3대지.08류주현c

- 2 -

노동경제논집 38권 3호 (전체).hwp

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

에너지경제연구제 16 권제 1 호 Korean Energy Economic Review Volume 16, Number 1, March 2017 : pp. 35~55 학술 전력시장가격에대한역사적요인분해 * 35

歯FFF01288.PDF

歯7권2호.PDF

歯320.PDF

untitled

<30312DC8ABBDC2C7E52E687770>

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

Vol.259 C O N T E N T S M O N T H L Y P U B L I C F I N A N C E F O R U M

歯연보01-10.PDF

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: The Effect of Caree

WHO 의새로운국제장애분류 (ICF) 에대한이해와기능적장애개념의필요성 ( 황수경 ) ꌙ 127 노동정책연구 제 4 권제 2 호 pp.127~148 c 한국노동연구원 WHO 의새로운국제장애분류 (ICF) 에대한이해와기능적장애개념의필요성황수경 *, (disabi

에너지경제연구 Korean Energy Economic Review Volume 14, Number 2, September 2015 : pp. 99~126 산유국의재생에너지정책결정요인분석 1) 99

h99-37.PDF

의정연구_36호_0828.hwp

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp DOI: 3 * Effects of 9th

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: * A Study on the Pe


04±èºÎ¼º

歯95_dbtech.PDF

02김헌수(51-72.hwp

분석결과 Special Edition 녹색건물의 가치산정 및 탄소배출 평가 이슈 서 민간분야의 적극적인 참여 방안의 마련이 필요하다. 또한 우리나라는 녹색건축의 경제성에 대한 검증에 대 한 연구가 미흡한 실정이다. 반면, 미국, 영국, 호주 등은 민간 주도로 녹색건축물


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp.1-19 DOI: *,..,,,.,.,,,,.,,,,, ( )

<312DBACFC7D1BBE7C0CCB9F6C0FCB7C22DC0D3C1BEC0CEBFDC2E687770>


歯FFF01379.PDF

최종보고서차례-2k PDF

歯음란물규제관할권(홍성필).PDF

퍼스널 토이의 조형적 특성에 관한 고찰

PDF

에너지경제연구 Korean Energy Economic Review Volume 9, Number 2, September 2010 : pp. 1~18 가격비대칭성검정모형민감도분석 1

141(26) () ( ( ) () () () ) 2) 1932 ()()3) 2 1) ( ) ( ) () () () 4) ( ) 5) 6) ) ) ( ) () 42 () )

<443A5CB1E8BFC144425CBAB8B0EDBCAD5CB4EBC7D0C7F5BDC5B0FAB0E6C0EFB7C228C3D6C1BE295F E2E2E>

Á¶´öÈñ_0304_final.hwp

#Ȳ¿ë¼®

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

완성09E02박은숙.PDF

< BBF3B9DDB1E228C6EDC1FD292E687770>

Transcription:

:, 1981-1996 An Empirical Analy sis on th e Relat ion ship Bet w een Reg ion al Indu strial Structure and Regional Economic F luctuation : F ocused on Korean Cities, 1981-1996 2001 2 ( )

:, 1981-1996 An Empirical Analy sis on th e Relat ion ship Bet w een Reg ion al Indu strial Structure and Regional Economic F luctuation : F ocused on Korean Cities, 1981-1996 2001 2 ( )

. 2001 2

.,. 1981 1996.,..,,., 10 20,., 1986 (- ).,,

..

1 (allocation effect ) (p. 30) 2-1 51 RIS ( ) (p. 45-46) 2-2 51 REF ( ) (p. 48-49) 3 51 RIS REF (p. 51) 4-1 50 RIS REF (p. 54) 4-2 (p. 54) 4-3 (p. 56) 4-4 (p. 57) 5-1 (p. 59) 5-2 (p. 61) 6 (p. 62) 1 RIS REF (p. 65)

. / 1. / 7 1. / 7 2. / 9 2.1 2.2 3. / 12 3.1 3.2. / 17 1. / 17 2. (RIS ) / 18 2.1 2.2 : (NAA) 3. (REF ) / 25 3.1 (Shift- Share Analysis) 3.2 :. / 40

1. / 40 2. / 42. / 44 1. / 44 1.1 RIS REF 1.2 RIS REF 1.3 RIS REF 1.3.1 1.3.2 2. / 61 2.1 2.2. / 66 1. / 66 1.1 1.2 2. / 69

. 1.. - (D. Dimitrios, 1992: 16)., Adam Smith, Karl Marx, Henri Pirenne. Fordism, (D. Dimitrios, 1992: 82). 20.,..,,,. - 1 -

(N. Jewson and S. MacGregor, 1997: 3). (container) (S. Sassen, 1994).,,,,, (world cities) (global localization)' (P. L. Knox, 1995: 7). Post-Fordism Neo-Fordism.,, Keynesian Fordism Post-Fordism (, ). (deregulation) (flexible accumulation) (P. L. Knox, 1995: 7)., - (N. Jewson and S. MacGregor, 1997). - 2 -

,,. 1991.,,,,, (over centralization) (, 1995: 11)..,. (J. R. Feagin and M. P. Smith, 1996: 347)., ( :, ). - 3 -

. 2.. 1). 2),.. 2000 9 7 9 72 5. 3) ', 1) (region) (functional region) (J. P. Blair, 1996. L ocal E conom ic D evelop m ent: A naly sis and P ractice. London : Sage. p. 4). 2) urban city. urban ( : urbanism) city (Louis Wirth. 1938, Urbanism as a way of life. T he A m erican J ournal of S ociology, p. 4). 3) -. (city),. - 4 -

