본 연구는 산림복지서비스의 공급전략을 제시하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 행정학 및 사회서비스 분야에서 많이 논의되고 있는 공공성의 개념을 도입하여 산림복지서비스의 공공성을 정의하였으며, 전문가 조사를 통해 공공성의 평가 기준을 도출하고 국내 9개 산림복지서비스 제공 시설을 대상으로 공공성을 평가하였다. 평가결과, 9개 산림복지서비스 유형 중 ‘숲길’에서 제공하는 서비스가 공공성이 가장 높은 것으로 평가되었으며, ‘산림레포츠시설’에서 제공하는 서비스가 공공성이 가장 낮은 것으로 평가되었다. 산림복지서비스의 공공성 평가결과의 명확한 해석을 위해 수익성에 대한 평가를 추가로 실시하여 종합적으로 살펴본 결과, 자연휴양림, 치유의숲, 수목원을 통해 제공되는 산림복지서비스의 경우 공공성과 수익성이 모두 높게 평가되었고, 숲길과 산림욕장을 통해 제공되는 산림복지서비스는 공공성은 높지만 수익성이 낮은 서비스로, 수목장림, 숲속야영장, 산림레포츠 시설 등을 통해 제공되는 서비스는 공공성은 낮지만 수익성이 높은 서비스로 평가되었다. 이상의 산림복지서비스의 유형별 공공성과 수익성을 종합해보았을 때, 향후 정부 차원에서는 서비스의 공공성은 높지만 수익성이 낮아 지속적인 운영이 어려운 숲길과 산림욕장을 중심으로 산림복지서비스의 영역을 확대해 나가야 할 것으로 보인다. 반면 수익성이 상대적으로 높은 수목장림을 비롯한 산림레포츠시설, 숲속야영장, 유아숲체험원 등은서비스 제공으로 발생 가능한 사회적, 환경적 영향들을 최소화시킬 수 있는 규제 기준만 제공하고 민간주체의참여 및 민간시장을 확대해야 할 것이다. 마지막으로 현재 활발하게 운영 되고 있는 자연휴양림이나 치유의숲은민간투자를 활성화시켜 운영관리에 대한 공적부담을 줄이는 방향으로 가야 할 것이다.
This study is intended to suggest supply strategies on forest welfare service. First, this study defines the publicness of forest welfare service with the concept of publicness mainly discussed in public administration study and social service field. Second, it presents assessment elements for the publicness of forest welfare service derived through experts’ survey and evaluates the publicness of 10 types of forest welfare services in Korea. The evaluation shows that services on forest trails have the highest publicness, services on forest leisure sports have the lowest. In order to more clarify the outcomes, an additional survey for profitability among 10 types of forest welfare service is conducted. It shows that services on recreational forest, forest therapy and arboretum are high rated both publicness and profitability and services on forest trails and forest bathing area are high rated in publicness but are low rated in profitability. Services on woodland cemetery, forest camp site and forest leisure sports are low rated in publicness but are high rated in profitability. Based on the above results of experts’evaluation, it can be suggested that the government have to expend forest welfare services like forest trails and forest bathing which have high publicness but are difficult to continue because of low profitability. On the other hand, when it comes to profitable services such as woodland cemetery, forest leisure sports, forest camp site and forest kindergarten, it has to be more open to private sector with expanding market, regulated only for minimizing social and environmental effects by services. Finally, as to services on recreational forest and forest therapy, government has to reduce public burdens on these services by promoting private investment.
This study is intended to suggest supply strategies on forest welfare service. First, this study defines the publicness of forest welfare service with the concept of publicness mainly discussed in public administration study and social service field. Second, it presents assessment elements for the publicness of forest welfare service derived through experts’ survey and evaluates the publicness of 10 types of forest welfare services in Korea. The evaluation shows that services on forest trails have the highest publicness, services on forest leisure sports have the lowest. In order to more clarify the outcomes, an additional survey for profitability among 10 types of forest welfare service is conducted. It shows that services on recreational forest, forest therapy and arboretum are high rated both publicness and profitability and services on forest trails and forest bathing area are high rated in publicness but are low rated in profitability. Services on woodland cemetery, forest camp site and forest leisure sports are low rated in publicness but are high rated in profitability. Based on the above results of experts’evaluation, it can be suggested that the government have to expend forest welfare services like forest trails and forest bathing which have high publicness but are difficult to continue because of low profitability. On the other hand, when it comes to profitable services such as woodland cemetery, forest leisure sports, forest camp site and forest kindergarten, it has to be more open to private sector with expanding market, regulated only for minimizing social and environmental effects by services. Finally, as to services on recreational forest and forest therapy, government has to reduce public burdens on these services by promoting private investment.
