도시공원녹지 내 텃밭정원 주민참여 프로그램 지표 개발 연구 - 수원특례시를 중심으로 -

Abstract

The present study aims to develop indicators for resident participation programs in kitchen gardens located in the urban park green areas. It began by analyzing the current status of 16 kitchen garden sites that have been continuously operated over the past three years. Based on this analysis, a questionnaire was worked out using the System Theory which consists of four domains: input, process, output, and feedback. The Delphi method (three rounds) was applied to a panel of experts to derive indicators for each domain. Additionally, an Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) was conducted to determine the relative importance of the indicators by group. The key findings are as follows: First, as development indicators for general environmental items in the input domain, revealed were the convenience facilities around the kitchen gardens and the participation of the socially disadvantaged. For budget and system items, financial support from operating organizations, consulting support for garden programs, and the expertise of teachers and instructors were identified as development indicators. Second, in case of program design and promotion items of the processing areas, the development indicators were found to include the program’s goals, customized programs for each participant, the substance of the program’s syllabus, and promotion using media such as SNS. Whereas, the development indicators for program execution and management items appeared to include program cycle, establishment of program operation management system, encouragement of continuous participation, and compliance with safety management. Third, the promotion of mental health, the enhancement of individual capacity, and the increasing interest in the ecological environment turned out to be the development indicators for the participant performance items in the output domain were. For the social performance items, the expansion of park green space functions, the strengthening of educational service information for kitchen gardens, and the increase of resident participation were identified as development indicators. Fourth, active cooperation for voluntary participation of residents, program purpose, and support for an operational management system suitable for participant characteristics were derived as development indicators for the operating agency evaluation items in the feedback area. Whereas, for the program evaluation items, practicality of program content and eco-friendly operational management were found to be development indicators. In the participant performance category, however, development indicators included participant satisfaction survey, instructor evaluation, and program expectations met. Fifth, the priority of the selected program development indicators was in the following order: financial support from the operating organization, implementation of carbon neutrality, expertise of teachers and instructors, program goals, and convenience facilities around the kitchen gardens. Sixth, concerned government officials prioritized, as development index, the financial support from the managing organization, adherence to safety management, expertise of instructors, coexistence with the natural environment, and protection of the ecological environment. In case of researchers, they prioritized financial support, availability of convenience facilities, program objectives, implementation of carbon neutrality, and expertise of instructors as development indicators.