.,,. -. 4) (empirical analysis). (national average approach), (shift- share analysis). 5) (cross- sectional analysis) (time- series analysis) OLS., 1, 2,. 3 4), -, (Dimitrios D. 1996, T he Dynamics of Cities, Routledge: London, p. 17). 5).. - 5 -

( ) ( ). 4, 3. 5,. 6. - 6 -

. 1.. 8 16,, (N. Kleniewski, 1997: 51-64).. ( ),, (R. D. McKenzie, 1967: 351)..,,. (localization effect) (urbanization effect) (J. P. Blair, 1995: 95-102). - 7 -

, ( ),.,,. (C. K. Kim, 1990: 7). Fordism. Post-Fordism. (technopolis). (R. W. Preer, 1992: 5)., (R. W. Preer, 1992: 6-8). - 8 -

2. 2.1., (W. K. K. Davies & D. P. Donoghue, 1993),. (J. J. Friedmann, 1995).,, 6). Allan Rodgers.. (balanced)', 6). G. A. Carlino Alan Evans Chinitz. Carlino,, Evan s (Comparison of Agglomeration: Or What Chinitz really said: A Reply. Urban S tudies, 1986. Longman.) - 9 -

.,, (specialization) (A. Rogers, 1957: 16). Rodgers..,, (ibid, p. 17). Rodgers,.. Post- Fordism (economy of scope) (economy of scale). Birch 1969 1976 5 6 (establishments) 7),, ( ) 66% 20, 80% 100 (P. K. Eisinger, 1988: 238-239)., 7) Birch (establishments) (firms),. (branch). - 10 -

.. Rodgers. Benton, Madison, Washington Daniel G. Williams(1983),.,. J. U. Marshall(1975) Ullman Dacey (minimum requirements profile),,.,.,. - 11 -

2.2,..., (A. Rogers, 1957: 17).. Marshall. 5 '. 3. 3.1-12 -

Mclaughlin 1931. 1919 1927 14 (G. E. Mclaughlin, 1931). 1938 R. C. Tress England Wales 5 144. (R. C. Tress, 1938). P. S. Florence(1942)... A. Rogers(1957) 1957 93 1950 22. (seasonal),. 1955 Steingenga.. Tress. 1960 Ullman Dacey (Minimum Requirements Approach). SIC '. - 13 -

,. 400 (E. L. Ullman & M. F. Dacey, 1969). 1974 Conroy 1958 1967 52 SMSA 118 SIC 3- digit (portfolio variance). (covariance). 42.2% (M. E. Conroy, 1974). 1975 J. U. Marshall Gini 10,000 108. (J. U. Marshall, 1975). 1981 Kort (Entropy Maximization Approach). Goldfeld- Quant (J. R. Kort, 1981). 3.2,, - 14 -

/. Ullman Dacey, Kort, Gini Marshall.,. 1983 Norcliff 4, (free- standing cities) (, 1992: 13). 1978 1987,,,,.,,.,, (, ) (C. K. Kim, 1990).. (1995) (Ogive ) - 15 -

( ),. 8),,.(, 1999). / (, 1998) (, 1997).,,. 8),. - 16 -

. 1. (RIS) (REF),. OLS,. 1981 1996 5.... R E F i = + R IS i + i...(1) R E F i ; R IS i i ; ; i.. R E F i = + 1 R IS i + 2 CS + 3 M C + i...(2) CS(City Size) M C(Metropolitan City) ;, 1, 2, 3 ; - 17 -

(1).,. R E F i = + 1 R IS i + 2 CS + 3 YD + i...(3 ) YD (Year Dummy) ; (2). (1), (2) (3). L og ( R E F i ) = + L og ( R IS i ) + i...(4 ) L og ( R E F i ) = + 1L og ( R IS i ) + 2 CS + i...(5 ) L og ( R E F i ) = + 1L og ( R IS i ) + 2 CS + 3 YD + i...(6) Log( R E F i ) Log( R IS i ) R E F i R IS i,. 2. (RIS ) 2.1-18 -

.,,. 2.1.1 1) (National Average Approach) D 1 = J j = 1 ( X j - X * j ) / X * j X j j ; X * j j ; J ; Florence.. 2) Ogive D 2 = J j = 1 [ ( X j - X ** j )/ X ** j ] X ** j 1/J ; X j J. Tress, Rogers. 3) Gini G j = N - 1 i = 1 ( C i D i + 1 - D i C i + 1 ) 10, 000 G j j ; C i (location quotients) j (successive cumulated percentage of industries) ; D i ; N. 1975 Marshall 9). - 19 -

4) (Minimum Requirements Approach). a b. M i = a i + b i L n P i, i=1, 2,, J M i ; P i.. D = ( n i = 1 n ( P i - M i ) 2 M i n P i - M i) 2 i = 1 i = 1 n M i i = 1 P i i ; M i i. Ullman Dacey, Bahl 10) 5) (Simple Percentage Approach). 1931 Mclaughlin. 9) Marshall (mean absolute deviation index ) Gini., Lorenz,. 10) Bahl SIC 14 Ullman 41 (R. W. Bahl. 1971. Industrial Diver sity in Urban Areas: Alternative Measure and Intermetropolitan Comparisons. E conom ic Geog rap hy Vol 47. N o 14. p. 415) - 20 -

