Abstract ▼

As the continued low fertility issue in Korea has had a great impact on the overall society, it is a serious concern that the impact may last for a long time. Recording the lowest total fertility rate of 1.08 in 2005, Korea has since implemented its First, Second, and Third Basic Plans on Low Fertil

As the continued low fertility issue in Korea has had a great impact on the overall society, it is a serious concern that the impact may last for a long time. Recording the lowest total fertility rate of 1.08 in 2005, Korea has since implemented its First, Second, and Third Basic Plans on Low Fertility and Aging Society.
However, reversing the declining fertility rates still remains a challenge.

Although there have been many studies on low fertility, they have reached the similar conclusions that late marriage and childbirth have negative impacts on fertility, and therefore marriage and childbirth should be encouraged. However, these conclusions have limitations in that they have not actively addressed changes in family or the perspective of gender equality.
In other words, the low fertility issue should be assessed in consideration of how marriage and childbirth have changed in society as well as demographic variables that are observed as phenomena.

In this context, this study conducted a comparative analysis of Korea and Japan in an effort to seek response strategies for low fertility from the perspective of gender equality. As Korea and Japan have long faced the risks of low fertility, the two countries have established and implemented diverse policies, which have brought no fundamental changes until now. As such, this study- aims to assess the issue through a comparative analysis based on the perspective of gender equality and to seek solutions to the issue. In particular, the study examines the impact of individuals’ awareness and values on institutional and policy changes from various aspects by approaching systems and culture through a frame of comparative analysis.

The major results of the study are as follows: first, its comparative analysis of policies in Korea and Japan shows that the two countries implemented response polices on low fertility with goals set on increasing fertility rates. Also, their major policies were concentrated on childcare support policies, but they failed to bring sufficient outcomes. As they did not go beyond “the male bread winner model,” these policies could not sufficiently address women’s employment. Due to the limitation of improving their employment environment, women had difficulty achieving work and life balance fundamentally. Another limitation was that there was almost no change in the division of gender responsibilities related to childcare and domestic work.

Second, according to the results of conducting a questionnaire survey and focus group interviews with the “2040 generations,” referring to young people in their 20s and 40s of Korea and Japan, Japan maintained a relatively traditional way of thinking about family values and gender roles, while Korea was undergoing a rapid change in values. In particular, Korean women had the most positive attitude toward changes in gender roles in the family, including men’s participation in childcare. Regarding the conflict in work and life balance, women’s overall conflict level was high, and so was Japanese men’s conflict level. Because Korean women and men were highly dissatisfied with their present life and concerned about their future life, they had a low consensus on the low fertility issue.

Third, according to the results of analyzing determinants of Korean and Japanese married women’s happiness using data from the Korean Longitudinal Survey of Women and Families by the Korean Women’s Development Institute and the Japan Household Panel Survey by Keio University, men’s participation in housework had a positive impact in both countries. In Korea, non-regular female workers had low happiness levels than regular and non-wage female workers. In Japan, women with more children had lower happiness levels.

Based on these results, this study presents the following policy suggestions that the quality of citizens’ life be increased； job security ensured by improving employment conditions； equal family culture expanded; diversity of family composition and individual right to choose a family form guaranteed； social protection of birth reinforced； gender gaps in the labor market resolved； models changed from the standard male worker model to the model of workers who are responsible for the family； childcare shared equally in the family； and an inclusive system established among the government, community, school, and family.

(출처 : ABSTRACT 360p)

