경인행정학회

키워드

초록

본 연구는 한국 사회의 저출산 현상을 이해하기 위해 자녀 및 출산에 부여되는 사회적 의미와 출산 선택에 미치는 사회문화적 영향을 개인의 서사(narrative)를 통해 탐색하고 그 과정에서 정부의 저출산 대응정책에 대한 인식을 분석하였다. 사회구성주의 관점과 내러티브 분석 방법을 토대로 출산 선택 경험이 있는 남녀 30명을 대상으로 심층 면담을 수행하였다. 분석 결과 자녀는 정서적 의미보다는 경제적·심리적 부담과 더 밀접하게 인식되었으며, 출산은 감정적 동기보다 현실 조건 속에서 조율되는 선택으로 의미화되었다. 출산 선택에는 사회문화적 기대와 구조적 제약이 함께 영향을 미쳤으며, 특히 교차성 관점에서 여성과 사회경제적 지위가 낮은 계층의 출산은 더욱 어려운 선택으로 서사화되었다. 정부의 저출산 대응정책에 대해서는 대상의 한정성, 실효성 부족, 현실과의 괴리 등으로 인해 무용감과 배제감을 표출하는 서사가 다수 나타났으며, 이러한 정책 인식은 성별·사회경제적 지위에 따른 정체성과 교차하며 출산 결정에 작용하는 양상으로 서사화되었다. 본 연구는 자녀·출산의 사회적 의미, 성별, 사회경제적 지위에 따라 출산 결정이 어떻게 형성되는지를 탐색함으로써, 저출산 대응정책의 실효성을 제고하기 위해 정책수혜자의 인식과 경험을 반영한 미시적 접근의 필요성을 제안한다.

This study explores the social meanings of children and fertility, and the sociocultural influences on reproductive choices, through personal narratives, to better understand the phenomenon of low fertility in South Korea. It also analyzes perceptions of the government‘s policy responses to low fertility. Based on a social constructionist perspective and narrative analysis, in-depth interviews were conducted with 30 men and women who had made decisions about childbirth. The analysis revealed that children were more often perceived as economic and psychological burdens than as sources of emotional reward, and that childbirth was commonly framed as a decision negotiated within practical realities, rather than one guided by emotion. Sociocultural pressures and structural constraints jointly shaped decisions about childbirth. From an intersectional perspective, childbirth was often narrated as a particularly difficult choice—especially for women and individuals with lower socioeconomic status. Narratives regarding government policy responses to low fertility expressed feelings of futility and exclusion, citing limited target coverage, lack of effectiveness, and a disconnect from lived realities. Perceptions of these policies intersected with gender and socioeconomic identity, influencing reproductive choices. This study suggests the need for a micro-level approach that reflects the perceptions and lived experiences of policy recipients, in order to enhance the effectiveness of policies addressing low fertility.

목차

I. 서론
II. 이론적 배경: 저출산 대응정책에 대한 사회구성주의적 접근
Ⅲ. 연구 방법
Ⅳ. 분석 결과
Ⅴ. 논의 및 결론

참고문헌 (61)