6) (Industrial Portfolio Approach), (portfolio variance). p = w i w j ij i j w i w j i j ; ij i j.. ij = 1 N - 2 N t = 1 y it - i it y j t - j j t it ; j t i j y it y j t i j ; i j i j. Conroy. 7) (Entropy Maximization Approach) D j = J j = 1 ( X ij X i )Log ( 1 X ij / X i ) = - J j = 1 ( X ij X j )Log( X ij X i ) X ij i j ; X i i ; Log (natural logarithm). Kort. 2.1.2 (REI: Regional Economic Instability), REI REI. - 21 -

(cross- sectional) (H. L. Brewer, 1985: 463).,.. Conroy... ' 11)., (portfolio variance) (M. E. Conroy, 11), (basic)'. (M. E. Conroy. T he concept and measurement of regional industrial diversification. University of T exas Press. p. 494) (self- sufficient city) (R. T. Pratt. 1968. An appraisal of the Minimum Requirements T echnique. E conom ic Geograp hy. Vol 44. N o. 2. p. 118). - 22 -

1974: 496). Ogive,.... Conroy,. Bort(1961: 170),. Bort.,., (R. W. Bahl, 1971: 419). - 23 -

. (shift- share analysis),. 2.2 (RIS ) ;.. R IS i = J j = 1 [ ( E i,j / E i ) - ( N E j / N E ) ]/ ( N E j / N E )...(7 ) R IS i i ; E i, j i j ; E i i ; N E i j ; N E ; J. (7), (RIS)., (1000 ) 10% X. A X A (100 ) 90% RIS 8. A X A 10% RIS 0. RIS - 24 -

. 3. (REF ) ; 3.1 (Shift- Share Analy sis ) 3.1.1 12).,. 1960, (shift- share analysis). (B. H. Stevens & C. L. Moore, 1980: 419).,. 12). (location quotients) ( ). - 25 -

..,,., d : (national growth) g, (industry-mix) m, (competitive) c. j i. d ij = g ij + m ij + c ij (employment: E ). d ij = E * ij - E ij g ij = E ij r N m ij = E ij ( r in - r N ) c ij = E ij ( r ij - r in ) E * ij j i ; E ij j i. j i. - 26 -

d ij = E ij r N + E ij ( r in - r N ) + E ij ( r ij - r in ) (a) d ij j i ; E ij j i ; r N ; r in i ; r in j i.,,. j i j i, ( m ij + c ij ). 3.1.2 1942 D. C. Creamer, 1960 (Ashby, Dunn, Fuchs, Perloff ) (H. W. Herzog, Jr. & R. J. Olsen, 1977: 441).,.. - 27 -

13).,,.,,,,..., (J. P. Blair, 1995: 148)., (H. W. Herzog, Jr. & R. J. Olsen, 1977: 444).., (B. H. Stevens & C. L. Moore, 1980: 419-422). 13). 1997.. ;. p. 325-326 - 28 -

,., (allocation effect) (competitive effect) (Allocation Effect Model) Esteban- Marquillas( E-M)(1972) ( Ê ij ) 14), c ij a ij,. c ij = Ê ij ( r ij - r i, N ) a ij = ( E ij - Ê ij )( r ij - r i, N ) (a). d ij = E ij r N + E ij ( r i, N - r N ) + Ê ij ( r ij - r i, N ) + ( E ij - Ê ij )( r ij - r i, N ) E- M, 14) (homothetic) ( Ê ij ) j i, (location quotient) 0. ( Ê ij ) Ê ij = E j ( E i,n / E N ). (J. M. E steban- Marquillas. 1972. A Reinterpretation of Shift - Share Analy sis. R eg ional and Urban E conom ics, Vol. 2. p. 251). - 29 -

1 Code N o. ( a ij ) (component s ) ( E ij - Ê ij ) ( r ij - r i, N ) 1 - + - 2 + - - 3 - - + 4 + + +, 1. E- M,. H. W. Herzog, Jr R. J. Olsen E- M Knoxville BEA 34 E- M, (H. W. Herzog, Jr. & R. J. Olsen, 1977) 15). E- M 15) H. W. Herzog, Jr. and R. J. Olsen. 1977. ibid. - 30 -

, 16). H. K. Stokes. K. E. Haynes Z. B. Machunda(1987). B. S. Sihag C. C. McDonough(1989), (International Shift- Share Analysis). (Forecasting T echnique ) D. C. Creamer, 17). 16) (region- to- region) (industry - to- industry) (additivity property) Haynes Machunda., j j? i i? (K. E. Haynes and Z. B. Machunda. 1987. Consideration in Extending Shift - Share Analy sis: Note. Growth and Chang e, Vol. 18, N o. 2, p.71.) 17 Ashby Houston. Ashby Houston, (B. H. Stevens and C. L. Moore. 1980. ibid, p. 422). - 31 -

. H. J. Brown. (constant) M. Beaud (ingrow Model) (super ingrow model).. R S i ] t + 1 t = R S i ] t t - 1 (b) e t + 1 i - e t i = e t i[ ( E t i/ E t - 1 i ) - 1] (c) e t + 1 i - e t i = e t i[ ( E t + 1 i / E t i) - 1] (d) E t + 1 i i. (b) Beaud, (c), (d). Brown(1969) 1947 1963, 16 SMSA (SIC) 2-digit 4- digit Theil,. Brown (Hellman and Marcus, Hewings, Zimmerman) 18). 18) Hellman Marcus (constant share of national Employment), (fixed ration of employment to regional population), (implicit shift - share), ( ) (explicit shift - share),, - 32 -

,. Stevens Moore, ( ) ( R S i ),, 5 (B. H. Stevens & C. L. Moore, 1980: 429). 3.1.3. E- M,,., ( ) ( + ),.,, (D. A. Hellman. 1976. Shift - Share Models as Predictive T ools. Growth and Chang e. Vol. 7. - 33 -

