DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Classification and Prioritizing the Importance of the Facility and Program for Green Care Introduction

그린케어(Green Care) 도입을 위한 시설과 프로그램 유형분류 및 중요도 분석

  • Choi, Young-Wan (Institute of Agricultural and Life Science, Gyeongsang National University) ;
  • Kim, Young-Joo (Department of Agricultural Engineering (Insti. of Agri. & Life Sci.), Gyeongsang National University)
  • 최영완 (경상대학교 농업생명과학연구원) ;
  • 김영주 (경상대학교 지역환경기반공학과(농업생명과학연구원))
  • Received : 2019.11.01
  • Accepted : 2019.11.20
  • Published : 2019.11.30

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to survey and analyze the operating state and characteristics of domestic and foreign green care, prioritize the facilities and programs for green care introduction through expert survey of importance, and thereby to provide a basic material for introducing green care in facilities in Rural Development Project districts, including domestic rural experience facilities. Domestic and foreign literature was analyzed in order to classify the necessary facilities programs, of green care, and the analysis results were modified and supplemented through Expert Delphi Survey. Based on the results, AHP based importance survey was conducted. In terms of the facilities and programs for green care introduction, necessary facilities (H/W) were categorized into four types (accommodation facility, resting facility, experience facility, therapy facility) and S/W programs into three types (learning experience type, therapy type, and care type). To verify the reliability of the AHP based importance survey, Consistency Index (C.I.) was analyzed. As a result, the C.I. value of nine respondents ranged from 0.000 to 0.083 so that the survey was found to have high consistency. The importance of S/W programs was 0.627, and that of H/W facilities was 0.373. For green care introduction, programs were found to be more important. Regarding the categories of necessary facilities, therapy facility had the highest value, or 0.348; experience facility 0.253; accommodation facility 0.211; resting facility 0.188. Therefore, therapy facility and experience facility were found to be important. In case of S/W programs, therapy type had the highest value, or 0.499, and learning experience type (0.255) and care type (0.246) were similarly important. Generally, the categories that had high importance values tended to show a remarkable difference in importance of their sub categories. In particular, facilities or therapy programs using natural ecology and forests were found to be highly important. In conclusion, it is required to actively review the introduction of active programs using resources, such as existing experience facilities and accommodation facilities and villages forests, and programs making the body and soul comfortable, such as natural ecology experience, Green Shower, and horticulture activity.

Keywords

References

  1. Choi, Y.W., 2010, The Classification and Activation Strategy of Rural Development Projects, Master Thesis, Graduate School of Gyeongsang National University, 12-15.
  2. Choi, Y.W., M.W. Jang, S.J. Bae, K.H. Jung and S.W. Hwang, 2019, Prioritizing the Importance of the Factors Related to the Vulnerability of Agricultural Water Resources and Infra-structures to Climate Change, Journal Of The Korean Society Of Rural Planning, 25(1), 75-87.
  3. Di lacovo, Francesco and Deirdre O'Connor, 2009, Supporting Policies for Social Farming in Europe : Preogressing Multifunctioality in Responsive Rural Areas, Agenzia Regionale per lo Sviluppo e l'Innovazione nel settore Agricolo-forestale(Arsia), Firenze.
  4. Gim, G.M., 2015, Understanding and Trends in 'Therapy Functions of Agricultural'(국문: '농업의 치유 기능'에 대한 이해와 최근 동향), Gyeongsang National University Seminar Presentation.
  5. Gim, G.M., J.Y. Moon, S.J. Jeong and S.M. Lee, 2013, Analysis on the Present Status and Characteristics of Agro-healing in Korea, Journal of Agricultural Extension & Community Development, 20(4), 909-936. https://doi.org/10.12653/jecd.2013.20.4.0909
  6. Hassink, J. and M. van Dijk, 2006, Farming for Health. Green-care Farming Across Europe and the United States of America, Ordrecht : Springer(Wageningen UR Frontis series vol. 13).
  7. Haubenhofer, Elingsir, Hassink and Hine, 2010, The Development of Green Care in Western European Countries, Explore 6(2), 107.
  8. Haugan, L., R. Nyland, E. Fjeldavli, T. Meistad and B.O. Braastad, 2005, Green care in Norway: farms as a resource for the educational, health and social sector, Frontis, Volume 13 Farming for Health: Green-Care Farming across Europe and the United States of America Chapter 9, 109-126.
  9. Hine, R., J. Peacock and J. Pretty, 2008, Care Farming in the UK: Evidence and Opportunities, A Report for the National Care Farming Initiative(UK), Colchester: University of Essex.
  10. Kim, A.R., E.J. Cho, S.M. Choi and S.C. Kim, 2016, The Operation Condition Analysis on Green Care Practice in South Korea, Journal of the Korean Society of Rural Planning, 22(1), 69-79. https://doi.org/10.7851/ksrp.2016.22.1.069
  11. Kim, J.O. and C.K. Lee, 2017, A Study on the Establishment of a Conceptual Model of Korean-style Healing Tourism and Analysis of Healing Effects : Focusing on Participants in Nature-based Outdoor Recreation, International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 31(5), 5-21.
  12. Kim, S.H., B.H. Jeong and J.K. Kim, 2006, Decision Analysis and Application(국문: 의사결정분석 및 응용), Youngji Publishers, 337-340.
  13. Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (MAFRA), 2016, Feasibility Study on Green Care Complex Development Project: Final Report(국문: 녹색농 업치유단지 조성사업 타당성 조사 연구 - 최종보고서).
  14. Rural Development Administration(RDA), 2013a, International Survey of Green Care in Agriculture and Development of Strategy in Domestic, RDA Research Report.
  15. Rural Development Administration(RDA), 2013b, Strategic Long Term Planning of Green Care Based on Agrohealing Survey, RDA Research Report, National Institute of Horticultural and Herbal Science(NIHHS).