통합과 포용력이 사회의 주요한 이슈로 부각되면서, 사회적 약자인 노년층과 저소득 계층의 여가 활동을 충족시키는 도시계획시설에 대한 역할이 주목받고 있다. 본 연구는 노원구 △△영구임대주택 거주민을 대상으로 옥외활동 시설에 대한 이용 실태와 주요 공간 이용에 따른 사회적 관계망 형성 효과를 분석하였다. 분석은 빈도, t-분석 그리고 사회연결망 분석 방법을 활용하였다. 분석결과, 단지 내 공간 및 시설이용 빈도는 복지관(36.9%), 나팔공원(17.9%), 텃밭(10.2%)의 순으로 나타났으며, 1인이 교류하는 이웃의 수는 텃밭(13.44명), 나팔공원(6.47명), 복지관(5.13명) 이용자의 순으로 나타났다. 특히, 텃밭 이용자는 이웃 간 교류의 범위가 가장 넓게 나타났으며, 다양한 그룹을 통해 정보의 교류가 활발히 일어나고 있었다. 관계의 질적 수준 역시 일반적인 교류의 수준을 넘어 정보 교류 및 문제 발생 시 적극적으로 도움을 주고받는 상호 부조의 관계를 유지하는 것으로 확인되었다. 반면 산책, 휴식, 운동 등의 여가 활동이 이루어지는 나팔공원과 교육 활동이 제공되는 복지관의 경우 이용자들 간 교류의 범위가 좁고 집중화된 정도가 소수 그룹에 한정되었다. 본 연구는 영구임대주택에 거주하는 취약계층을 대상으로 주민들의 자발적인 교류와 지속적인 옥외활동을 촉진하는 공간 및 시설에 대한 사회적 기능을 밝혔다는데 의의가 있다.

This study intended for Cheongryongsan Community Garden in Gwanak-gu, one of the demonstration places for 'Community Garden' Project recently implemented by the Seoul Government. This study had two major purposes: investigating the current status of the management and usage and identifying its characteristics; investigating users' awareness to consider the construction and operation directions of sustainable community gardens. This study was conducted based on several surveys such as an investigation into the spatial configuration and the management system of parks through a field study, a use survey through a questionnaire survey for vegetable garden users and an awareness survey about the construction direction of gardens direction preferred by users through the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). As a result of a questionnaire survey for vegetable garden users, the usage status was summarized as follows: Considering the common trends in the 2012 and the 2013 user survey, women used Cheongryongsan Vegetable Garden more than men. Over fifties used it most of all users. Users were mostly neighborhood residents. They used to visit there three to five times a week and stayed for about 30 minutes to one hour. Users differently responded to the question related to the order of priority for the use of the garden in the 2012 and the 2013 survey. They had increasingly used it for individuals' production activities more than social exchanges. As a result of making an AHP analysis for general park users, vegetable garden users there were clear differences in the targets which each subject put emphasis on in relation to the construction and operation of vegetable gardens. General park users recognized a vegetable garden as a park where park functions and the functions of the vegetable garden coexisted. On the other hand, vegetable garden users viewed it as a space where they attached importance to the functions of the vegetable garden like an allotment. Last, this study contemplated subjects related to the construction and operation of vegetable gardens which had to be considered in the future. Vegetable gardens tended to be biased as personal hobby places. It was viewed that the main reason was insufficient support activities for vegetable garden education and exchange programs originally planned when vegetable gardens had been constructed. Vegetable garden users recognized vegetable gardens as places for individuals' farming activities like allotments. For the desirable operation of vegetable gardens, it would be necessary to give priority to the park management before the production activities in individuals' vegetable gardens. The important role of the government would be to build the base through the provision of education and opportunities so that a local resident organization could actively participate in the management of a vegetable garden after a vegetable garden was constructed. It would be necessary to make a use survey and an awareness survey for users conducted in this study on a regular basis because the surveys could be important basic data in the decision-making process for the sustainable operations of the vegetable garden.