Park, M; Lee, M H; Lee, H S and Hwang, S (2010) Boost, control, or both of Korean housing market: 831 countermeasures. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(6), pp. 693-701. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Although the Korean government reported a housing supply ratio of more than 100% in the early 2000s, regional and class disparities in the Korean housing sector have not been correspondingly alleviated. Unfortunately, many Korean households are still enduring the economic burden caused by cyclical price variation, while many housing construction companies are on the verge of bankruptcy. To resolve the ever-expanding socioeconomic problems in the housing and real estate sector, the current Korean government proposed 831 Countermeasures, which has since met with much controversy. In an effort to address these issues, this paper utilizes a qualitative system dynamics model to elucidate and interrogate complex Korean housing mechanisms. By mapping bibliographical and experimental knowledge with causal loop diagrams, the positive and adverse effects of the 831 Countermeasures are also analyzed. Finally, based on the research findings, alternative policy guidelines are proposed that can be used to strengthen positive housing structures and obviate negative ones.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | 831 countermeasures; Korean housing market; policies |
| Index terms: | bankruptcy, disparity, residential construction, household, real estate, housing, variation, mapping, system dynamics |
| Subjects: | computing systems, construction type, economic analysis, real estate economics, contractual condition, spatial and geospatial analysis, construction integration, social justice, demography |
| Topics: | Construction Technology, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Contract Administration, Ethics, Urban Studies, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here