View : 29 Download: 0

都市地域社會開發에 있어서 社會福祉館의 役割과 새마을 運動과의 關係

Title
都市地域社會開發에 있어서 社會福祉館의 役割과 새마을 運動과의 關係
Other Titles
(The) Role of Community Welfare Centers and their relationship to the Saemaeul Movement(the New Village Movement) in Urban Community Development
Authors
金聖淑.
Issue Date
1979
Department/Major
대학원 사회사업학과
Keywords
도시지역사회개발사회복지관새마을운동
Publisher
이화여자대학교 대학원
Degree
Master
Abstract
계속적인 經濟開發 5개년 計劃에 의해 産業間, 都農間, 階層間의 貧富격차가 심각해진 우리나라는 그 해결의 일환으로 1970年부터 거국적 地域社會開發運動인 "새마을運動"을 시행하게 되었다. 그에 앞서 민간의 地域社會開發이 祉會福祉館을 통해 시도되었는데 그 活動은 미미한 것이었다. 그러나 대부분의 사회복지관이 "特殊써비스 제공"으로부터 "地域社會接近"으로 그 활동이 變化되므로 앞으로는 지역사회개발의 센타로서의 機能을 할 수 있을 것이다. 그것은 사회복지관이 地城成이란 特性을 가지고 전문적 Services를 제공하기 때문에 더욱 그렇다. 이 論文에서는 이 두가지 境遇를 비교하므로서 우리나라의 地域祉會開發을 보다 더 효과적이며 民間 자발적 운동으로 발전시킬 方法을 생각해 보았다. 都市 새마을運動은 1971年부터 시작되어 1973年 末에야 어느정도 궤도에 올랐는데 크게 市民運動一主로 道義秩序지키기, 自然·環境보호, 새마음 갖기等一, 地域 새마을운동, 職能 새마을운동등으로 나뉘어 전개되고 있다. 政府는 住民을 主體라고 본다고 하였지만 종종 권위주의, 획일주의, 하향식 사업실시라는 비난을 받곤한다. 全國을 통해 체계적 행정조직을 가지고 있어 빠른 事業 效果를 갖지만 아직 住民들은 自發的인 組織개발에는 미흡한 것 같다. 反面 社會福祉館은 현재 전국에 30여개가 있는데 거의 都市에 분포되어 있고 저소득층民이 Service의 주요 수혜자인 경우가 많다. 주로 外援에 의한 民間기관과 몇개의 官·民協同기관이 있다. 이들은 취업관계사업, 교육사업, 집단지도사업, 의료 써비스, 가정복지등의 프로그램을 실시하고 있으며 써비스 전달 外에 지역組織化에도 관심을 갖고 시행한다. 그것은 地域의 자치 조직들이 발달되어야 地域民들의 진정한 복지향상을 꾀할 수 있으며 그러한 自治조직들을 통해서 地域問題를 주민들 스스로 해결할 수 있기 때문이다. 그러므로 도시 새마을 운동의 强力한 행정체계와 재정의 强點과 方法상의 弱點, 그리고 祉會福祉館의 지역사회개발에 있어서 方法上의 强點과 財政및 기타 行政上의 難點이 서로 절충되어 相互 보완할 수 있는 길을 모색하는 것이 바람직 하다고 본다. 그것을 위해 都市 새마을 운동은 그한 Preject로서 官·民協同 사회복지관의 전국적 확대 설립및 運營을 하도록 해야겠고, 사회복지관은 民間운동화되는 한편으로 새마을 운동에 일부 포섭되어야겠다. 그리하여 官, 官民協同, 民間의 지역사회개발이 同時에 추친되어야 할 것이다. 마을회관의 官·民협동 사회복지관으로의 전환도 바람직한 그 出發點일 수 있겠다. 官·民협동기관의 경우 民間은 지역조직, 프로그램계획및 實旅, 評價등의 기술적민 面을 담당하고 官은 재정, 감사, 홍보등의 보조적 支持 역할을 맡는 것이 좋겠다. 이러한 기관에 채용된 職員-특히 社會事業家-을 국가 別定 公務員化 하는 것도 생각할 수 있다. 民間운영의 사회복지관이건 官·民협동의 사회복지관이건 많은경우 사회사업가가 實務를 담당하게 되는데 현재 우리나라의 경우 社會事業에 대한 公信力이 弱하므로 무엇보다도 그 專門性을 확보하고 증명될 수 있는 效果的 機能을 발휘하도록 노력해야겠다. 사회사업의 전문성이 알려질 때야 비로소 정부와의 협동이 바람직하게 되어질 수 있을 것이다.;Our Country has been rapidly changing from an agrarian state to a urban industrial society since our government launched the First 5-years National Economic Development Plan in the early 1960's. Our specific patterns of adopting the continued socioeconomic policies and industrialization have been bringing about polarization between the have and have-not, intersectral di disequilibrium, and unbalanced development between rural and urban areas. "Samaeul Movement" was enacted in 1970 as one of community development approaches in order to overcome such existing unbalanced problems of our society. Prior to this Movement, community development programs were undertaken in various ways by voluntary community welfare centers, though their activities were beyond significant level. Regardless of the fact that this writer hopes community welfare centers will not only develop their programs from limited specific services to region-wide community programs but also function as the center of various community development programs, especially when locality of the community center is concerned. In this thesis, the writer attempted to make comparative studies on Saemaeul Movement and community development, and put emphases on how the government centered C.D programs can be turned into voluntarism. Saemaeul Movement is becoming a national-wide campaign. At the initial phase, the Movement covered only rural areas making various successful stories. The government came to r cogn recognize that such movement was really needed