A Study on Development Plans to Engage Local University Students in Landscape Improvement Projects in Rural Areas - The case of on the Revitalization Project of Rural Center of Geumsan-eup -
This study aims to identify more reasonable and efficient development plans to engage local university students in landscape improvement projects in rural areas. To survey university students, residents, administrators and experts involved in such projects on important considerations in this regard, SWOT analysis was employed to identify important factors, followed by analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to evaluate their relative importance, identify problems and suggest implications for improvement. The results are summarized as follows: the relative importance of the SWOT group was in the order of opportunity, strength, threat, and weakness. For each SWOT factor, the relative importance of strengths was in the order of students’ aspiration and passion, availability of creative ideas and designs, and improved attachment to their community. The relative importance of weaknesses was in the order of the lack of spontaneous participation of residents, short preparation periods and insufficient budgets, and the lack of experience in similar projects. The relative importance of opportunities was in the order of young students’ activity itself being a boost factor to the community, students’ endeavors arising a consensus among residents, and students feeling a sense of duty as representatives of their school. The relative importance of threats was in the order of projects being one-shot, temporary events, immaturity, and differences in preferences between older and younger generations. To draw an overall ranking of the sub-factors evaluated, the overall relative importance of the decision-making factors was evaluated. Among the sub-factors for each SWOT group, young students’ activity itself being a boost factor to the community as an opportunity factor was shown to be the most important, while the lack of experience in similar projects was shown to be the least important as administrators and experts made appropriate interventions in each stage.