.,.,.. H. Tervo P. Okko(1983) Moore- Rhodes. (M. D. Partridge & D. S. Rickman, 1999), 19) (covariance anlysis) (S. D. Gerking & J. L. Barrington, 1981).. (REI:Regional Economic Instability) (Siegel, Conroy, Kort). 19) Brown, Floyd Sirmans Paraskevopoulos. - 34 -

Siegel.. R E I i = T t = 1 [ ( Y it - i i T - 1 ) 2 ] 1/ 2 R E I i i ; Y it ; i i. Siegel, 20). Siegel,. Siegel,,. Siegel 20) 2 (C. K. Kim. 1990. Economic Diver sity and Stability of Growth: U.S Metropolitan Regions, 1978-1987). - 35 -

. 3.2 ; (t) (t+1) (REF). R E F i, t. t + 1 = J j = 1 ( E i, j, t. t + 1 / E i, j, t ) - ( N j, t. t + 1 / N j, t ) ( E i, j, t / E i, t )...(8 ) R E F i, t. t + 1 i ; E i, j, t. t + 1 i j ; N j, t. t + 1 j ; E i, j, t i j ; E i, t i ; N i, t ; J. REF,. (a ). d ij = E ij r N + E ij ( r in - r N ) + E ij ( r ij - r in )...(a),, - 36 -

. (t) (t+1) REF. E i, t + 1 = N S i + IM i + R S i...(8-1) 21) (8-1),. (REF) ( R S i ),. (8-1) ( R S i ). R S i, t = [ ( E i, t + 1 / E i, t ) - ( N i, t + 1 / N i, t ) ] E i, t...(8-2) (8-2), Ashby. (B. H. Stevens & C. L. 21). N S i = E i, t ( N t + 1 / N t ) IM i = E i, t [ ( N i, t + 1 / N i, t ) - ( N t + 1 / N t ) ] R S i = E i, t [ ( E i, t + 1 / E i, t ) - ( N i, t + 1 / N i, t ) ] REF - 37 -

Moore, 1980: 420-422). (8-2) (j ). R S i,j, t. t + 1 = [ ( E i, j, t. t + 1 / E i, t ) - ( N j, t. t + 1 / N t ) ] ( E i, j, t / E i, t )...(8-3 ) (j ) (8-2). (8-2) ( E i, t ) (8-3) j ( E i, j, t / E i, t ). (8-3). R S i, t. t + 1 = J j = 1 [ ( E i, j, t. t + 1 / E i, j, t ) - ( N j, t. t + 1 / N j, t ) ] ( E i, j, t / E i, t )...(8 ) (8),,, (8-3). (8) REF (8), - 38 -

,. REF, REF,. REF. - 39 -

. 1. 5 1981, 1986, 1991. 1996 1991,. 3- digit, 2- digit. 1996, 3- digit 5- digit, 31 2- digit. (1),. 15. 1996 70, 51. 51 15 ( ),, 15-40 -

.. ( ).. 1995,. 1996, ( :, ). 5 ( : ). 1985 1981, 1982 5.. (2). 1980 1995 5. 1, 1980 1. - 41 -

2. ( RIS: Regional Industrial Structure) ( REF: Regional Economic Fluctuation),, 1980 1990 22). RIS 1981 1996. REF,,.,.,,...., 22) RIS REF Lotus, SAS. - 42 -

. Duranton Puga (2000), (stylised fact).,., /,.,. (, 1995). RIS REF (outlier). (, 1999) 23),. 23) 1. - 43 -

. 1.. (RIS ) (REF ), 1981 1996 5. 15,. 1.1 RIS REF 1.1.1 RIS RIS REF 2-1 2-2. RIS,. 2-1, RIS 51 (58.475), (6.040), (3.312), (2.813), (1.323), (1.263). - 44 -

2-1 51 RIS ( ) R IS 198 1 1986 1991 1996 0.453 0.215 0.226 0.190 0.27 1 0.512 0.395 0.168 0.199 0.318 0.265 0.200 0.199 0.233 0.224 0.224 0.120 0.133 0.047 0.13 1 1.137 0.716 0.540 0.348 0.685 0.500 0.473 0.401 0.256 0.408 0.498 0.324 0.331 0.347 0.375 2.438 1.331 0.832 0.451 1.263 0.477 0.649 0.320 0.373 0.455 1.228 0.895 0.925 0.402 0.862 0.873 0.798 0.538 0.506 0.679 0.314 0.363 0.284 0.406 0.342 0.831 1.286 0.906 1.041 1.016 0.254 0.411 0.892 0.236 0.448 0.334 0.256 0.293 0.151 0.259 0.596 0.562 0.454 0.331 0.486 54.487 54.025 67.320 58.068 58.475 1.987 1.480 0.830 0.538 1.209 0.828 0.832 0.876 0.548 0.77 1 0.131 0.076 0.059 0.055 0.080 0.382 0.356 0.233 0.144 0.279 0.984 0.643 0.545 0.270 0.610 0.288 0.147 0.109 0.136 0.170 0.580 0.496 0.458 0.314 0.462 0.54 1 10.275 0.320.,. - 45 -