목차 Contents

• 표지 ... 1
• 발간사 ... 4
• 연구요약 ... 5
• 목차 ... 17
• 표목차 ... 21
• 그림목차 ... 26
• Ⅰ. 서론 ... 28
• 1. 연구배경 및 목적 ... 29
• 2. 비교연구 ... 33
• 가. 국가 선정사유 ... 33
• 나. 비교연구의 틀 ... 34
• 3. 연구 내용 ... 35
• 4. 연구 방법 ... 36
• 5. 연구의 구성 ... 38
• Ⅱ. 선행연구 검토 ... 39
• 1. 만혼, 비혼과 저출산 ... 40
• 가. 경제적 자원과 결혼 및 가족구성 ... 40
• 나. 가족관련 가치 및 태도의 변화 ... 41
• 다. 결혼과 출산의 연계성 약화 ... 43
• 2. 성평등과 저출산 ... 45
• 가. 가족내 성평등 ... 45
• 나. 노동시장 내 성평등 ... 50
• 3. 일본의 관련조사 ... 53
• 가. 內閣府(2008). 「워크 라이프 밸런스에 대한 의식 조사」 ... 53
• 나. 內閣府(2015). 「결혼･가족형성에 대한 의식조사」 ... 54
• 다. 內閣府(2017). 「국민생활에 관한 여론조사」 ... 56
• 라. 국립사회보장･인구문제연구소(2017). 「현대 일본의 결혼과 출산: 제15회 출생동향기본조사」 ... 57
• 4. 연구에의 함의 ... 58
• Ⅲ. 한국과 일본의 제도특성 및 평가 ... 59
• 1. 한국 ... 60
• 가. 저출산대응정책 개요 ... 60
• 나. 1~3차 저출산고령사회기본계획 ... 64
• 다. 평가 ... 75
• 2. 일본 ... 87
• 가. 저출산대응정책 개요 ... 87
• 나. 저출산계획의 주요 내용 및 특징 ... 89
• 다. 평가 ... 106
• 3. 소결 ... 117
• Ⅳ. 한국과 일본 2040세대의 가족, 일, 삶 가치관 조사(1): 설문조사 분석결과 ... 125
• 1. 조사개요 ... 126
• 가. 조사목적 및 대상 ... 126
• 나. 조사표의 개발 및 분석방법 ... 129
• 다. 조사대상자의 일반적 특성 ... 130
• 2. 가족가치 및 성역할 인식 ... 133
• 가. 가족가치 ... 133
• 나. 성역할 인식 및 가족 내 역할분담 ... 151
• 3. 일과 삶에 대한 태도 ... 168
• 가. 경제활동 참여 ... 168
• 나. 일과 삶 ... 170
• 다. 미래에 대한 불안 ... 204
• 4. 일･생활 균형 ... 218
• 5. 저출산 인식과 정책지원 욕구 ... 226
• 6. 소결 ... 231
• 가. 가족가치관 ... 231
• 나. 일과 삶에 대한 태도 ... 234
• 다. 일･생활균형 ... 237
• 라. 저출산 ... 238
• Ⅴ. 한국과 일본 2040세대의 가족, 일, 삶 가치관 조사(2): FGI 분석결과 ... 239
• 1. 초점집단면접(Focus Group Interview) 개요 ... 240
• 가. 조사목적 및 방법 ... 240
• 나. 조사대상자의 일반적 특성 ... 241
• 2. 가족가치관 ... 243
• 가. 결혼보다는 자신의 삶에 몰입 ... 243
• 나. 다양한 방식의 커플관계 ... 247
• 다. 가족 부담 ... 248
• 3. 일과 삶에 대한 태도 ... 254
• 가. 일에 대한 태도 ... 254
• 나. 현재의 불만과 미래 불안 ... 256
• 4. 일생활균형 ... 258
• 가. 적절한 노동시간 ... 258
• 나. 개인시간 ... 261
• 5. 저출산 인식과 정책지원 욕구 ... 262
• 가. 나와 상관없는 저출산 이슈 ... 262
• 나. 일생활균형 ... 264
• 다. 안정적인 주거공간 확보 ... 265
• 6. 소결 ... 266
• Ⅵ. 한일 기혼여성 행복 결정요인 비교 ... 270
• 1. 연구 배경 ... 271
• 2. 분석 자료 및 분석 변수 ... 273
• 가. 분석 자료 ... 273
• 나. 분석 변수 ... 274
• 다. 분석 방법 ... 281
• 3. 한일 기혼여성 행복 결정요인 ... 281
• 가. 기혼여성 행복 결정요인 ... 281
• 나. 유배우 취업여성 행복 결정요인 ... 283
• 4. 소결 ... 285
• Ⅶ. 결론 ... 286
• 1. 요약 및 논의 ... 287
• 가. 젠더관점에서의 정책 평가 ... 287
• 나. 한국과 일본 2040세대의 가치관 변화와 정책 지형 ... 294
• 2. 정책과제 ... 304
• 가. 사회적 시민권 보장 ... 305
• 나. 새로운 가족문화 확산 ... 307
• 다. 노동시장내 성격차 해소 ... 311
• 라. 돌봄 연속성 강화 ... 314
• 참고문헌 ... 318
• 부록 ... 332
• Abstract ... 360
• 끝페이지 ... 364