바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

Space and Environment

ISSN : 1225-6706

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.31 No.2

Citation Share

A Study on Economic Efficiency of Public Land-Lease Social Housing in Seoul

Space and Environment / Space and Environment, (P)1225-6706; (E)2733-4295
2021, v.31 no.2, pp.19-64
https://doi.org/10.19097/kaser.2021.31.2.19

(2021). A Study on Economic Efficiency of Public Land-Lease Social Housing in Seoul. Space and Environment, 31(2), 19-64, https://doi.org/10.19097/kaser.2021.31.2.19

Abstract

This study conducted a cost-benefit analysis incorporating social accounts with the aim of examining the economic efficiency of public land-lease social housing in order to obtain implications for solving the social problem of rising housing prices, which is becoming more serious in recent years. It was confirmed that public land-lease social housing could form an efficient price through indicators such as the benefit-cost ratio, market liquidity of the project, and minimum rent. In particular, the efficiency of social housing was more clearly revealed through comparison with private rental housing. Through a comparative analysis of the supply conditions of social housing in Europe, it was also confirmed that public subsidies and long-term low-interest financing support can further increase price efficiency. These results are very different from some assertions that the role of the public should be reduced to increase the efficiency of the market, and indicate the necessity of expanding the supply of social housing.

keywords
사회주택, 토지임대부, 임대주택, 비용편익분석, 사회계정, social housing, public land-lease, rental housing, cost-benefit analysis, social accounts

Reference

1.

강세진·진남영·이상열. 2014. ｢국외 주택협동조합 운영구조의 유형화에 관한 연구｣. 『국토계획』. 제49권, 제2호, 209~228쪽.

2.

고정희·서용석. 2018. ｢한국 사회주택의 잔여적 성격의 원인에 관한 연구｣. 『주택연구』. 제26권, 제2호, 5~40쪽.

3.

기노채. 2012. ｢주택협동조합의 개념과 역사 그리고 시사점｣. 『생협평론』. 제7호, 7~23쪽.

4.

남기포. 2005. ｢주택협동조합운동에 대한 소고｣. 『농협경영연구』. 제34호, 147~169쪽.

5.

국토교통부, 2021.2.4. “｢공공주도 3080 + ｣ 대도시권 주택공급 획기적 확대방안 발표”, http://www.molit.go.kr/USR/NEWS/m_71/dtl.jsp?lcmspage=3&id=95085147(검색일: 2021.4.20).

6.

문철우·이은희·고연경. 2016. 『서울시 공유주택사업의 경제적 성과 및 사회적가치평가 연구』

7.

박정규, 2014.11.25. “朴대통령 ‘적정 수익구조 만들어야 주거도 안정’…부동산법안 처리 촉구”, ≪뉴시스≫, https://newsis.com/ar_detail/view.html?ar_id=NISX20141125_0013317063(검색일: 2021.4.25).

8.

박종숙·오현주·김명훈·강세진. 2021. 『공공토지임대제도 개선을 위한 현장 연구 - 서울시 토지임대부 사회주택 운영 경험을 바탕으로』. 대전: 토지주택연구원.

9.

유한빛, 2020.9.1. “정작 선진국은 안그러는데… 자가수요는 뒷전, 임대에만 힘싣는 정부,” ≪조선일보≫, https://biz.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2020/09/01/2020090101764.html(검색일: 2021.4.20).

10.

박주희. 2012. ｢미국과 스웨덴의 주택협동조합｣. 『협동조합네트워크.』. 제58호, 118~127쪽.

11.

변창흠·김란수. 2012. 『재정비사업과 공공임대주택 공급의 대안적 모델 검토: 협동조합주택을 중심으로』. 서울: 서울연구원(Park, J-H., 2012. “Housing Cooperatives in USA and Sweden,” Cooperatives Network, (58): 118~127).

12.

은난순·김정인·신수임·오수훈. 2017. 『서울시 사회주택사업 평가연구 –2단계-』. 서울: 서울특별시 사회주택종합지원센터.

13.

임진창. 1971. ｢주택문제와 주택협동조합 운동｣. 『주택금융』. 제4권, 제1호, 4~11쪽.

14.

최상희·정소이·송기욱·최원철·김남훈. 2018. 『사회주택 모델구상 및 주체별 협력방안 연구』. 대전: 한국토지주택공사 토지주택연구원.

15.

최은영·박신영·진남영·강세진·이봉조·김기태·황서연·권지웅·김수현. 2014. 『사회적 경제 주체 활성화를 통한 서울시 청년 주거빈곤 개선 방안』. 서울: 서울특별시의회.

