¶óÆæÆ®¦¢Ä«Æä¦¢ºí·Î±×¦¢´õº¸±â
¾ÆÄ«µ¥¹Ì Ȩ ¸í»çƯ°­ ´ëÇבּ¸½Ç޹æ Á¶°æ½Ç¹« µ¿¿µ»ó°­ÀÇ Çѱ¹ÀÇ ÀüÅëÁ¤¿ø ÇÐȸº° ³í¹®
ÇÐȸº° ³í¹®

Çѱ¹°Ç¼³°ü¸®ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹°ÇÃà½Ã°øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹µµ·ÎÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹»ý¹°È¯°æÁ¶ÀýÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹»ýÅÂÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹¼öÀÚ¿øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹½Ç³»µðÀÚÀÎÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÀÚ¿ø½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÀܵðÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹Á¶°æÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹Áö¹Ý°øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÇÏõȣ¼öÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ý¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ýÅÂÇÐȸ

Çѱ¹¼öÀÚ¿øÇÐȸ / v.39, no.7, 2006³â, pp.563-574
»ýȰ¿ë¼ö¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¼ÒºñÀÚÀÇ ÁöºÒÀÇ»ç ÃßÁ¤ ¹× Á¤Ã¥Àû ÀǹÌ
( Consumer¡¯s Willingness To Pay for Residential Water and It¡¯s Policy Implication )
¹ÚµÎÈ£;¹ÚÀ±½Å;À̱¤¸¸; Çѱ¹¼öÀÚ¿ø°ø»ç ¼öÀÚ¿ø¿¬±¸¿ø;Çѱ¹¼öÀÚ¿ø°ø»ç ¼öÀÚ¿ø¿¬±¸¿ø;Çѱ¹¼öÀÚ¿ø°ø»ç ¼öÀÚ¿ø¿¬±¸¿ø;
 
ÃÊ ·Ï
°æÁ¦À̷п¡ ÀÇÇÏ¸é ¼ÒºñÀÚµéÀº ¾ðÁ¦³ª È¿¿ëÀ» ±Ø´ëÈ­Çϱâ À§ÇÑ ¼±Åÿ¡ Á÷¸éÇÑ´Ù. ÀÌ °°Àº ¼ÒºñÀÚÀÇ ¼±ÅÃÀº »ýȰ¿ë¼öÀÇ °¡°Ý, °ø±Þ ¹× ¼ö¿ä µî¿¡ Á¤º¸°¡ ½ÃÀåÀ» ÅëÇØ ³ªÅ¸³ª°í Á¤Ã¥°áÁ¤ÀÚµéÀº À̸¦ Á¤Ã¥ ÁöÇ¥·Î ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ°Ô µÈ´Ù. ±×·¯³ª ¼öÀÚ¿øÀÇ °æ¿ì´Â ½ÃÀåÀÌ Çü¼ºµÇ¾î ÀÖÁö ¾Ê±â ¶§¹®¿¡ ½ÃÀå¿¡¼­ÀÇ ±× °°Àº Á¤º¸ ȹµæÀÌ Á¦ÇÑÀûÀÌ´Ù. º» ¿¬±¸´Â »ýȰ¿ë¼öÀÇ ¼öÁú°³¼±¿¡ µû¸¥ ¼ÒºñÀÚ ÁöºÒÀǻ縦 1,000 °¡±¸¸¦ ´ë»óÀ¸·Î Á¶»çÇϰí À̸¦ ÃßÁ¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ »ýȰ¿ë¼ö¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¼ÒºñÇàÅ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ºÐ¼®µµ ½ÃµµµÇ¾ú´Ù. ¼ÒºñÀÚµéÀº ÇöÀçÀÇ ¹° °ª¿¡¼­ 50%ÀÇ ÀÎ»ó¿¡ ´ëÇØ¼­´Â °­ÇÑ Àý¼ö ÀÇÁö¸¦ º¸ÀÎ ¹Ý¸é 25% ÀÌÇÏÀÇ ¹° °ª ÀÎ»ó¿¡ ´ëÇØ¼­´Â °ÅÀÇ Àý¼ö ÀÇÁö°¡ ¾ø´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³ª ÇöÇà ¹° °ªÀÌ Àý¼ö¸¦ À¯µµÇÏ´Â µ¥´Â ³·Àº ¼öÁØÀÓÀ» ³ªÅ¸³»°í ÀÖ´Ù. ¼öµ¾¹°ÀÇ ¼öÁúÀÌ Çâ»óµÈ´Ù´Â Á¶°ÇÀ¸·Î ¼ÒºñÀÚ´Â ¸Å¿ù ÇöÇà ¹° °ªÀÇ 16%, $1m^3$´ç ¾à 153¿øÀ» ÁöºÒÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖÀ½À» º¸¿´´Ù. ÀÌ °°Àº Á¤º¸¸¦ Åä´ë·Î »ýȰ¿ë¼ö¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Á¤Ã¥ Á¦¾ðÀ» ÇÏ¿´´Ù.
Economic theory tell us, consumers always make a choice to maximize their utility. In the market system, consumers' choices are revealed and policy maker taking into account the aggregated consumers choice such as price, supply and demand. However, water resources as a public goods, therefore typically there is no market and does no aggregated information for residential water use. This study explore the consumers' willingness to pay for higher quality for residential water. Over 1,000 households responded for this survey and willingness to pay has been estimated. Furthermore, consumers' behaviors of residential water are examined. Consumers are willing to reduce the amount of water use with more than 50% of increasing water price, but stay almost constant with less than 25% of increasing which mean that current price level is not high enough to derive water saving. If consumers can have better quality of water, they willing to pay additional 16%, $153;won/m^3/month$, more than their current price. Based on the derived information, we suggested policy direction for residential water policy.
 
Ű¿öµå
»ýȰ¿ë¼ö;¼öÁú;¹° ¼ö¿ä;ÁöºÒÀÇ»ç;»ýȰ¿ë¼ö°¡Ä¡;Residential Water;Water Quality;Demand of Water;Willingness to Pay;Value of Residential Water;
 
Çѱ¹¼öÀÚ¿øÇÐȸ³í¹®Áý / v.39, no.7, 2006³â, pp.563-574
Çѱ¹¼öÀÚ¿øÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1226-6280
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO200633242282720)
¾ð¾î : Çѱ¹¾î
³í¹® Á¦°ø : KISTI Çѱ¹°úÇбâ¼úÁ¤º¸¿¬±¸¿ø
¸ñ·Ïº¸±â
ȸ»ç¼Ò°³ ±¤°í¾È³» ÀÌ¿ë¾à°ü °³ÀÎÁ¤º¸Ãë±Þ¹æÄ§ Ã¥ÀÓÀÇ ÇѰè¿Í ¹ýÀû°íÁö À̸ÞÀÏÁÖ¼Ò ¹«´Ü¼öÁý °ÅºÎ °í°´¼¾ÅÍ
   

ÇÏÀ§¹è³ÊÀ̵¿