earticle

영어

The purpose of this paper is to analyse conflict arising from the sitting of Jeju Naval facilities. In particular, it is to investigate causes of the conflict and conflict management strategy in each conflict process. According to L.Pondy, conflict process are classified into five stages: latent conflict, perceived conflict, felt conflict, manifest conflict, and conflict aftermath. Each conflict relationship is made up of a sequence of interlocking conflict episodes. The current findings suggest several policy implications of managing conflict to sit Naval facilities in Jeju. The first implication is that it should involve local resident's participation to sit Naval facilities. Without enough level of resident's participation, naval base 's location was determined and this caused strong conflict. The second implication is that mediation process is needed in the manifest conflict. If mediation procedure were operated in a relevant way to resolve the conflict, the conflict could be prevented or be decreased. The third implication is that along with value conflict, cost-benefit conflict should be equally recognized and dealt with. In reality, Jeju local resident was not compensated while value conflict was covered as the main issues in conflict. Navy Department should find an equal point between social benefits and local cost to resolve the conflict. It was found that no conflict management strategy was possible without an appropriate level of compensation for the damage made to residents. The final implication is that compromise should be reached by continuous discussion. Compulsory method and police force have been used but still fundamental issues of conflict in Jeju Naval facilities were not resolved.

한국어

본 연구에서는 제주해군기지의 입지 갈등사례를 단계별로 각 단계에서 갈등 원인들이 갈등의 전개 과정에 어떠한 영향을 주었는지, 각 단계별로 갈등의 원인과 사용한 해결기제들의 인과관계를 살펴보았다. 분석결과를 살펴보면 다음과 같다. 첫째, 지역주민들의 참여가 배제된 상태에서 해군기지의 입지가 결정되어 갈등이 시작되었다. 따라서 초기에 갈등을 해결하기 위해서는 입지선정과정에서 지역주민들의 의견을 반영하는 것이 요구된다. 둘째, 갈등이 평화와 안보라는 가치갈등으로 전개되면서 양립 불가능한 상태로 발전하였다. 셋째, 갈등이 장기화되는데도 별다른 조정기구가 나타나지 않았다. 따라서 당사자 간의 합의가 원활하지 않을 경우 빠른 시기에 갈등 조정 절차에 들어갔다면 갈등의 증폭을 방지할 수 있었다. 넷째, 가치갈등에 매몰되어 경제적 보상측면이 등한시되었다. 따라서 가치갈등과 이익갈등을 구분하고, 현실보상에 대한 구체적인 제시와 제도적인 보완이 요구되었다. 다섯째, 법적 강제력을 동원한 강제해산을 통하여 갈등상황이 진정되었으나, 여전히 근본적인 문제가 해결되지 않은 상태이기 때문에 지속적인 대화와 타협의 정치적인 과정이 필요하다.