16.

하성규. 1993. ｢무주택서민을 위한 협동조합주택제도 도입방안｣. 『성곡논총』. 제24호, 1203~1230쪽. Berlin.de. "Mehr Anreize für sozialen Wohnungsbau," https://www.berlin.de/aktuelles/berlin/4011384-958092-mehr-anreize-fuer-sozialen-wohnungsbau.html(검색일:2021.4.20)

17.

Bilt, 2021.1.11. "TROTZ CORONA-KRISE STEIGEN DIE PREISE WEITER Mietschock in Deutschland," https://www.bild.de/politik/2021/politik/trotz-corona-krise-steigendie-preise-weiter-mietpreisschock-in-deutschland-74810048.bild.html(검색일:2021.4.20).

18.

BID. 2020. Wohnungsmarkt Wien - Eine wohnungspolitische Analyse aus deutscher Sicht, Berlin: Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft Immobilienwirtschaft Deutschland

19.

Der Tagesspiegel, 2020.2.1., "Linke in Baden-Württemberg beschließt Volksantrag für Mietendeckel". https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/vorbild-berlin-linke-in-badenwuerttemberg-beschliesst-volksantrag-fuer-mietendeckel/25499300.html(검색일:2021.4.20).

20.

Deschermeier, P., R. Henger, B. Seipelt and M. Voigtländer. 2017. “Wohnungsmangel in den Städten, Leerstand auf dem Land.” IW-Kurzberichte, No.44. Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft Köln.

21.

Elsinga, M., M. Stephens and T. Knorr-Siedow. 2014. “The Privatisation of Social Housing:Three Different Pathways.” In K. Scanlon, C. Whitehead and M. F. Arrigoitia(eds.). Social Housing in Europe. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

22.

Handelsblatt, 2018.4.15. "Mehr als 10.000 Menschen protestieren in Berlin gegen steigende Mieten". https://www.handelsblatt.com/politik/deutschland/wohnungsnot-mehrals-10-000-menschen-protestieren-in-berlin-gegen-steigende-mieten/21176920.html(검색일: 2021.4.20).

23.

Hannoversche Allgemeine, 2017.2.2. "Deutschlands Mieten steigen weiter". https://www. haz.de/Nachrichten/Wirtschaft/Deutschland-Welt/Deutschlands-Mieten-steigen-weiter(검색일: 2021.4.20)

24.

Housing Europe Observatory. 2013. Study on FINANCING OF SOCIAL HOUSING in 6European countries.

25.

Housing Europe Observatory. 2021. The sale of social and public housing in Europe.

26.

JLL. 2018. Wohnungsbauförderung Big 7.

27.

Kuhnert, J. and O. Leps. 2017. "Die gemeinnützigen Woningcorporaties in den Niederlanden," In Neue Wohnungsgemeinnützigkeit. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

28.

Ludl, H. and Bauer, E. 2012. “Housing Co-operatives in Austria,” in Profiles of a Movement:Co-operative Housing around the World. Brussels: CECODHAS Housing Europe and ICA Housing.

29.

MHCLG. 2020. Table 104: by tenure, England (historical series). London: Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.

30.

Mundt, A. 2018. “Privileged but challenged: the state of social housing in Austria in 2018.”Critical Housing Analysis, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 12~25.

31.

Murie, A. 2016. The Right to Buy?: selling off public and social housing. Bristol: Policy Press.

32.

OECD. 2018. Promoting Access to Affordable and Social Housing – Germany Policy Brief.

33.

Rosenfeld, O. 2015. Social Housing in the UNECE Region: Models, Trends and Challenges. Geneva: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe.

34.

Schichel, A. 2021.3.3. "SPD-Vorschläge zum Wohnen sind kein Zukunftsprogramm:Deutschland braucht pragmatische Lösungen statt Ideologie," https://www.gdw. de/pressecenter/spd-vorschlaege-zum-wohnen-sind-kein-zukunftsprogramm-deutschland-braucht-pragmatische-loesungen-statt-ideologie/(검색일: 2021.4.20).

35.

Schichel, A. 2021.9.25. “Wohngeld ist wesentlicher Schlüssel für bezahlbares Wohnen,”https://www.gdw.de/pressecenter/pressemeldungen/wohngeld-ist-wesentlicherschluessel-fuer-bezahlbares-wohnen-2/(검색일: 2021.4.20).

36.

Stephens, M., C. Whitehead and M. Munro. 2005. Lessons from the past, challenges for the future for housing policy. London: Department of Communities and Local Government.

Space and Environment

e-Submission OA Policy