RIS 1981 1986 1991 1996 0.239 0.221 0.371 0.194 0.256 0.975 0.704 0.405 0.272 0.589 0.466 0.420 0.340 0.196 0.356 0.675 0.499 0.378 0.343 0.474 0.523 0.591 0.505 0.457 0.519 0.579 0.478 0.379 0.272 0.427 1.240 0.946 0.451 0.355 0.748 0.560 0.562 0.456 0.267 0.46 1 1.651 4.981 2.946 3.669 3.312 11.450 6.536 4.424 1.747 6.040 0.593 0.363 0.335 0.296 0.397 0.310 0.321 0.197 0.127 0.239 0.429 0.425 0.446 0.313 0.403 1.754 1.701 0.957 0.879 1.323 0.465 1.458 0.506 0.261 0.672 0.542 0.895 0.186 0.268 0.473 0.243 0.306 0.084 0.142 0.194 0.199 0.135 1.063 0.155 0.388 4.955 3.600 1.700 0.996 2.813 0.490 0.485 0.293 0.448 0.429 0.580 0.413 0.545 0.203 0.436 0.506 0.505 0.613 0.217 0.460 0.541 0.406 0.385 0.994 0.58 1 1.230 0.819 0.818 0.379 0.812 0.881 1.110 0.846 0.886 0.930 0.616 0.514 0.653 0.384 0.542 0.598 0.706 0.734 0.551 0.647 0.794 1.037 0.594 1981 RIS 90 1996 RIS - 46 -

. 1990 RIS.,, 1, 1. 2-2 REF ( REF : 0.186). RIS 6 RIS 1.1 24). RIS ( ) (10.275) (0.320).,. RIS,. 1981 1996 RIS,. 24) RIS (1.209), RIS (0.080) RIS 1.129. RIS 6. - 47 -

2-2 51 REF ( ) R E F 198 1-86 1986-9 1 199 1-96 0.365 0.264 0.262 0.297 0.454 0.305 0.567 0.442 0.248 0.253 0.238 0.246 0.289 0.215 0.233 0.246 0.764 0.251 0.174 0.397 0.543 0.387 0.238 0.390 0.365 0.228 0.184 0.259 2.881 0.789 0.471 1.380 0.696 0.252 3.737 1.562 0.522 0.457 1.351 0.777 0.404 0.373 0.455 0.410 0.299 0.399 0.286 0.328 1.376 0.256 0.409 0.680 0.489 0.337 0.473 0.433 0.373 0.178 0.492 0.347 0.145 0.201 0.536 0.294 0.164 0.113 0.282 0.186 0.312 0.373 0.173 0.286 0.295 0.219 0.293 0.269 0.454 0.210 0.170 0.278 0.314 0.387 0.485 0.395 0.291 0.209 0.598 0.366 0.237 0.255 1.298 0.597 0.562 0.265 0.244 0.357 0.57 0 0.3 02 0.399-48 -

RE F 1981-86 1986-91 199 1-96 0.236 0.410 0.233 0.293 0.357 0.300 0.273 0.310 0.302 0.131 0.146 0.193 0.249 0.237 0.297 0.26 1 0.356 0.322 0.686 0.455 0.315 0.231 0.183 0.243 0.232 0.286 0.222 0.246 0.266 0.290 0.496 0.35 1 1.438 1.096 0.407 0.980 0.375 0.296 0.304 0.325 0.292 0.258 1.089 0.547 0.295 0.238 0.383 0.305 0.286 0.199 0.368 0.284 0.103 0.542 0.252 0.299 0.302 0.293 0.405 0.333 0.614 0.547 1.080 0.747 0.504 0.389 0.357 0.416 0.270 0.261 0.207 0.246 0.226 0.538 0.257 0.340 0.359 0.218 0.285 0.287 0.399 0.451 1.149 0.666 0.397 0.585 1.020 0.667 0.315 0.220 0.287 0.274 0.976 2.039 0.356 1.124 0.538 0.424 0.371 0.444 0.270 0.265 0.178 0.238 0.252 0.235 0.237 0.24 1 0.37 0 0.456 0.24 0-49 -

1.1.2 REF REF,. 2-2 (1981 1986, 1986 1991, 1991 1996) 51 REF., REF 1981 1986 1991 1996 1986 1991. (1.562) (1.380), (1.124), (0.980) (0.186). ( ), (0.570) (0.456) REF.,. 1991 1996, 1981 1986, 1986 1991 REF,. REF RIS, RIS,,. 1.2 RIS REF 3-1 RIS REF - 50 -

.. RIS REF (, 1999). 51 25).. (1995),. 3 51 RIS REF (P ears on Corr.) RE F 8 186 R E F 869 1 RE F 9 196 RIS 198 1-0.07157 (0.6177) - 0.09216 (0.5201) - 0.07204 (0.6154) RIS 1986-0.06097 (0.6708) - 0.07830 (0.5850) - 0.06457 (0.6526) RIS 199 1-0.08122 (0.5710) - 0.10133 (0.4793) - 0.06176 (0.6668) 25) 51, 1981 (31,140 ) (386,751 ), 10. - 51 -

1.3 RIS REF RIS REF,,..,,. RIS (R. W. Bahl, 1971) 26).., 50 1981 10 (7 ), 10 20 (29 ), 20 (14 )..,. 26) /. Henderson (1997), ( 50 ), ( 5 50 ) (mature) (,,, ). - 52 -

. RIS REF. RIS,, RIS REF 27),. 1.3.1 1.3.1.1 RIS REF 4-1 50 RIS REF. 1986 RIS REF 0.1,. RIS REF. F 1986 1991 0.1,. 1981 1991, 1991 1996. 27) RIS. 1.867 8.138 0.047 67.320 0.734 1.134 0.047 11.450-53 -

