대안적 주거 실천으로서의 청년 비친족가구에 관한 연구

Abstract

본 연구는 청년의 경제 불안정성이 심화되고, 다양한 가족에 대한 관심이 증가하는 상황에서 청년 비친족가구 사례에 주목하고자 한다. 청년들이 기존 주거 방식에서 벗어나 자발적으로 비친족가구를 형성하고 유지하는 과정을 심층면접을 통해 살펴봄으로써, 청년 비친족가구가 가지는 사회적 의미와 주거 정책에 대한 시사점을 파악하고자 하였다. 1인가구 – 원룸 주택 방식, 공동 거주 가구 – 사택, 기숙사 방식, 원가족 – 투룸 이상 주택 방식 등 청년들이 일반적으로 택할 수 있는 주거 방식은 그러나 생각보다 열악한 청년들의 주거 실상을 드러내며, 이러한 한계를 인식한 청년들은 보다 쾌적한 주택과 친밀하고도 느슨하며 평등한 관계의 가구원, 주거비 부담 완화, 사생활 및 주체성이 보장되는 주거 공간을 확보하기 위한 대안 주거 전략으로 기존의 친밀성과 신뢰가 구축된 다른 청년과 비친족가구를 형성하게 되는 모습이 나타났다. 비친족가구로서 이어나가는 일상적 실천은, 이러한 대안적 주거 방식의 형성 요인 외에도 안전과 관계, 존중, 자아실현 등과 관련된 욕구들을 추가로 충족시키는 한편, 일부 사례에서 가구원 간 이질성으로 인해 갈등이 누적되고, 해당 주거 공간이 임차 형태이자 타인과 함께 거주하는 공간인 만큼 오롯이 자신의 공간으로서 안정감을 확보하는 데에서는 한계를 드러냈다. 한편, 향후 개인 신상의 변동에 영향을 크게 미칠 것으로 판단되는 학생 신분 여부와 결혼에 대한 태도 등 청년들이 놓인 조건은 비친족가구 유지 기간에 또한 영향을 주는 주요 요소로 드러났다. 이상 비친족가구 형성 및 유지 과정을 통해 주거 불안정성과 전통적인 가족관이 약화되는 청년들의 인식이 교차하는 지점에서 청년 비친족가구가 출현하고 있으며, 청년들이 가구를 형성하고 상위 주택으로 이동하고자 할 때 경제적 약자나 비친족가구와 같은 비정상가족에게 주거 정책의 혜택이 제한되면서 공간적 배제의 문제가 드러난다는 것을 알 수 있다. 한편, 상대적으로 기존 주거 방식과 비교하여 비친족가구가 가지는 관계적 차원에서의 이점은 원하는 사람과 함께 살 권리가 보장될 때 달성 가능한 것에 주목할 필요가 있다. 그럼에도 불구하고 비친족가구를 형성하고 유지하는 다양한 방식에 반영된 청년들의 각기 다른 조건과 가족관은, 청년들 내부의 차이에 따라 동일한 주거 정책의 효과가 달라질 수 있음을 감안하며 세밀하게 접근할 필요가 있음을 시사한다.

This study focused on the case of youth non-relative households appearing as an alternative housing practice in a situation where youth's housing problems are in full swing due to the deepening of economic instability among youth, and interest in various family types and loose relationships is increasing. By examining the spatial experiences that youth experience in the process of voluntarily forming and maintaining non-relative households by breaking away from the existing housing method, the purpose of this study was to understand the social meaning of youth non-relative households and implications for housing policies. The housing methods that youth can generally choose, such as single-person households with one-room housing method, shared housing with dormitory method, and family with two-room or more rooms housing method, have revealed the housing situation of youth that is poorer than expected. These existing housing methods were generally difficult to satisfy the housing and relationship needs of youth. Recognizing these limitations, youth tried to secure more comfortable housing, close but loose and equal household members, relaxing the burden of housing costs, and a living space that guarantees privacy and subjectivity. For this, youth formed non-relative households with other young people who had established intimacy and trust as an alternative housing method. In addition to the factors that led to this alternative housing practice, the daily practice as a non-relative household additionally satisfied the needs of the research participants related to safety, relationships, respect, and self-actualization. Meanwhile, in some cases, conflicts has accumulated due to heterogeneity among household members, and the fact that the corresponding residential space was a rental type and a space to live with others revealed limitations in securing stability as one's own space. On the other hand, the conditions placed on the research participants, such as student status and attitude toward marriage, which are judged to have a significant impact on changes in personal identity in the future, were found to be major factors that also affect the duration of non-relative households. Based on the spatial experience in the process of forming and maintaining non-relative households as an alternative housing practice, it was found that youth non-relative households are emerging at the intersection of housing instability and the perception of young people who are weakening the traditional view of the family. In addition, in the process of young people forming households and moving to higher-level housing, the limitations of housing policies were revealed. ️️In other words, the systems that have been reproduced by normative spatio-temporality do not take into account abnormal families such as non-relative households in the housing policy, and low-income or non-regular youths give up the benefits of housing policies due to the opportunity cost of long-term procedures. As a result, the problem of spatial exclusion was aroused. Furthermore, in order to prepare a more improved housing policy, it is necessary to pay attention to the fact that the relational benefits of non-relative households can be achieved when the 'right to live with the desired person' is guaranteed. It should be noted that in order to take the relational advantage of the alternative housing of non-relative households voluntarily pursued by these young people, it can be achieved when the 'right to live with anyone they want' is guaranteed. It is required to flexibly reflect this right in housing policies. Nevertheless, in the process of forming and maintaining non-relative households, the different conditions and family views of young people are reflected in the spatial experience. This suggests that a detailed approach should be taken in consideration of the heterogeneity of young people when formulating a housing policy that considers non-relative households.