1. 감사원. (2021). ｢저출산･고령화 대책 성과분석｣.
2. 김경근·최윤진. (2017). 교육열 현상으로서의 저출산: 중산층 기혼자의 자녀 수 결정 배경과 양육방식. ｢교육사회학연구｣, 27(2): 1-34.
3. 김지성. (2018). 젠더 거버넌스의 규범적 조건에 대한 소고: 한국 저출산 대응정책을 중심으로. ｢한국거버넌스학회보｣, 25(3): 1-24.
4. 김지성·김유민. (2023). 한국 저출산 대응정책에 관한 행정· 정책학 연구 경향과 과제: 미시적 수준의 사회적 의미형성 관점에서. ｢국가정책연구｣, 37(1): 97-122.
5. 김대성. (2012). 문화정책 변동의 담론분석: 사회적 구성주의의 비판적 재해석. ｢한국정책연구｣, 12(4): 83-99.
6. 김형관·최혜정. (2021). 저출산 정책에 대한 여성의 주관적 인식에 관한 질적연구. ｢한국자치행정학보｣, 35(1): 119-140.
7. 박미경. (2022). 저출산 대응정책의 요구도 및 우선순위 분석: MZ세대 인식을 중심으로. ｢한국정책연구｣. 22(1):33-54.
8. 손호성·안은서. (2022). 통제집단합성법(Synthetic Control Method)을 활용한 출산장려금 정책의 사중손실 분석. ｢한국정책학회보｣, 31(2): 291-323.
9. 이선경·송주은. (2020). 미주 한인 여대생이 생각하는 결혼과 출산의 의미: 현상학적 접근. ｢가정간호학회지｣, 27(3): 330-343.
10. 이미숙·김창훈. (2025). 시스템 다이내믹스를 활용한 저출산 대책의 정책효과 분석. ｢한국정책연구｣, 25(1): 137-155.
11. 이채정 외. (2021). ｢저출생･고령사회 정책 평가｣. 국회미래연구원.
12. 임재연. (2021). 한국 청년세대의 출산 의향에 영향을 미치는 사회적 요인: 가족가치관 유형의 효과를 중심으로. ｢한국인구학｣, 44(4): 47-74.
13. 임병인·서혜림. (2021). 여성의 가족가치관과 결혼 및 출산의향. ｢한국보건사회연구｣, 41(2): 123-140.
14. 조유선·문아람·송아영. (2020). 성역할에 대한 여성의 태도와 사회적 규범이 출산에 미치는 영향 분석. ｢비판사회정책｣, (66): 175-211.
15. 진미정·한준·노신애. (2019). 20-30대 청년세대의 결혼·출산 가치관의 잠재유형과 한국사회 인식 및 개인적 미래 전망의 관련성. ｢가족과 문화｣, 31(1): 166-188.
16. 하지선·이은영·김지선. (2022). 취업 여성들의 비출산 선택에 관한 질적연구. ｢사회복지정책｣, 49(4): 5-43.
17. Adams, Jacqueline. (2016). Why Do Women Want Children? The Case of Hong Kong, China: A Lowest-low Fertility Context. Marriage & Family Review. 52(7): 632-653.
18. Alvarez, Bruna. (2018). Reproductive Decision Making in Spain: Heterosexual Couples’ Narratives about How They Chose to Have Children. Journal of Family Issues. 39(13): 3487-3507.
19. An, Brian Y., Barboza-Wilkes, Cynthia J., & Resh, William G. (2024). Applying an Intersectional Understanding of Extra Work Behavior and Emotional Exhaustion in Local Public Service. Public Administration. 102(4): 1578-1603.
20. Barbehön, Marlon. (2020). Reclaiming Constructivism: Towards an Interpretive Reading of the ‘Social Construction Framework’. Policy Sciences. 53(1): 139-160.
21. Bergsvik, Janna, Fauske, Agnes, & Hart, Rannveig K. (2021). Can Policies Stall the Fertility Fall? A Systematic Review of the (Quasi-) Experimental Literature. Population and Development Review. 47(4): 913-964.
22. Bulatao, Rodolfo A., & Lee, Ronald D. (1983). An Overview of Fertility Determinants in Developing Countries. In Rodolfo A. Bulatao & Ronald D. Lee (eds.), Determinants of Fertility in Developing Countries: Fertility Regulations and Institutional Influence, Vol. 2., 758-787. New York: Academic Press.
23. Burr, Vivien. (2015). Social Constructionism. Routledge.
24. Cho, Sumi, Crenshaw, Kimberlé W., & McCall, Leslie. (2013). Toward a Field of Intersectionality Studies: Theory, Applications, and Praxis. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society. 38(4): 785-810.
25. Clandinin, D. Jean, & Rosiek, Jerry. (2007). Mapping a Landscape of Narrative Inquiry: Borderland Spaces and Tensions. In D. Jean Clandinin (ed.), Handbook of Narrative Inquiry: Mapping a Methodology, 35-75. Sage Publications, Inc.
26. Conrad, Peter, & Barker, Kristin K. (2010). The Social Construction of Illness: Key Insights and Policy Implications. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 51(1_suppl): S67-S79.
27. Colledge, Hannah E., & Runacres, Jessica. (2023). But Why Isn’t It an Accomplishment Not to Have Children?: A Qualitative Investigation into Millennial Perceptions of Voluntarily Childless Women. Society. 60(6): 968-982.
28. Corbin, Juliet M., & Strauss, Anselm L. (1990). Ground Theory Research: Procedures, Canons, and Evaluative Criteria. Qualitative Sociology. 13(1): 3-21.
29. Crompton, Rosemary. (2006). Class and Family. The Sociological Review. 54(4): 658-677.
30. Crenshaw, Kimberlé. (1989). Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum. 140(1): 139-167.
31. Crenshaw, Kimberlé. (1991). Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color. Stanford Law Review. 43(6): 1241-1299.
32. Davey, Kate M., & Symon, Gillian. (2001). Recent Approaches to the Qualitative Analysis of Organizational Culture. In Cary L. Cooper, Sue Cartwright, & P. Christopher Earley (eds.), The International Handbook of Organizational Culture and Climate, 123-142.
33. Duncan, Simon. (2005). Mothering, Class and Rationality. The Sociological Review. 53(1): 50-76.
34. Ellingsæter, Anne L., & Pedersen, E. (2016). Institutional Trust: Family Policy and Fertility in Norway. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society. 23(1): 119-141.