4-1 50 RIS REF RE F : (t ) 198 1-1986 1986-199 1 199 1-1996 Int erc e pt 0.437 (6.111) 0.307 (6.129) 0.545 (5.136) RIS 0.028 (0.749) 0.070* (2.005) - 0.074 (- 0.66) R - s qu are F N 0.012 0.561 50 0.077 4.018* 50 0.009 0.440 50 * : 0.1 4-2 RE F : (t ) 198 1-1986 1986-199 1 199 1-1996 In t er - c ept 0.380 (3.035) 0.212 (2.648) 0.557 (3.304) R IS 0.030 (0.801) 0.067* (1.952) - 0.076 (- 0.674) S C 0.263 (1.300) 0.050 (0.388) - 0.146 (- 0.553) M C 0.031 (0.218) 0.156* (1.712) 0.017 (0.090) R - s qu. F N 0.051 0.820 50 0.137 2.426* 50 0.019 0.297 50 * SC MC : 0.1 : 10 7 : 10 20 29 1.3.1.2 RIS,. - 54 -

R E F i = + 1 R IS i + 2 CS + i...(2-1) (p. 18) (CS), RIS REF 4-2. R- square,. 1981 1986, 1986 1991 RIS 90%, 10 20 30 REF 90%,. 1986 1991 10 20. 1.3.1.3 RIS (M C),. R E F i = + 1 R IS i + 2 CS + 3 M C + i...(2) 4-3.., R- square, (SC) 1991 1996-55 -

.,, 1991 1996. 4-3 R E F : (t ) 198 1-1986 1986-199 1 199 1-1996,,, Int erc ept 0.247 (1.180) 0.168 (1.189) 0.587 (2.048) RIS 0.041 (1.092) 0.059 (1.622) - 0.054 (- 0.447) S C 0.312 (1.557) 0.063 (0.467) - 0.147 (- 0.539) M C 0.107 (0.734) 0.162 (1.658) 0.041 (0.208) 0.333 (1.492) 0.053 (0.354) 0.102 (0.335) 0.024 (0.107) 0.027 (0.173) - 0.254 (- 0.798) - 0.033 (- 0.147) 0.110 (0.724) - 0.041 (- 0.134) - 0.105 (- 0.381) - 0.090 (- 0.483) - 0.161 (- 0.426). R - s q. F N 0.182 1.331 50 0.177 1.288 50 0.072 0.467 50 * SC MC : 0.1 : 10 7 : 10 20 29-56 -

. 1.3.1.4. RIS REF 4-4 In t erc ept RIS S C M C 198 1 1986 R - s qu are F N RE F : (t ) 0.431 (4.911) 0.029 (1.010) 0.058 (0.490) 0.069 (0.831) - 0.044 (- 0.497) - 0.137 (- 1.546) 0.027 0.802 150 SC MC : 10 7 : 10 20 29. R E F i = + 1 R IS i + 2 CS + 3 YD + i...(3 ) YD (Year Dummy), (2). - 57 -

4-4, REF. 1981 1986, RIS REF., 1986 28). (, 1997) RIS REF, RIS REF. 1.3.2 1.3.2.1,. RIS REF,. L og ( R E F i ) = + L og ( R IS i ) + i...(4) 28) 1986 Prob T 0.1244, 90%. - 58 -

L og ( R E F i ) = + 1L og ( R IS i ) + 2 CS + + i...(5 ) (4) (5) RIS REF. 5-1., RIS REF R- square 1991 1996 REF 29). 5-1 Log (RE F ): (t ) 198 1-1986 1986-199 1 199 1-1996 In t erc ept - 0.907 (- 9.919) - 0.845 (- 5.036) - 1.005 (- 13.645) - 1.140 (- 8.536) - 1.013 (- 7.572) - 1.328 (- 6.045) Log (R IS ) 0.131 (1.323) 0.139 (1.355) 0.246** (3.454) 0.223** (3.056) - 0.046 (- 0.389) - 0.098 (- 0.818) S C 0.008 (0.031) - 0.050 (- 0.251) 0.193 (0.629) M C - 0.103 (- 0.548) 0.223 (1.560) 0.425* (1.946) R- squa F N 0.035 1.749 50 0.044 0.702 50 0.199 11.931** 50 0.262 5.430** 50 0.003 0.151 50 0.082 1.364 50 ** * SC MC : 0.05 : 0.1 : 10 7 : 10 20 29 29), R- square 0.012, 0.077, 0.009, 5-1) 0.035, 0.199, 0.003. - 59 -

, RIS REF 0.1 0.5, 1991 1996 0.1. 1986 1991 0.5,, 1991 1996. 1986 1991, 1991 1996. 1.3.2.2 RIS REF. RIS,, 1986 1991,. L og ( R E F i ) = + 1L og ( R IS i ) + 2 CS + 3 YD + i...(6 ) (4) YD (Year Dummy), 5-2. RIS 0.1 REF - 60 -

, ( 10 20 29 ) 0.1. 1986 0.1 5-2 In t erc ept Log (RIS ) S C M C 198 1 1986 R - s qu are F N * : 0.1 SC : 10 7 MC : 10 20 29 Log (RE F ): (t ),, - 1.010 (- 7.999) 0.097* (1.677) 0.052 (0.338) 0.180* (1.665) - 0.025 (- 0.219) - 0.193* (- 1.709) 0.069 2.136* 150., 1986 1991. 2. 2.1. - 61 -

