콘텐츠 바로가기
로그인
컨텐츠

Category Open

Resources

tutorial

Collection of research papers and materials on development issues

home

Resources
Government and Law Public Administration

Print

한국과 일본의 정책평가제도 변천과정 비교 분석

Related Document
Frame of Image 사적으로나 문화적으로 유사성이 많은 일본과의 비교분석을 통해 상이한 점 과 차이점을 발견하고 또 왜 그런지를 밝히고자 하였습니다. 이처럼 통시적이고 거시적이며 비교역사적인 연구는 자칫 학문적인 경향으로 흐르기 쉽고 정책적 기여도가 미흡한 것처럼 보이지만 제도의 좀 더 깊은 이해를 위해서 또한 미래의 올바른 방향제시를 위해서는 이러한 연구는 필수적이며, 학문 적인 의미에서 뿐 아니라 정책을 결정하는 분들이나 집행하시는 분들 모두에게 귀중한 아이디어와 자료를 제공하게 되기를 바랍니다. 끝으로 이 연구를 책임지고 수행한 홍재환 박사, 김왕식 교수, 함종석 연구원 그리고 연구 수행과정에서 자문과 조언을 아낌없이 주신 학계 및 관련 공직자 여 러분들께 진심으로 감사를 드립니다. 2007년 12월 한국행정연구원 원장 정 용 덕
목차
Ⅰ. 서 론
1. 연구의 의의 및 목적 ···························· 2 ···························· ··························· 2. 선행연구 및 본연구의 차별성 ······················· 4 ······················· ·······················
Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 및 연구분석 틀
1. 이론적 배경 ································ 12 ······························· ······························· 1) 역사적 제도주의의 이론적 기초 ····················· 12 ····················· ···················· 2) 제도변화의 메커니즘 ··························· 14 ·························· ·························· 2. 연구분석 틀 및 비교기준 ························· 17 ························· ························ 1) 정책평가제도의 국내외 유발요인 ···················· 18 ···················· ···················· 2) 행정부의 수반(Government Executive)과 정책결정을 규정하는 제도적 맥락(Institutional Context) ·················· 20 ·················· ·················
Ⅲ. 한국과 일본의 정책평가제도 변화 비교분석
1. 정책평가제도변화의 계기: 국내외 유발요인 ··············· 24 ··············· ··············· 1) 국제환경의 변화 ····························· 24 ····························· ···························· 2) 국내환경의 변화 ····························· 26 ···


Full Text
Title 한국과 일본의 정책평가제도 변천과정 비교 분석
Similar Titles
Material Type Reports
Author(Korean)

홍재환

Publisher

서울:한국행정연구원

Date 2007-12
Series Title; No KIPA 연구보고서 / 2007-11
Pages 200
Subject Country Japan(Asia and Pacific)
South Korea(Asia and Pacific)
Language Korean
File Type Documents
Original Format pdf
Subject Government and Law < Public Administration
Holding 한국행정연구원

Abstract

The shaping of an institution is a historical process influenced by the internal and the external environment. Thus, it is not easy to project the long term and macro future directions of the evaluation system without understanding the institutional environment in terms of macro perspectives. Study of the evaluation system in the past was largely focused on the fragmentary and myopic aspects of performance measurement indicators or methods in terms of micro perspectives. This study intends to view the evaluation system from the macro perspectives by adding new viewpoints based on the historical institutionalism and to analyze the stages of the development in Korea and Japan in comparative perspectives. This allows the proper understanding of the evaluation system with its birth and development.
Since Japan and Korea have similar administrative cultures and close relations with each other, it is meaningful to analyze the shaping and the development of the policy evaluation system in both countries in comparative perspectives.
The momentum of birth and change of the policy evaluation system in each country is distinguished between domestic change and the change of international environment. The institutional context which limits the policy-making is composed of 3 components: political context; bureaucratic context; and non-government organizations and media context. Since the current and the future institutional decisions are made by the institutional environment and the policy actors, we areexpected to recognize the demand for the future change or the generation and provide appropriate responses by looking at the responsive efforts for policy change diachronically as a result of the interaction between external constraints and internal factors.
Korea first introduced the Institution Evaluation system after the economic crisis in 1998 with the tradition of the Inspection and Analysis System and the Inspection and Evaluation System since early 1960s and made the first Framework Act on Government Performance Evaluation in 2001. Soon after the first Act, the second new Framework Act on Government Performance Evaluation was made to strengthen the Institution Evaluation System and went into effect in 2006. Unlike Japan, the Korean evaluation system was reinforced with the introduction of the second Framework Act without much opposition from the bureaucrats of the government.
In Japan, the power of the bureaucrats is much stronger while that of the Prime minister is much weaker than that of the President in Korea. After the breakdown of the Liberal Democratic Party regime in 1993, Japanese Prime Minister Hashimoto implemented “Hashimoto Administrative Reform.” As a part of the
reform, a policy evaluation system was introduced in Japan for the first time without much resistance from the bureaucrats. The policy evaluation system is intact in spite of the increasing demand for the change of the system. On the other hand, in Korea, the transition toward the integrated government performance evaluation system was easier than in Japan due to the strong position of the President and the weak resistance of the bureaucrats which intensified the orientation of the unique Institution Evaluation System in Korea.
This study tries to link and reduce the gap between theory and the real policy change, focusing on the inclusive aspects of synergetic and sometimes confrontational dynamics. With the emphasis on the dynamics of the institutions, this study attempts to be differentiated from other studies that neglect the importance of the institutional dynamics which lie beneath the changes in policy.