DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

단절균형이론을 적용한 국방예산 분석에 관한 연구

Analyzing the Defense Budgetary in the Republic of Korea with the Punctuated Equilibrium Theory

  • 박용준 (육군3사관학교 법정학과)
  • Yongjoon Park (Dept. of Faculty of Law & Public Administraion, Department of Social Science, Korea Army Aacademy at Youngcheon)
  • 투고 : 2023.10.03
  • 심사 : 2023.11.10
  • 발행 : 2023.11.30

초록

예산 분석에 관한 기존 연구는 이론적 배경 없이 전체 예산 대비 국방예산의 연간 변화만을 기술하는 데 대부분 국한되어 왔다. 본 연구에서는 단절균형이론(Punctuated Equilibrium Theory, PET)을 이용하여 국방비 지출에 대한 실증분석을 실시하였다. 본 연구의 목적은 한국의 국방예산(총예산, 전력운용예산, 방위력개선예산)의 추이를 살펴보고, 단절균형이론을 사용하여 국방예산의 급진적 변화 지점을 파악하고 분석하는 것이다. 본 연구에서는 또한 1998년부터 2017년까지 매년 대한민국 국방예산 자료를 활용하여 국방예산의 추세와 급격한 변화 지점을 탐색하였다. 그 결과, 1998년부터 2017년까지 한국의 국방비 지출 패턴은 다음과 같은 특징을 갖는 것으로 나타났다. 국방예산 총액 기준 19년간 안정적인 성장을 보였고 일회성 단절지점(5.0%)을 보였으며, 전력운영비는 18년 동안은 균형을 이루며 안정적으로 성장하였고 두 번의 단절지점(10%)을 보였다. 방위력개선비는 총 5번의 급격하게 변화는 단절지점을 확인할 수 있었다.

Previous research regarding budget analysis has been mostly limited to describing annual changes in defense budgets relative to total budgets without a theoretical background. More empirical defense budget research is needed with better data. This study conducts an empirical analysis of national defense expenditures using Punctuated Equilibrium Theory (PET). The purpose of this study is to examine trends in the Republic of Korea's (ROK) functional defense budgets (total defense budget, force operation budget, force improvement budget) and to identify and analyze radical points of change in the defense budget using punctuated equilibrium theory. This study also explores trends and punctuations in the national defense budgets using annual defense budget data from the ROK for every year from 1998 to 2017. This study finds that from 1998 to 2017 the spending pattern of the total defense budget in the ROK was characterized by 19 years of stable growth and a one-time punctuation (5.0%). The force operation budget exhibited stable growth in eighteen years and was punctuated twice (10%). The force improvement budget was punctuated five times.

키워드

과제정보

이 논문은 2023년도 육군3사관학교의 연구지원에 의하여 연구되었음

참고문헌

  1. Defense, M. o. N. "Defense White Paper". 2016b.
  2. Defense, M. o. N. "Defense White Paper". Seoul: Ministry of National Defense, 2012.
  3. Defense, M. o. N. "2016 defense budget brochure". Seoul: Ministry of National Defense, 2016a
  4. Finance, M. o. S. a., "2018 Government Budget". Sejong-si, Korea Retrieved from http://www.mosf.go.kr/nw/mosfnw/detailInfograpView.do?searchNttId1=MOSF_000000000010572&menuNo=4040500, 2017.
  5. Lee, P. J., & An, B. S., "A Comparative Analysis of the past two Governments' Defense Budgeting Policies and Suggestions for the New Govenment". The Quarterly Journal of Defense Policy Studies, Vol. 99, pp. 1-41, 2013.
  6. Lindblom, C. E., "The science of" muddling through"". Public Administration Review, pp. 79-88, 1959.
  7. Wildavsky, A. B., "Politics of the budgetary process"., 1964
  8. Gordon, T. P., "Incrementalism in Public Budgeting". James Chan and James Patton, 1959.
  9. FR Baumgartner, BD Jones, "Agenda dynamics and policy subsystems". The journal of Politics, 1991.
  10. Kingdon, J. W., & Thurber, J. A., "Agendas, alternatives, and public policies". Vol. 45: Little, Brown Boston, 1984.
  11. Jordan, M. M., "Punctuations and agendas: A new look at local government budget expenditures". Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 345-360, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.10136
  12. Baumgartner, F., & Jones, B., "Agendas and instability in American politics". In: Chicago: University of Chicago Press Google Scholar, 1993.
  13. Jordan, M. M., "Punctuations and agendas: A new look at local government budget expenditures". Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 345-360, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.10136
  14. Jones, B. D., Baumgartner, F. R., & True, J. L., "Policy punctuations: US budget authority, 1947-1995". The journal of Politics, Vol. 60, No. 1, pp. 1-33, 1998. https://doi.org/10.2307/2647999
  15. Jones, B. D., Sulkin, T., & Larsen, H. A., "Policy punctuations in American political institutions". American Political Science Review, Vol. 97, No. 1, pp. 151-169, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055403000583
  16. Jones, B. D., True, J. L., & Baumgartner, F. R., "Does incrementalism stem from political consensus or from institutional gridlock? American Journal of Political Science". pp. 1319-1339, 1997.
  17. True, J. L., "Avalanches and incrementalism: Making policy and budgets in the United States". The American Review of Public Administration, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 3-18, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1177/02750740022064524
  18. hahm, S. D., & Yoon, K. J., "Influences on Defense Spending in Korea: A Disaggregated Analysis". Korean Association of Governmental Studies, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 129-145, 2002.
  19. Hahm, S. D., Kamlet, M. S., & Mowery, D. C., "US Defense Spending Under the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act, 1986-1989". Public Administration Review, pp. 8-15, 1992.
  20. Mintz, A., "Guns versus butter: A disaggregated analysis". American Political Science Review, Vol. 83, No. 4, pp. 1285-1293, 1989. https://doi.org/10.2307/1961669
  21. Breunig, C., & Koski, C., "The tortoise or the hare? Incrementalism, punctuations, and their consequences". Policy Studies Journal, Vol. 40, No. 1, pp. 45-68, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2011.00433.x
  22. Defense, M. o. N., "Defense White Paper". Seoul: Ministry of National Defense, 2004.
  23. Defense, M. o. N., "Defense White Paper". Seoul: Ministry of National Defense, 2006.
  24. Korea, N. D. C. o. t. R. o. "2005 Defense Budget Overview". Seoul: National Assembly of the Republic of Korea, 2005.
  25. Korea, N. D. C. o. t. R. o. "2001 Defense Budget Overview". Seoul: National Assembly of the Republic of Korea, 2001.
  26. Defense, M. o. N. "Defense White Paper". Seoul: Ministry of National Defense, 2008.
  27. Korea, N. D. C. o. t. R. o., "2004 Defense Budget Overview". Seoul: National Assembly of the Republic of Korea, 2004.