RIS REF, /,. RIS REF RIS REF. REF, ( 10 20 29 ), 1986,. 6 R E F : (t ) * SC MC Int erc e pt RIS S C M C 198 1 1986 R - s q F N 0.431 (4.911) 0.029 (1.010) 0.058 (0.490) 0.069 (0.831) - 0.044 (- 0.497) - 0.137 (- 1.546) 0.027 0.802 150 : 0.1 : 10 7 : 10 20 30-1.010 (- 7.999) 0.097* (1.677) 0.052 (0.338) 0.180* (1.665) - 0.025 (- 0.219) - 0.193* (- 1.709) 0.069 2.136* 150-62 -

6.. RIS REF 0.1, 1986 1991 0.1.,. RIS 1986 1991 0.1. 0.1. 6 RIS, 0.1, 0.1, 1986 0.1 (- ). 2.2 50,. 5 40, 10 20-63 -

. 1986., 1980,,,. 1980,. 1980, 1990. RIS REF 10 15 30), 1986 1990. 1986 (- ). 1,. 30) C. K. Kim (1999 ) RIS REF, 10 15. - 64 -

1 RIS REF Regional Economic Fluctuations 0 Regional Industrial Specialization :, 1999: - B- 2-15,,,,,. (, 1999). - 65 -

. 1. 1.1,.,, (pooling)..,,. 10 20,. 1986 (- ). - 66 -

....,,. 1.2,.,. RIS REF,. RIS REF - 67 -

.,.... 1, (,, ) (, ),. RIS RIS REF 1,.,,, 1. - 68 -

2.. 1991 10,.,,.,..,.,,. - 69 -

..,.. LA,,. (aura)' (entrepreneurial)... - 70 -

1.. (1992).. 27 2.. (1993). :., 11.. (1995).. 29 1.. (2000). :. 12 2.. (1997).. :.. (1997).... (1995)..... (1998).... (1996)... (1996)... (1998).. 1996.. (1996)... (1996)... (1996)... (1996)... (1996)... (1996)... (1980, 1985, 1990, 1995)... (1981, 1986, 1991)... (1996)..

. (19..)..... (1984). :. 2. Babbie, E. (1992). The P ractice of S ocial R es earch. California: Wadsworth. Bahl, R. W. (1971). Industrial Diversity in urban areas: Alternative measure and Intermetropolitan Comparisons. E conom ic Ge og rap hy, Vol. 47, No. 14. Blair, J. P. (1996). Local Economic D evelop ment: A naly s is and P ractice. London: Sage. Borts, G. H. (1961). Regional Cycles of Manufacturing Employment in the U.S., 1914-53. N ational B ur eau of E conom ic R es earch. Occasional Paper Number 75. Brewer, H. L. (1985). Measures of Diversification: Predictors of Regional Economic Instability. J ournal of R eg ional S cience, Vol 25. No 3. Brown, M. J. (1969). Shift- share Projections of regional growth: Empirical test. J ournal of R eg ional S cience. Vol 9. Carlino, A. (1986). Comparison of Agglomeration: Or what Chinitz really said: A Reply. Urban S tudies. Longman. Connaughton, J. E. & Madsen, R. A. (1990). The Changing Regional Structure of the U.S economy. Growth and Change. Vol 21. No 2. Conroy, M. E. (1974). Alternative Strategies for Regional Industrial Diversification. J ournal of R eg ional Science. Vol 4. No 1.. (1975). The Concept and Measurement of Regional Industrial Diversification. S outhern E conomic J ournal Vol 41. University of Texas Press. Davies, W. K. K. & Donoghue D. P. (1993). Economic Diversification and Group Stability in an Urban System: The case of Canada, 1951-86. Urban S tudies. Longman. Dimitrios, D. (1992). The Dy namics of Cities. New York: Routledge.

Eisinger, P. K. (1988). The R is e of the Entr ep r ene urial S tat e. The University of Wisconsin Press. Esteban- Marquillas, J. M. (1972). A reinterpretation of shift- share analysis. R eg ional and Urban Econom ics, Vol 2. Feagin, J. R. & Smith, M. P. (1996). Cities and the New International Division of Labor: An Overview. The S ociology of Urban Comm unit ies Vol. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. Fielding, A. J. (1994). Industrial Change and Regional Development in Western Europe. Urban S tudies, Vol 31. No 4. Florence P. S. (1942). Ind us trial L ocat ion and N ational R es ources. Washington D.C: National Resources Planning Board. Friedmann, J. J. (1995). The Effects of Industrial Structure and Resources upon the Distribution of Fast- growing Small Firms among U.S Urbanised Areas. Urban S t udies. Longman. Gerking, S. D. & Barrington, J. L. (1981). Are Regional Share Effects constant over Time? J ournal of R eg ional Science. Vol 21. No 2. Haynes, K. E. & Machunda, Z. B. (1987). Consideration in extending Shift- share analysis: Note. Gr ow th and Chang e. Vol 18. No 2. Hellman, D. A. (1976). Shift- share models as Predictive T ools. Grow th and Chang e. Vol 7. Herzog, H. W. & Olsen, R. J. (1977). Shift- share analysis revised: The Allocation Effect and the Stability of Regional Structure. J ournal of R egional Science. Vol 17. No 3. Jewson, N. & MacGregor, S. (1997). Transf orm ing Cit ies. New York: Routledge. Kim, C. K. (1990). E conom ic D iv ers ity and S tability of Gr ow th: U.S M e tr op olitan R eg ions, 1978-8 7. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of T exas at Dallas.. (1999). Regional Industrial Structure and Regional Economic Fluctuation: Empirical analysis for South Korean Metro areas, 1981-96. R etrosp ect & P rosp ect f or R eg ional D evelop ment in the 21th Century. Chinese Institute of Urban Planning: T ainan.