especially for urban areas. Under circumstances, urban Saemaeul Movement became effect in 1971. It refers to "Citizen Movement" which includes the morality of citizens, the protection of natural environment, and "New Mind" campaign, Regional Saemaeul Movement, and Occupational Saemaeul Movement. Though the government announces that such Movement is really based upon citizenship, residents-centered. But the way of being done is blamed for its authoritarianism, uniformism of people, and government-centered methods, It is said that the centralized philosophies and methods of the Movement have to be changed into localization and voluntarism in the near future. In the meanwhile, there are about 30 community welfare centers in our country. Unfortunately, they are almost distributed in urban areas engaging in social services mainly for socio-economically low classes. They are almost voluntary agencies except a few of the government's. They engages in various social services such as vocational training & job placement, educational programs, group work activities for the youth, medical care, and family welfare program. In addition to the above programs, they are concerned about community organization including the organization of residents themselves, and their needs and resources. Community organization assumpts that local organization can contribute truly to solving their own problems and the welfare of the whole community. When was reviewed Saemaeul Movement in the angles of the government and voluntarism at the level of community centers, this writer found that the former has strong points in relation to powerful administration and finance whereas community welfare centers have in relation to methodologies; very briefly they have contrary strong and weak points. This writer gave strong emphases upon that the above indicated contrary strong points of the government and community welfare centers should supplement each other avoiding weak patterns of the movement. In this viewpoint, this writer suggest firmly that the organization and functions of government Saemaeul Movement and those of C.O and C.D oriented community welfare center be coordinated; for example, a joint project between them is highly desirable in some areas, (village centers of Saemaeul Movement can possibly be a starting point.) while they keep their own pace in their unique ways in another areas. In the case that the two different organizations undertake a joint project, community welfare centers take part actively in technical aspects and the government plays active roles in financial and administrative areas. So far as personnels are concerned, they had better be government employees rather than voluntary workers. Whether it is in the government organizations or in community welfare centers, social work professionals are directly involved in such activities. It is regret to acknowledge that the profession of social work has not been well known in our society. One way of making public relation, we, social workers should prove our professionalism on the basis of our theoritical and empirical qualities. When the profession of social work is well known, the government may be more willing to make a joint project.
Fulltext
Show the fulltext
Appears in Collections:
일반대학원 > 사회복지학과 > Theses_Master
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Export
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)
XML


qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

BROWSE