35. Ellingsæter, A. L., Jensen, An-Magritt., & Lie, Merete. (2013). The Social Meaning of Children and Fertility Change. In Anne L. Ellingsæter et al.(eds.), The Social Meaning of Children and Fertility in Europe, 1-11. Routledge.
36. Esin, Cigdem, Fathi, Mastoureh, & Squire, Corinne. (2014). Narrative Analysis: The Constructionist Approach. In Uwe Flick(ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis, 203-216. SAGE Publications Ltd.
37. Esping-Andersen, Gosta. (2009). Incomplete Revolution: Adapting Welfare States to Women’s New Roles. Cambridge: Polity Press.
38. Eydal, Guðný B., & Rostgaard, Tine. (eds.). (2016). Fatherhood in the Nordic Welfare States: Comparing Care Policies and Practice. Policy Press.
39. Floersch, Jerry, Longhofer, Jeffrey L., Kranke, Derrick, & Townsend, Lisa. (2010). Integrating Thematic, Grounded Theory and Narrative Analysis: A Case Study of Adolescent Psychotropic Treatment. Qualitative Social Work. 9(3): 407-425.
40. Folbre, Nancy. (1994). Children as Public Goods. The American Economic Review. 84(2): 86-90.
41. Folbre, Nancy. (2008). Valuing Children: Rethinking the Economics of the Family. Boston: Harvard University Press.
42. Goldman Sachs. (2022). The Path to 2075: Slower Global Growth, but Convergence Remains Intact (Global Economics Paper No. 451). https://www.goldmansachs.com/insights/pages/gs-research/the-path-to-2075/report.pdf.
43. Glaser, Barney G., & Strauss, Amselm L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine.
44. Glenn, Evelyn N. (2016). Social Constructions of Mothering: A Thematic Overview. In Andrea O’Reilly (ed.), Matricentric Feminism: Theory, Activism, Practice, 99–112. Demeter Press.
45. Grant, David, Keenoy, Tom, & Oswick, Cliff. (1998). Introduction: Organizational Discourse of Diversity, Dichotomy and Multi-disciplinarity. In David Grant, Tom Keenoy, & Cliff Oswick (eds.), Discourse and Organization, 1-17. Sage.
46. Hay, Colin. (2016). Good in a Crisis: The Ontological Institutionalism of Social Constructivism. New Political Economy. 21(6): 520-535.
47. Hewitt-Taylor, Jaquelina. (2001). Use of Constant Comparative Analysis in Qualitative Research. Nursing Standard. 15(42): 39-42.
48. Lewis, Suzan. (1997). An International Perspective on Work-family Issues. In Saroj. Parasuraman & Jeffrey H. Greenhaus. (eds.), Integrating Work and Family: Challenges and Choices for a Changing World, 91-103. Connecticut: Quorum.
49. Lundberg, Craig C., & Young, Cheri A. (2005). Foundations for Inquiry: Choices and Trade-offs in the Organizational Sciences. Stanford University Press.
50. Nauck, Bernhard. (2007). Value of Children and the Framing of Fertility: Results from a Cross-cultural Comparative Survey in 10 Societies. European Sociological Review. 23(5): 615-629.
51. Nauck, Bernhard, & Klaus, Daniela. (2007). The Varying Value of Children: Empirical Results from Eleven Societies in Asia, Africa and Europe. Current Sociology. 55(4): 487-503.
52. Patrick, Ruth, & Andersen, Kate. (2023). The Two‐Child Limit and Fertility Decision Making: When Policy Narratives and Lived Experiences Collide. Social Policy & Administration. 57(5): 580-595.
53. Qvortrup, Jens. (2009). Are Children Human Beings or Human Becomings?: A Critical Assessment of Outcome Thinking. Rivista Internazionale di Scienze Sociali. 3/4: 631-653.
54. Rodríguez-Dorans, Edgar, & Jacobs, Paula. (2020). Making Narrative Portraits: A Methodological Approach to Analysing Qualitative Data. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 23(6): 611-623.
55. Saurugger, Sabine. (2013). Constructivism and Public Policy Approaches in the EU: From Ideas to Power Games. Journal of European Public Policy. 20(6): 888-906.
56. Sevón, Eija. (2005). Timing Motherhood: Experiencing and Narrating the Choice to Become a Mother. Feminism & Psychology. 15(4): 461-482.
57. Schneider, Anne, & Ingram, Helen. (1993). Social Construction of Target Populations: Implications for Politics and Policy. American Political Science Review. 87(2): 334-347.
58. Smart, Carol. (2013). Deconstructing Motherhood. In Elizabeth B. Silva (ed.), Good enough mothering? Feminist perspective on lone motherhood, 37-57. Routledge.
59. Strauss, Anselm L., & Corbin, Julliet M. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage.
60. Testa, Maria R., Sobotka, Tomáš, & Morgan, Philip S. (2011). Reproductive Decision-making: Towards Improved Theoretical, Methodological and Empirical Approaches. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research. 9: 1-9.
61. Zelizer, Viviana A. (2005). The Priceless Child Revisited. In Jens Qvortrup (ed.), Studies in Modern Childhood: Society, Agency, Culture, 184-200. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.

참고문헌 더보기