000			05163cam a2200349 4500
005			20260818112747.0
008			171198s1980 th r 0000|0 eng d
035			_a.b1026078x
099		9	_aAIT Thesis no. HS-80-29
100	1		_aKim, Tae-myung
245	1	0	_aEvaluation of low-income housing projects in Seoul, Korea : _bhousing preference and satisfaction
260			_aBangkok : _bAsian Institute of Technology, _c1980
300			_aix, 168 p.
490	1		_aThesis ; _vno. HS-80-29
500			_aA thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Science, School of Engineering and Technology
502			_aThesis (M.Sc.) - Asian Institute of Technology, 1980
520			_aThis study is focused on facilitating the government to work out a more successful low-income housing policy by supplying the housing preference of the houseless households who are the future target group of the government low-income housing policy. Guidelines and implications of the apartment housing are given, inferred by the evaluation of the impact of the low-income apartment housing in Seoul, Korea. In this study, housing is presented as a system consisting of four subsystems, which in turn are composed of relevant subcomponents. It describes the existing housing conditions and the housing preference for each housing component, identifies the key housing preference patterns in housing choice and installation choice and main variables affecting them, and evaluates the impact of the low-income apartment housing on the basis of level of satisfaction and attitudes of the occupants and non-occupants. Housing preference was described by simple statistics. In finding out the main preference patterns, quantification method III developed by C. Hayashi, which is a factor analytical method, was employed. For extracting the key variables influencing the preference patterns, quantification method I was applied, which was also developed by C. Hayasi. The modal preference patterns which were found are location-oriented preference, convenience-oriented preference and general-housing-condition oriented preference in the housing choice, and financial-oriented preference, space oriented preference and general-facility-oriented preference in house installation choice. The key variables affecting the location-oriented preference were number of family members and key money; convenience oriented preference, number of rooms; and financial-oriented preference, level of education and monthly saving. In evaluating the impact of the low-income apartment housing, four areas, level of satisfaction with each housing component, habitability at the housing system level, moving motivation and attitudes towards the housing were analyzed. In computing the level of satisfaction with each housing component, the expressed satisfaction level on a 5 point scale was weighted and averaged. To obtain the habitability, the level of satisfaction with each component was integrated at the housing system level. To analyse the moving motivation, levels of satisfaction at the housing system level were compared between the occupants planning to move and the occupants not planning to move. The attitudes towards the apartment housing were obtained through the opinions about the advantages and disadvantages of the housing and intention. According to the average level of satisfaction with the component, it was found that the main sources of dissatisfaction were space-related components such as storage space, bathroom, size, etc. and accessibility-related components such as distance from the city centre and the job place. The habitability of the low income apartment housing was found to be in middle level. The result of analysis of moving motivation showed that more than half planned to move out; they moved in because of their personal situation but they planned to move out because of the apartment, namely, too small; and generally the more dissatisfied people were, the more they wanted to move out. Through the attitudes towards the apartment housing, the occupants and non-occupants were identified to have almost the same opinions about the advantages and disadvantages. The houseless household as non occupants accepted the apartment housing as a temporary and transitional dwelling means, but the occupants thought the single detached house was better to live in.
650		0	_aPublic housing _xKorea
700	1		_aKaji, Hideki, _eChairperson
700	0		_aApichat Wongkaew, _eExamination Committee
700	1		_aWeber, Karl E., _eExamination Committee
710	2		_aThe Ford Foundation, _eScholarship Donor
810	2		_aAsian Institute of Technology. _tThesis ; _vno. HS-80-29
856			_3Full-Text _uhttp://203.159.5.9/ait-thesis/detail.php?q=B22079
907			_a.b1026078x _bmnait _cs
902			_a250506
998			_b2 _c951012 _dm _ea _fs _g0
945			_lmnarc
942			_c40
909			_aBarcode : 30050120306963 _bCREATED : 2016-05-30 _cRECORD # : i1300427x _dLPATRON : 0 _eLCHKIN : - _f# RENEWALS : 0 _g# OVERDUE : 0 _hIUSE3 : 0 _iTOT CHKOUT : 0 _jTOT RENEW : 0
999			_c41069 _d41069