• 대한예방한의학회지
• /
• 제7권1호
• /
• pp.17-28
• /
• 2003

We met results like the followings through the literatures and questionnaires about the tasks and solutions about the insurance fee of packed medical herbs. 1) It's turned out that 74.8% of herb doctors agrees to the insurance fee of packed medical herbs. However, in comparison with the same survey of the herb doctor association the percentage of general approval went somewhat lower, and especially the percentage of 'positive approval' became notably lower$(43.7%{\rightarrow}26.5%)$ and the percentage of 'active objection' raised about 2 times$(6.8%{\rightarrow}12.9%)$. Inquiring into the approval reasons on the insurance fee application of packed medical herbs some heads such as 'development toward treatment medical science' and 'decrease of publics burden' were higher than the one of 'management income and expenditure.' 2) As a result of the research, 36.0% of the patients and 42.8% of the residents recognized that the pay range of Chinese herb health insurance is narrow. They recognized that less people have the experiences of Chinese medical hospital use and internal application of the packed medical herbs as they are older, men rather than women. 85.4% of the patients and 74.9% of the residents agreed on the insurance pay of packed medical herbs. It's shown that they agree on the Chinese medical hospital use more as the economic standard is lower, on the insurance pay as they have ever taken the packed medical herbs. In the aspect of increase of insurance fee, 66.7% of the patients and 44.3% of the residents agreed on the insurance pay of packed medical herbs, and 18.1% and 36.1% disagreed on the insurance pay of packed medical herbs. The main objective reason why they disagree on the insurance pay of packed medical herbs was 'because the insurance fee goes up higher,' which answered 95.2% of the patients and 78.8% of the residents. 7.22% of the patients and 1.80% of the residents answered that they can pay more insurance fee in case of the insurance pay of packed medical herbs. However, in the priority order of the insurance pay, it hold the 5th position between 2 target research groups which was less than medical examination, charges for hospital accommodation and taking MRI. 3) According to the result of analysis about the cost of packed medical herbs, current practice price is 115,000 won and the average prime cost of a packed medical herb is 73,000 to 106,000 won. It's examined that the herb doctors regard that 95,000 won will be reasonable when the packed medical herb is payed in insurance. However, it was found out that the public generally thinks that the price would be appropriate on the level of 30,000 to 40,000 won and the percentage of the answers of 20,000 won to 30,000 was fairly high. 4) the central system of a prescription should be change into the central system of demonstration and the sick and wounded. 5) To solve this problem, the government should regulate it to pass by the circulation gradation of [importer, $peasantry{\rightarrow}manufacturer{\rightarrow}wholesaler{\rightarrow}distributor$(Chinese medical hospital, pharmacy dispensary of Chinese medicine)]And it should intervene into the quality and the circulation steps of Chinese medicine through 'the office or organization which is in charge of certification of Chinese medicine' and 'the office or organization which is in charge of the circulation of Chinese medicine.' And some actions such as simple severance, lavation, drying should be included into the conception of manufacture and the boundary between food and medical supplies should be made at a manufactory. And the regulation of standardized goods at one's own house should be improved so that, the peasantry can sell the materials of Chinese medicine only to the manufacturer. 6) In company with the insurance pay of packed medical herbs, the study about the separation of dispensary from medical practice in the Chinese medicine should be accomplished.

• 기술혁신연구
• /
• 제31권1호
• /
• pp.29-63
• /
• 2023

세계화와 지방화 추세의 가속화와 21세기 지식기반경제의 발전에 따라 지역의 장기적 발전을 위한 과학기술의 중요성이 강조되면서 과학기술정책의 대상으로 지역이 주목받게 된다. 행정적으로는 지방자치제의 실시가 기점이 된 것으로 평가되며, 1999년 제1차 지방과학기술진흥종합계획의 수립과 관련 내용의 법제화 이후에 비로소 독립적인 정책으로 자리매김하게 된다. 이후 국가과학기술정책과 지역발전정책이 연계되고 정부의 국정방향 구현을 위한 다양한 정책이 구현되면서 변화 발전하게 된다. 시기적으로 구분하면 1994년 지방자치제 실시 이전까지 국가의 경제발전을 위한 부문계획으로서 국가과학기술정책의 정립과 지역과학기술정책의 태동기, 1994년 지방자치제 실시 이후 국가과학기술기본법 제정의 시기 동안 지역의 과학기술정책이 재조명되고 1차 지방과학기술진흥종합계획이 수립된 지역과학기술정책의 형성기, 이후 지역과학기술정책이 별도의 정책적 위상을 가지고 국가 과학기술정책 및 지역발전정책과 상호 작용하면서 현재까지 추진된 발전기로 나눌 수 있다. 지방과학기술진흥종합계획의 수립과 함께 다양한 정책사업이 추진되면서 지역의 자립적 발전기반이 확충되고 지역의 과학기술혁신역량이 발전하게 되었다. 그럼에도 중앙정부의 종속적 정책추진의 틀을 벗어나지 못하고 있고 실질적인 지역과학기술의 자립적 생태계 구축이 미흡한 실정이다. 특히 최근에 직면하고 있는 고령화, 저출산 등으로 인한 인구감소, 지역주력산업 침체로 인한 일자리 감소, 청년인구의 수도권 집중 등 지역간 격차문제가 심화되고 있다. 디지털전환, 탄소중립 등 전환의 위기를 극복하기 위해서 지역과학기술정책은 새롭게 추진될 필요가 있다. 2022년은 신정부 출범으로 지역정책의 패러다임을 근본적을 바꾸고자 노력하고 있으며, 더불어 과학기술기본계획, 지방과학기술진흥종합계획, 국가균형발전 5개년계획 등 새로운 지역과학기술관련 중장기 계획이 수립되는 시점이다. 디지털전환과 탄소중립 등 대외 기술환경 또한 대전환의 시기를 맞이하고 있다. 변화하는 환경에 대응하면서 확대되는 지역 격차를 해소하고 지역의 지속가능한 성장을 위해서는 1990년대 후반에 형성된 중앙정부 중심 지역과학기술정책의 제도적 기반을 지역 자율적인 체계로 근본적으로 전환하고 새로운 정책추진을 위한 새판을 짤 필요가 있다.