Kleniewski, N. (1997). Cit ies, Chang e and Conf lict. London: Wadsworth. Knox, P. L. (1995). World Cities in a World System. in: P. L. Knox(Eds.) World Cities in a World Sy stem. London: Cambridge University Press. Kort, J. R. (1981). Regional Economic Instability and Industrial Diversification in the U.S. Land Econom ics Vol 57. Marshall, J. U. (1975). City size, Economic Diversity and Functional type: The Canadian case. E conomic Geog rap hy. Vol 51. No 1. McKenzie, R. D. (1967). The Ecological Approach to the study of the Human Community. The S ociology of Urban Comm unities. Vol. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. Mclaughlin, G. E. (1931). Industrial Diversification in American Cities. Quar ter ly J ournal of E conom ics. Vol 45. Patridge, M. D. & Rickman, D. S. (1999). A Note on the benefits to Current Residents of State Employment Growth: Is there an Industry Mix Effect on migration? J ournal of R eg ional S cience. Vol 39. No 1. Preer, R. W. (1992). The Emerg ence of Technop olis. New York: Praeger. Pratt, R. T. (1968). An Appraisal of the Minimum Requirements T echnique. E conomic Geog rap hy. Vol 44. No 2. Rogers, A. (1957). Some aspects of Industrial Diversification in the United States. Econom ic Geog rap hy. Vol 33. Sassen, S. (1994). Cities in the W orld E conomy. London: New Pine Press. Sihag, B. S. & McDonough, C. C. (1989). Shift- share analysis: The International Dimension. Growth and Change. Vol 20. No 2. Stevens, B. H. & Moore, C. L. (1980). A Critical Review of the Literature on Shift- share as a Forecasting T echnique. Journal of R eg ional S cience. Vol 17. No 3. T ervo, H. & Okko, P. (1983). A Note on Shift- share as a Method of estimating the Employment Effects of Regional Economic Policy. Journal of R eg ional Science. Vol 23. No 1. Tim Blackman. (1995). Urban P olicy in P ractice. New York: Routledge. Tress, R. C. (1938). Unemployment and the Diversification of Industry.

M anches ter School of Economic and Social Studies. Vol 9. Ullman, E. L. & Dacey, M. F. (1969). The E conomic bas e of A m erican Cities. Seattle: University of Washington Press. William, D. G. (1983). Regional Development as a determined by Alternative Regional Goals. Gr ow th and Chang e. Vol 14. No 3. Center for Business and Economic Research. Wirth, L. (1938). Urbanism as a way of life. The A merican Journal of S ociology.

(1): (2):

(1 ) 11. 01., 12. 02., 13. B. 21. 10. 23. 13. 29. 31. 32., 33., 11., 12. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19.,, 20. ( ) 361. 34., 21., 22., 23., 35.,,, 24. 25. 36. 26. 37. 1 27. 1 28. (, ) 29. 30., 31. 38., 32., 33.,, 34. 35. 39. 369. 37.

41., 40., 42. 41. 51. 52. 62. F. 501. 503. 51. 63. 504. 505. 52. ( ) - )526. ( ) 63. 55. 71. 60. 61. 62. 63. 72. 64. 81. 82. 65. 671. 83. 70. 66. 672. 84. 71. 72. 74. 92. 90. 93. 73. 80. 85. 91. 94. 92., 95. 502. 526. ( ) 93. 95.

1.. 75., 2. 19 203. : 407 19 204. : 2495 36 10 1. : 7611 5 0 12. : 49092

(2 ) 198 1 1986 199 1 1996 + + + +

198 1 1986 199 1 1996 + + + + + + + + + + +

A b s t a c t A n E m piric al A n aly s i s o n t h e R e l at io n s h ip s B e t w e e n R e g io n al In du s t ri al S t ru c t u re an d R e g io n al E c o n o m ic F lu c t u at io n : F o c u s e d o n K o re an Cit y, 19 8 1-19 96. K w an g h y o k Y an g, M a s t e r of A rt s in D e p artm e n t of P u b lic A dm in i s t ration Gra du at e S c h o o l o f In h a U n iv e r s ity T his study empirically analy zed the relation s betw een r egional indu strial specialization an d regional econom y flu ctuation in the K orean cities for the period 1981 to 1996. National av erage appr oach m ea sur es of in du strial specialization an d r ev ised m odel of shift - share analy sis for m ea sures of indu strial fluctuation are caculat ed for all K or ean cities th at could be an aly s ed for em pirical oper ation s. Empirical analy ses show the r esult s a s follow s. Fir st, Regional indu strial structur e affect s positiv e r elation ship to r egional economic fluctuation, clearly non - linear rather than lin ear r elation ships.

S econ d, In ca se of city dum m ies, only th e m edium size popu lation cities (popu lation s fr om 100,000 t o 200,000) sh ow ed a st atistically significant r elation ships betw een indu strial stru ctur es and economic fluctuation s. T hird, 1986 y ear dummy is also show n a statistically significant relation ships betw een RIS and REF index es w ith n egativ e sign. Empirical result s indicate that higher the indu strial specialization in m anufacturing, higher the r egional economic flu ctuation s for K orean cities. H ow ev er the pattern is non - linear ; the economic fluctuation s is stable relativ ely div er sified indu strial structures, but specialization effect of r elativ ely div er sified indu strial environm ent s could also giv e stability to regional economy. T hese an aly sis strongly support s Kim ' s argum ent that the div er sification policies to reduce the econom ic fluctu ation is not appropriate since the policy effect m ight b e so sm all com par ed t o th e inv estm ent cost.