항만투자예산의 구조분석에 관한 연구

Abstract

In South Korea, port development has a rich history. In the early 1980’s, Korea built a dedicated container terminal in Busan Port using a loan granted by International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD). At that time, the commercial container port era revealed. In 2001, the ‘development roadmap of domestic trading ports’ supported a two-port system as a co-development of Busan and Gwangyang Ports so as to two-port has been gained a lot of development funds by both public and private sectors. Some of the small and medium-sized ports, such as Pyeongtaek-Dangjin, Port have different financial budget deviation tendencies than of megaports such as Busan Port. Although the development of port facilities has been announced, there have been difficulties in raising private funds to develop ports. In order to analyze the regional balance and fairness of the port investment budget allocation, this study chose five domestic large ports, Busan, Incheon, Gwangyang, Pyeongtaek-Dangjin, and Ulsan. This study analyzed the financial budget of public and private investment budgets of these ports. The modified second and newly third domestic trading port development roadmap investment budgets were used as data in this study, and an empirical analysis was conducting using correlation analysis and regression analysis. The result revealed a high correlation between the financial budget of Busan Port and private budget of Incheon Port. The financial budget of Busan Port and Pyeongtaek-Dangjin Port were also found to have a high correlation. The regression analysis results revealed that the private budget of Gwangyang Port has a low explanatory degree. The R-square score also could not confirm the statistical significance at 0.144. The private budget of Ulsan Port is 0.183. However, the private budget of Incheon Port and Pyeongtaek-Dangjin Port showed a relatively high explanatory power at 0.432 and 0.408 respectively. The results of the regression analysis showed that during 2006-2010 the private budget of Gwangyang Port positively affected the public budget of Busan Port. The score also confirms the statistical significance at 0.850. The private budget of Pyeongtaek-Dangjin Port has relatively explanatory for public budget of Busan Port; the score is 0.378. The other ports have low explanatory power for the public budget of Busan Port. During 2011-2020, the private budget of Gwangyang Port is 0.373, Incheon has 0.360, Ulsan has 0.033, Pyeongtaek-Dangjin has an score of 0.080. Thus, Hypothesis 1 (there is a correlation between large ports and small and medium-sized ports) was partially confirmed by the correlation analysis results. Hypothesis 2 (financial budget of the large port positively affects the private budget of small and medium-sized ports) was also partially confirmed given the Incheon Port and Pyeongtaek-Dangjin Port analysis results. This study focused on regional balance of port investment budget and fairness of budget allocation. If it were to focus on another aspect such as efficiency or effectiveness as another policy evaluation criterion, it would be more efficient to concentrate investments in the one or two megaports. Therefore, this study has such limitation.